2009-01-0695

Development of a Practical Tool for Residual Gas Estimation in IC Engines

Mark Sellnau, James Sinnamon and Larry Oberdier
Delphi Corp.

Carroll Dase, Matthew Viele and Kris Quillen

Drivven, Inc.

John Silvestri and Iakovos Papadimitriou

Gamma Technologies, Inc.
Copyright 2009 SAE International

ABSTRACT
As engines advance toward greater efficiency and lower emissions, there is increasing need for accurate realtime residual models for engine control. Both the formulation of real-time-capable models and the development of methods for measuring or estimating residuals during engine calibration have been difficult and longstanding problems. This paper describes development of a low-cost, easyto-use tool for on-line residual estimation in all cylinders of an IC engine. The basic method, hardware required, and software structure are described. The residual estimation tool was applied to estimate residuals over the operating map in all cylinders of a sixcylinder direct-injection SI engine equipped with dualindependent phasers. The data was used to calibrate a real-time residual model integrated into the engine management system. Validation data confirming accuracy of the model are presented.

INTRODUCTION
Due to the urgent need to improve IC engine thermal efficiency, the control of internal residuals in engines has become increasingly important. For spark ignition engines at part load, it is desirable to operate at a total dilution (EGR + residual) level close to the combustion stability limit for optimum indicated efficiency, reduced pumping loss and reduced NOx emissions. For engines that rely on auto-ignition, such as diesel or HCCI, dilution needs to be controlled accurately to some desired level that balances efficiency, noise and emissions. Variable valve actuation, VVA, has become a common means to vary and control internal residuals. In recent years there has been significant effort toward the formulation of accurate real-time capable residual models for engine management systems (EMS)[1-14]. The physical process that determines residual in engines is a complex interaction between valve lift events and the pulsating pressures in both intake and exhaust manifolds. This complexity means that a real-

The Engineering Meetings Board has approved this paper for publication. It has successfully completed SAEs peer review process under the supervision of the session organizer. This process requires a minimum of three (3) reviews by industry experts. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of SAE. ISSN 0148-7191 Positions and opinions advanced in this paper are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE. The author is solely responsible for the content of the paper. SAE Customer Service: Tel: 877-606-7323 (inside USA and Canada) Tel: 724-776-4970 (outside USA) Fax: 724-776-0790 Email: CustomerService@sae.org *9-2009-01-0695* SAE Web Address: http://www.sae.org Printed in USA

time model is necessarily highly simplified and mainly empirical in nature in order to present reasonable memory and throughput demands on the engine control module (ECM). It is therefore necessary to fit empirical model constants to measured residual data collected on a dynamometer calibration engine. Consequently, efforts toward practical measurement methods have also intensified. Until recently, a practical method of obtaining measured residual data has been lacking. Currently, the two most commonly used methods are a) direct cylinder CO2 sampling and b) the triple-pressure analysis (TPA) method. Cylinder CO2 sampling is acknowledged to be highly accurate if carefully done [4,14-23], but is tedious and time consuming, as well as impractical for all cylinders of a multi-cylinder engine in a calibration test cell setting. Its use is likely limited to obtaining validation data for models and other measurement techniques. The triple-pressure analysis method [5,17,24] is reasonably accurate and practical. It uses measurements of crank-angle-resolved pressures in the intake and exhaust pipes as boundary conditions applied to a detailed, one dimensional, single-cylinder engine simulation. The simulation computes the estimated residual. A more detailed discussion of this method along with an error sensitivity analysis is given in [13]. This method, because of its elaborate instrumentation requirement, is also somewhat impractical for routine use on all cylinders of a multi-cylinder engine. Development of a more practical method for on-line residual estimation, requiring only currently standard calibration test instrumentation was presented in a previous paper [13]. The current paper will first present a very brief and condensed description of the method, then focus on development of a hardware platform, the Residual Estimation Tool, or RET, for on-line engine test cell use. Finally, application of the RET to map residual on a V6 SIDI engine, followed by fitting a real-time EMS model will be described. Validation of model accuracy is demonstrated. Figure-1 is a schematic of the overall residual mapping and modeling process.

