Engine Controller Optimization via Iterative Combustion Perturbation

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Internal combustion engine systems face challenges in optimizing fuel economy and emissions control due to increasing complexity and varying operating conditions, with existing solutions failing to account for manufacturing variations and aging effects, while also managing reductant consumption and battery health effectively.

Innovation Solution

A method of iterative multivariate optimization that controls charge constituents in internal combustion engines and aftertreatment systems, perturbing combustion inputs to optimize fuel consumption and emissions, while meeting NOx emissions criteria, using a controller to adjust parameters such as EGR fraction, fueling quantity, and reductant dosing based on real-time data and geographical variations.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Use of energy by moving object

If existing control strategies are used to optimize fuel consumption, then fuel economy improves, but emissions requirements are not met and manufacturing variations are not accounted for

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvefuel consumptionVSAvoidadaptability to manufacturing variations and aging effects
Core Design Contradiction:
Use of energy by moving objectVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The control system dynamically adapts to manufacturing variations and aging effects by continuously adjusting control parameters based on actual system performance. The controller modifies combustion inputs in real-time to account for component degradation and manufacturing tolerances, transforming a static control approach into a dynamic one that evolves with the system.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes control parameters such as EGR fraction, fueling quantity, and combustion timing to optimize performance across different operating conditions. By varying these parameters adaptively, the system accounts for manufacturing variations and aging effects while maintaining fuel efficiency and emissions compliance.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Object-generated harmful factors

If aftertreatment systems are added to control emissions, then emissions are reduced, but system complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
ImproveemissionsVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Object-generated harmful factorsVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The control system performs preliminary actions by optimizing combustion inputs before exhaust gases reach the aftertreatment system. By pre-conditioning the exhaust through controlled combustion parameters (EGR, fueling, timing), the system reduces the burden on aftertreatment components and enables simpler aftertreatment designs to achieve the same emissions performance.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

3Object-generated harmful factors

If combustion inputs are adjusted to meet emissions criteria, then NOx emissions are controlled, but fuel consumption increases

Engineering Contradiction:
ImproveNOx emissionsVSAvoidfuel consumption
Core Design Contradiction:
Object-generated harmful factorsVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The system changes multiple combustion parameters simultaneously (EGR fraction, fueling quantity, injection timing) to achieve the desired balance between NOx emissions and fuel consumption. By coordinating changes across multiple parameters rather than adjusting a single parameter, the system achieves emissions compliance with minimal impact on fuel economy.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The control system dynamically adjusts combustion parameters based on real-time operating conditions to maintain the optimal balance between emissions and fuel consumption. The controller continuously monitors system state and modifies combustion inputs adaptively, allowing the system to meet NOx criteria while minimizing fuel penalty under varying operating conditions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

4Productivity

If iterative multivariate optimization is implemented, then multiple parameters are optimized simultaneously, but control complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveoptimization efficiencyVSAvoidcontrol complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The control system segments the optimization problem by treating different combustion parameters (EGR fraction, fueling quantity, timing) as separate controllable variables. The controller independently adjusts each parameter while considering their interdependencies, breaking down the complex multivariate optimization into manageable segments that can be controlled and tuned separately.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Data Source

PatentUS9328674B2Controls for performance optimization of internal combustion engine systems
Publication Date: 2016.05.03 CUMMINS INC
  • US9328674B2 patent drawing
  • US9328674B2 patent drawing
  • US9328674B2 patent drawing

AI summary

One illustrative embodiment is a method comprising operating an engine and an aftertreatment system by controlling a plurality of charge constituents provided the engine, iteratively perturbating one or more combustion inputs effective to vary operation of the engine, and determining fuel consumption and emissions information at the operating points effective to seek a weighted optimization of multiple parameters including fuel consumption and reductant consumption while also meeting a predetermined NOx emissions criterion. Further embodiments, forms, objects, features, advantages, aspects, and benefits shall become apparent from the description and figures.