Test Engine

Residual Estimation Tool (RET) Measurements

Data Acquisition and Logging Estimate Residual
Residual Gas Estimate, RGE

Production Engine ECU Residual Model

Tables of Model Constants

Residual Model Calibration

Figure 1. Engine data acquisition, residual estimation and residual model calibration.

DESCRIPTION OF THE RESIDUAL ESTIMATION METHOD

The complexity of pulsating flow during gas exchange is ignored and, instead, the equation of state is applied at intake valve closing to calculate residual.

Mtrap = Mair + Mfuel + Megr + Mresid = (Pcyl * Vcyl) / (R * Tcyl)

(1)

Fuel mass, air mass, EGR mass, and Pcyl can be measured using standard test instrumentation. Cylinder volume, Vcyl, can be calculated from crank position. This leaves three unknowns in solving for residual mass: (a) cylinder temperature, Tcyl, (b) the gas constant, R, and (c) bias pressure needed to accurately peg the cylinder pressure transducer signal. Cylinder temperature depends on in-cylinder heat transfer, intake and exhaust port heat transfer, and is also strongly affected by the residual mass. The gas constant depends on temperature and composition. Piezoelectric pressure transducers are currently the only type capable of sufficient accuracy while surviving incylinder temperature conditions. But these give only a relative change of pressure and must be pegged by some independent means. The method chosen for residual estimation is called PolyC-pegging. If the polytropic exponent during compression is accurately known, then Pcyl can be pegged using equations derived by Matekunas [25]. The problem is that PolyC is a function of gas temperature and composition, which are not known a-priori. These difficulties have been addressed by coupling an optimizer to a very simple single-cylinder engine simulation as shown schematically in Figure-2. The optimizer uses the engine measurements, along with simulation-generated values for Pcyl, airflow and exhaust temperature to make iterative adjustments to

Estimated Residual [%]

several simulation input parameters to obtain a sufficiently accurate estimate of the state of the trapped charge. At convergence, a self-consistent set of pressure-temperature-composition values are obtained, and the simulated value for residual is reported as the residual gas estimate, RGE.

60 50 40 30 20

Homogeneous DI Gasoline with Intake Cam Phaser Single-Cyl Diesel with Negative Overlap

Optimizer
Auto-peg Peg Pcyl_meas such that PolyC_meas=PolyC_sim

Pcyl_sim

Single Cylinder Simulation

+/- 2 %
10 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Pcyl_meas

PINT Mair_sim

Mair_meas

Find PINT such that Mair_sim=Mair_meas Find Mb such that Pcyl_sim=Pcyl_meas during early compression

RGE

Measured (CO2) Residual [%]

Mb

Figure 3. method.

Validation results for the RET estimation

Texh_meas

Find heat transfer coef. such that Texh_sim=Texh_meas

HTC Texh_sim

Figure 2. Simplified schematic of coupled optimizer / simulation. In Figure-2, the parameter Mb represents any one or more of several possible simulation input parameters that may be modulated in order to adjust trapped residual. For example, valve effective flow areas may be adjusted during their respective periods of burned gas backflow. In this way, the need to accurately model dynamic valve pressure and flow is avoided. The approximate nature of the simplified simulation is accepted, and the effects of error in valve pressure and flow are compensated by the above iterative procedure. An important function of the embedded simulation is to produce the best possible estimate of in-cylinder gas temperature, as likewise it does in the alternative triplepressure method of residual estimation. Error sensitivity analysis for both methods show similar response to errors in those input parameters, such as port and cylinder heat transfer multipliers, that affect gas temperature [13]. Validation of the method was performed by comparing RGE to values measured by direct cylinder CO2 sampling using equipment from Cambustion [20,21]. Tests were performed on two different engines; a single cylinder diesel using negative valve overlap to generate residual, and a 4-cylinder turbocharged SIDI engine equipped with an intake cam phaser. The results are shown in Figure-3. Nearly all points have error within +/2 percentage points residual.

An error analysis was performed to evaluate the sensitivity of the RGE to uncertainties in both the measurements and in the simulation input parameters [13]. The validation results show error that is consistent with expectations based on the error sensitivity analysis. A similar analysis was performed for the triple-pressure method, and it was found that it should yield similar accuracy, provided the procedure is implemented with iterative adjustment of cycle-average intake manifold pressure to match simulated and measured engine airflows.

DESCRIPTION OF THE RESIDUAL ESTIMATION TOOL (RET)

Having validated the method implemented in Matlab/Simulink, it was decided to create a hardware tool for on-line engine test-cell use. Figure-4 is photo of the resulting apparatus showing the front panel with signal inputs, and the user interface display. The apparatus may be either rack mounted or table-top (shown here). Figure-5 is a schematic showing the main features. Table-1 lists the minimum required set of engine simulation parameters. Note that a relatively small amount of information, consisting mainly of basic and readily available parameters, is required. This is because the nature of the residual estimation method is such that highly accurate and detailed engine information is not required. However, to accommodate cases where the user has access to more detailed information, the user interface provides an additional optional setup page for advanced simulation setup. Valve flow coefficient data is often difficult to obtain, but in most cases a generic input table provided by default is sufficient. A piston cup input is needed for some engines, such as diesels. When a piston cup is combined with a swirl port, the effect on cylinder heat

transfer is sufficient to significantly affect the residual estimate.

a setup utility that performs analysis of a motoring cylinder pressure record to estimate values for these two parameters, and to asses the quality of the cylinder pressure data as well.
Engine Type
Port Fuel Injected Early-Injection GDI Late-Injection GDI Diesel HCCI

User Interface

Cyl Pressure Inputs Thermocouples Airflow Manifold Pres Cam Sensor Crank Encoder

Engine Configuration
Number of Intake Valves Number of Exhaust Valves Port Throttle (yes/no)

Fuel Type
Gasoline Diesel Ethanol

Figure 4. Photo of RET

Residual Estimation Tool (RET) Measurements

Time-Avg Fuelflow or A/F P_intk_man T_intk_man P_exh_man T_exh_man Cam Enc Crank Enc Pcyl (1-8) DAQ Hardware (Nat Inst) Airflow User Interface (Labview)

Number of Cylinders Firing Order Bore Stroke Connecting Rod Length Compression Ratio Piston Cup (yes/no)
If yes, Max Diameter Edge Diameter Max Depth Center Depth

Optimizer (Labview)

1-cyl Simulation (GT-Power) RGE

Dataset Name - Intake Valve Lift Profile Dataset Name - Exhaust Valve Lift Profile Crankangle at Max Intake Valve Lift Crankangle at Max Exhaust Valve Lift Intake Phaser Authority Exhaust Phaser Authority Cylinder Convective Heat Transfer Multiplier Ambient Temperature Coolant Temperature

Figure 5. Schematic of RET USER INTERFACE - The user interface is written in Labview, a graphical data-flow language developed by National Instruments Corp. It provides a well organized, user-friendly facility for input of setup parameters such as transducer calibration constants, file name specifications, engine simulation parameters, etc. An interactive facility for setting up the calculation of cam phaser positions from the cam encoder input signals is also provided. Once the setup parameters have been entered, they are saved in a file for future recall and use during data logging and residual calculation. Two of the parameters listed in Table-1, namely compression ratio and cylinder heat transfer multiplier, can be somewhat difficult to specify. The RET includes

Data Logging Software (Labview)

Table 1. Required parameters for RET engine simulation setup. By contrast, accurate use of triple-pressure-analysis requires much more information, such as port diameter and length, intake and exhaust pipe diameter and length, and most notably, measured valve flow coefficient data at low valve lifts for both flow directions as a function of pressure ratio. This is because accurate calculation of the pulsating port pressures and the resulting mass flows are required. The required port flow data is particularly difficult and expensive to obtain. DATA ACQUISITION - All the measured signal inputs required by the RET are shown in Figure-5. Note that only time average, rather than crank-angle-resolved, intake and exhaust pressures are required. In fact all

the inputs are available in currently standard engine calibration dyno test facilities. The data acquisition hardware utilized in RET is shown schematically in Figure-6. It consists of a National Instruments 4 slot PXI chassis, a dual core embedded controller, a one million gate Field Programmable Gate Array (FPGA), a simultaneous sampling card, and a high accuracy temperature measurement card. The dual core embedded controller was selected to allow real time cylinder pressure analysis. The FPGA contains an Engine Position Tracking (EPT) [28] function to control the engine synchronous sampling. The EPT allows for various encoder setups as well as extrapolating or reducing the sample resolution. A simultaneous sampling card was desired to ensure precise timing of samples on all channels and to obtain sufficient sampling rates for relatively fast engine speeds at the desired sampling resolution. The high accuracy temperature measurement card, combined with thermocouple signal conditioning was required to provide accurate temperature measurements.

User Interface on Host Machine

PXI Controller
Real-Time Processing Post Processing Stream to Disk

GT-POWER Server
Results Server Control
CPU-1 (Optimizer/GTP)

Results Saved to Disk

Optimizer Queue Optimizer Queue Optimizer Queue

Figure 7. Data-Flow Schematic with Parallel Processing The data-logging software which executes within the PXI chassis is written in Labview. During data acquisition, real time analysis of the cylinder pressure signal is performed, including IMEP, PMEP, heat release and combustion duration parameters, along with a statistical analysis of their variability. To allow the user to monitor data quality, the user interface includes display of analysis results in moving average form, including realtime graphical display of cylinder pressure vs. crank angle, logP-logV, and heat release. After setup is complete, data quality is verified and a desired steady engine operating condition is established; data logging is then initiated. The user interface displays a panel that monitors the data acquisition process. When logging of the specified number of engine cycles is complete, the logged values for average intake and exhaust pressure and temperature, airflow, fuelflow and cam phaser positions are displayed. Also displayed are various combustion statistics. If the data is not acceptable, the user can retry or pause to repair the problem. If acceptable, a software button is activated and the results are written to disc, including the raw cylinder pressure data for every engine cycle. At this point the user may either initiate on-line residual estimation, or skip residual estimation and immediately initiate data logging at the next engine operating point. If on-line residual estimation is declined, the saved data may be queued for post-processing at a later time. During residual estimation a panel is displayed that allows the user to monitor optimizer convergence. The entire process of data logging and residual estimation at a given engine operating condition typically requires less than one minute. ENGINE SIMULATION Gamma Technologies, Inc. supplied the embedded engine simulation capability. Since the nature of the iterative estimation process is such that accurate calculation of the pulsating pressures and flows at the valves is not required, only a very simple single-cylinder simulation is needed. Therefore, a condensed and optimized-for-speed version of GTPOWER [26], a standalone engine modeling

Collect Data Collect Data Collect Data

CPU-n (Optimizer/GTP)

PXI Chassis
Data Sample Clock

Figure 6. RET Data Acquisition System A single data set for one cylinder can process in less than one minute. However, each additional cylinder will increase the total processing time. In order to reduce the total time, each cylinder is set to run on a different processor in parallel, as shown in Figure-7. To process up to 8 cylinders simultaneously (eg, V8 engine), a 2 GHz dual quad core server was selected. As each new cylinder of data becomes ready, it enters the optimizer queue. The data is passed to the server when a CPU resource is free. Running the optimizer and GT-Power (GTP) on a separate server also allows the user to immediately start collecting a new data set. The separate server also allows for future upgrades without upgrading the PXI system or DAQ hardware.

Embedded Controller

Temperature Temperature

Data

Simultaneous Sampling

Data

Sample Clock

Encoder, Time Averaged Measurements

FPGA

Engine Synchronous Measurements

Time Average Temperature Measurements

environment, was used. It was provided as an executable, together with a generic, thread-safe, platform-independent Application Programming Interface (API) that was responsible for the inter-process communication. Expertise in constructing engine simulation models is not required of the user. Several generic models are stored in parameterized form, and all required setup information is supplied based on user interface input. The appropriate model is selected by the RET software in response to the engine type and configuration selected in the user interface (see Table-1). Figure-8 is a schematic of the conventional 4-valve-per-cylinder model.
Intake Pipe Intake Port Cylinder Exhaust Port Exhaust Pipe

the compression stroke is preferred in order to minimize the effects of compression ratio uncertainty and error in the cylinder heat transfer calculation. (5) Control signals for heat transfer coefficients (HTC), average intake pressure (PINT) and the parameter Mb for modulation of trapped residual are calculated by nested PI controllers. Airflow control is always active, while cylinder pressure control is active only when airflow error is within specified bounds. Exhaust temperature control operates when both airflow and cylinder pressure errors are within specified bounds.
(2) Heat Release (3) Peg PCYL
PCYL_peg PolyC_meas PolyC_sim Burn Fraction

Engine Simulation

AEFF_MULT

+ +

(1) Labview/GT- Power Interface

TEXH_sim

AIRFLOW PINT

PCYL

TEXH PEXH
PCYL

PI Cntl

GT-Power / Labview Interface

(4) Errors
HTC Calculate error_PCYL
Mair +

Figure 8. RET single-cylinder engine model schematic. OPTIMIZER The essence of the RET is the optimizer and its coupled engine simulation. The optimizer was initially developed and verified as a Simulink model, then translated into Labview code for application in the RET. Figure-9 is a simple schematic showing the six main features of the optimizer. (1) The Labview/GT-POWER interface was developed by Drivven Inc. in cooperation with Gamma Technologies Inc. (2) The heat release calculation is simple, approximate and fast, since error analysis showed that high accuracy is not required. (3) Accurate pegging of the measured cylinder pressure is required. As shown in Figure-9, the pegging adjustment is calculated to achieve a target value of the compression polytropic exponent. The target value is calculated using cylinder pressure feedback from the simulation. (4) Error signals for cylinder pressure, airflow and exhaust temperature are required. The cylinder pressure error signal is calculated as the difference between measured and simulated pressure averaged over a specified crank angle interval (normally 30 deg). The interval must begin after intake valve closing and end prior to significant heat release. An interval early in

PCYL_sim

Mair_sim

HTC

RET DAQ

TEXH

(5) Control Signals

PI Cntl gain_AIR PI Cntl PI Cntl

Error_PCYL

(6) Adaptive Gain

Figure 9. Schematic of the RET optimizer. (6) The airflow and cylinder pressure control functions are strongly interactive, and the optimum values of gain are strongly dependent on the engine operating condition. It was therefore necessary to implement an adaptive gain algorithm. The algorithm monitors the error signals and adjusts controller gains to maintain both a good rate of convergence with stability. Convergence normally requires about 60 engine cycles of simulation.

Error_TEXH

Error_AIR

gain_PCYL

Mb

PINT

Figure-10 shows plots of errors and gain values generated during a typical RET run.
Airflow Error

implemented by providing measurements of intake and exhaust port pressure, and disabling the cylinder pressure PI control. No change in the form of the embedded engine simulation model is needed, but more detailed engine parameter information must be entered during RET setup. Furthermore, with simple modifications the RET may also be extended to estimate blow-through of fresh air during valve overlap (over-scavenging) in boosted engines.

Airflow Control Gain

Pcyl Control Gain

RET PROCESSING TIME

Tests were performed to determine RET processing time. A target processing time of 60 seconds for all cylinders of an eight-cylinder engine was determined based on testing requirements for engine calibration test cells.

Pcyl Error

PolyC Control

Texh Error

Figure 10. User interface display during optimizer convergence. ADDITIONAL RET FEATURES The RET, as described above, can successfully be applied to most engine configurations. However, there are some situations where difficulties are encountered. One of these is the late-intake-valve-closing (LIVC) type of VVA for which it is possible to have intake valve closing so close to combustion initiation that no interval is available to perform the PolyC pegging procedure. A second problematic engine configuration is the case where direct cylinder fuel injection occurs early in the intake stroke, shortly before or during the crankangle interval used to calculate PolyC. In this case gas phase temperature and composition are uncertain, so the value of PolyC may not be known with sufficient accuracy. In these cases two options are available; a) Use an alternative method of pegging, or b) Use triple-pressureanalysis. For cases where an alternative pegging method is used, the RET has an option to disable the auto-pegging feature and use the measured cylinder pressure signal directly. The recommended pegging accuracy, based on error sensitivity analysis [13], is 1.0 kPa, and alternative methods capable of this accuracy are difficult to use. For a discussion of alternative pegging methods see [27]. The RET easily may be extended for cases where the TPA method may be preferred. This option may be

Test results are shown in Figure 11. The first bar shows that processing time for the original one-processor RET was about 90 seconds per cylinder. The second bar shows results for the multi-core RET. Processing time was about 95 seconds for all eight cylinders or about 8X faster than the original RET. The third bar shows results after improvements to the multi-core RET optimizer, which enabled the RET to achieve the target of less than 60 seconds processing time for most engine operating conditions.

Processing Time (s)

100 75 50 25 0

~90 s 1-Cyl of Data

~95 s 8-Cyl of Data

Target: 60 sec 8-Cyl of Data

~50 s 8-Cyl of Data Improved Optimizer Code

Original RET (Apr08)

Multi-Core RET (Nov08)

Improved RET Optimizer

Figure 11. Measured processing time for various RET implementations.

CALIBRATION OF REAL-TIME RESIDUAL MODEL

The first application of the RET for calibration was performed on a 3.5L V6 direct-injection spark-ignited gasoline engine having dual-independent intake and exhaust cam phasers. Neither a GT Power model nor CAD drawings were available for this engine. The cylinder bore, piston stroke and base cam timings were

obtained from published literature. The cam lift profiles were measured using an electronic indicator.
ECU Model Residual (%)

45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

Residual values were acquired at 788 different engine operating points as summarized in Table-2. Residual ranging from 9% to 44% wet mass fraction was obtained.

1600 RPM RMS Error = 0.35

RPM = 1200,1600,2000,2400,2800,3200 Intake Phaser (ICP) = 0,10,20,30,40 Exhaust Phaser (ECP) = 0,10,20,30,40 Pres Ratio (Pexh/MAP) = 2.9,2.3,1.8,1.5,1.3,1.1
Table 2. Engine operating points for residual calibration mapping. These residual values were then applied to determine the calibration constants of an empirical real-timecapable residual model, which were then inserted into the ECU. The model fit errors, shown in Figure-12 were consistent with expected RET errors based on the validation data shown in Figure-3. The errors are also consistent with expected accuracy based on error analysis of the model form presented in [13], in which the model was fit to engine-simulation-generated residual data.
45

RET Measured Residual (%)

Figure 12b. Real-Time Model Fit Errors at 1600 rpm

45

ECU Model Residual (%)

40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 5

2000 RPM RMS Error = 0.29

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

RET Measured Residual (%)

1200 RPM RMS Error = 0.28

ECU Model Residual (%)

40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 5

Figure 12c. Real-Time Model Fit Errors at 2000 rpm

45

ECU Model Residual (%)

40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 5

2400 RPM RMS Error = 0.50

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

RET Measured Residual (%)

Figure 12a. Real-Time Model Fit Errors at 1200 rpm

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

RET Measured Residual (%)

Figure 12d. Real-Time Model Fit Errors at 2400 rpm

45

ECU Model Residual (%)

40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 5

2800 RPM RMS Error = 0.40

Engine

ECU RET

RSG Model Output RET Output

Figure 13. Measurement setup for audit tests.

35

ECU Model Residual (%)

30 25 20 15 10 10 15 20

+/- 2 %

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

RET Measured Residual (%)

Figure 12e. Real-Time Model Fit Errors at 2800 rpm

45

ECU Model Residual (%)

40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 5

3200 RPM RMS Error = 0.30

25

30

35

RET Audit Residual (%)

Figure 14. residual.

Audit test results, ECU Model vs. RET

CONCLUSION
1) A method of estimating engine residual has been developed and validated using direct cylinder CO2 sampling. 2) A Residual Estimation Tool (RET) using this method has been developed and implemented. It is a portable self-contained hardware unit consisting of data acquisition hardware, a small PC and an 8processor server. The residual estimation method has been implemented within the RET in the form of an optimizer coupled to a simple single-cylinder engine simulation. 3) The RET is easy to use, requiring only currently standard engine calibration instrumentation. A minimum amount of detail concerning the test engine is easily input through a graphical user interface. 4) A real-time residual model was successfully calibrated using the RET over a wide range of engine speeds, loads, and residuals. The real-time model was then integrated within the test engine ECU. An audit procedure in which on-line RET residual estimates were compared to simultaneous ECU values was performed. The audit test was successful with errors less than +/-2.

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

RET Measured Residual (%)

Figure 12f. Real-Time Model Fit Errors at 3200 rpm An audit test was performed to establish that the residual model as integrated in the EMS system was generating accurate residual values for a range of operating conditions. Figure 13 shows the test setup for which residual model outputs are compared to simultaneous RET outputs. The engine was operated while connected to the RET at 26 different conditions as summarized in Table-3. Residual values obtained from the RET during audit tests were then compared to those from the residual model embedded in the ECU. Some points are repeats of conditions used for the original calibration, and others require the real-time ECU model to perform interpolation between calibration points. The results shown in Figure14 show that the residual model was successfully integrated in the EMS system and that accuracy is very good. Model errors of about +/-2% were consistent with expected errors based on the validation results shown in Figure-3.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to thank Dan Trytko, Jan Holmskov, Ruediger Kubis and Jean-Baptiste Terpreau for their support during engine testing. Thanks to Jeffrey Pfeiffer for his contribution to calibration and error analysis of the real-time-capable residual model.

REFERENCES
1. Alger, T. and Woodbridge, S., Measurement and Analysis of the Residual Gas Fraction in an SI Engine with Variable Valve Timing, SAE Paper 2004-01-1356. 2. Giansetti P., et al., A Model for Residual Gas Fraction in Spark Ignition Engines, SAE Paper 2002-01-1735. 3. Cho, H., et al., Measurements and Modeling of Residual Gas Fraction in SI Engines, SAE Paper 2001-01-1910. 4. Giansetti, P. and Higelin, P., Residual Gas Fraction Measurement and Estimation in Spark Ignition Engines, SAE Paper 2007-01-1900. 5. Mladek, M. and Onder, C.H., A Model for the Estimation of Inducted Air Mass and Residual Gas Fraction Using Cylinder Pressure Measurements, SAE Paper 2000-01-0958. 6. Fox, J.W., Cheng, W.K., Heywood, J.B., A Model for Predicting Residual Gas Fraction in Spark Ignition Engines, SAE Paper 931025, 1993. 7. Senecal, P.K., Xin, J. and Reitz, R.D., Predictions of Residual Gas Fraction in IC Engines, SAE Paper 962052. 8. Koehler, U. and Bargende, M., A Model for a Fast Prediction of the In-Cylinder Residual Gas Mass, SAE Paper 2004-01-3053 9. Cavina, N., Siviero, C. and Suglia, R., Residual Gas Fraction Estimation: Application to a GDI Engine with Variable Valve Timing and EGR, SAE Paper 2004-01-2943. 10. Amer, A.A. and Zhong, L., A Semi-Empirical Model for Fast Residual Gas Fraction Estimation in Gasoline Engines, SAE Paper 2006-01-3236. 11. Oberg, P. and Eriksson, L., Control Oriented Modeling of the Gas Exchange Process in Variable Cam Timing Engines, SAE Paper 2006-01-0660. 12. Leroy, T., et al., Modeling Fresh Air Charge and Residual Gas Fraction on a Dual Independent Variable Valve Timing SI Engine, SAE Paper 200801-0983. 13. Sinnamon, J.F. and Sellnau, M.C., A New Technique for Residual Gas Estimation and Modeling in Engines, SAE Paper 2008-01-0093. 14. Miller, R., et al., Comparison of Analytically and Experimentally Obtained Residual Fractions and NOx Emissions in Spark-Ignited Engines, SAE Paper 982562, 1998.

15. Quader, A.A. and Majkowski, R.F., Cycle-By-Cycle Mixture Strength and Residual-Gas Measurements During Cold Starting, SAE Paper 1999-01-1107. 16. Westin, F., Grandin, B. and Angstrom, H., The Influence of Residual Gases on Knock in Turbocharged SI Engines, SAE Paper 2000-012840. 17. Schwarz, F. and Spicher, U., Determination of Residual Gas Fraction in IC Engines, SAE Paper 2003-01-3148. 18. Karagiorgis, S., et al., Residual Gas Fraction Measurement and Estimation on a Homogeneous Charge Compression Ignition Engine Utilizing the Negative Valve Overlap Strategy, SAE Paper 200601-3276. 19. Shayler, P.J. and Alger, L., Experimental Investigations of Intake and Exhaust Valve Timing Effects on Charge Dilution by Residuals, Fuel Consumption and Emissions at Part Load, SAE Paper 2007-01-0478. 20. Collings, N., et al., Cycle Resolved Measurements of In-cylinder NOx Concentration in a Gasoline Engine, JSAE Paper 20065423, 2006. 21. Collings, N., et al., In-Cylinder Sampling of IC Engines using Modified GDI Injectors the CSV, JSAE Paper 20055401, JSAE Annual Congress 2005. 22. Prucka, R.G., et al., An Evaluation of Residual Gas Fraction Measurement Techniques in a High Degree of Freedom Spark Ignition Engine, SAE Paper 2008-01-0094. 23. Davis, P. and Peckham, M. S., Cycle-by-Cycle Gasoline Engine Cold Start Measurement of Residual Gas and AFR using a Fast Response CO&CO2 Analyzer, SAE Paper 2008-01-1649. 24. Liu, J.P., et al., A Model for On-Line Monitoring of In-Cylinder Residual Gas Fraction (RGF) and Mass Flowrate in Gasoline Engines, SAE Paper 2006-010656. 25. Matekunas, F.A., Engine Combustion Control with Ignition Timing by Pressure Ratio Management, U.S. Patent 4,622,939, 1986. 26. GT-POWER Software, Version 6.2, Gamma Technologies Inc, Westmont, Illinois. 27. Davis, R. and Patterson, G., Cylinder Pressure Data Quality Checks and Procedures to Maximize Data Accuracy, SAE Paper 2006-01-1346. 28. Engine Position Tracking VI, Drivven, Inc., San Antonio, Texas.

CONTACT
For additional information, James Sinnamon james.f.sinnamon@delphi.com Delphi Powertrain Customer Technical Center Michigan 3000 University Dr. Auburn Hills, MI 48326

Mark Sellnau mark.sellnau@delphi.com Delphi Powertrain Customer Technical Center Michigan 3000 University Dr. Auburn Hills, MI 48326

DEFINITIONS, ACRONYMS, ABBREVIATIONS

AEFF_MULT: Multiplier on valve effective flow area, applied during burned gas backflow DAQ: Data Acquisition System ECM: Engine Control Module EGR: Exhaust Gas Recirculation (external) EMS: Engine Management System HTC: Heat transfer coefficient IMEP: Indicated Mean Effective Pressure

IVC: Crank angle at Intake Valve Closing LIVC: Late Intake Valve Closing Mair: Trapped air mass Mair_meas: Measured trapped air mass Mair_sim: Simulated trapped air mass Mb: A simulation parameter used to modulate trapped residual Megr: Trapped EGR Mresid: Trapped burned gas residual Mtrap: Trapped cylinder mass Pcyl: Cylinder pressure Pcyl_meas: Measured cylinder pressure Pcyl_sim: Simulated cylinder pressure PEXH: Exhaust manifold pressure, cycle average PINT: Intake manifold pressure, cycle average PMEP: Pumping Mean Effective Pressure PolyC: Polytropic exponent, compression R: Gas constant RET: Residual Estimation Tool RGE: Residual Gas Estimate (% mass, wet) SIDI: Spark Ignition Direct Injection Tcyl: Cylinder gas temperature TEXH: Exhaust temperature Texh_meas: Measured exhaust temperature Texh_sim: Simulated exhaust temperature TPA: Triple Pressure Analysis Vcyl: Cylinder volume VVA: Variable Valve Actuation