throbber
FA-4 911 0
`
`Proceedings of the 33rd
`Conference cm Decision and Control
`Me Buena Vista, FL - December 1994
`
`Engine Air-Fuel Ratio and Torque Control using Secondary Throttles
`
`A. G. Stefanopoulou: J. W. Grizzle* and J. S. Freudenberg*
`
`Abstract
`A control scheme is designed to limit air-fuel ratio
`excursions and track driver-demanded torque for a 4-
`cylinder engine during rapid changes in throttle position.
`The new control scheme is based on joint management
`of air and fuel flow into the cylinders using secondary
`throttles placed before the intake ports of the cylinders,
`in combination with standard fuel injectors.
`
`1 Introduction
`Environmental regulations continue to drive research
`on improved vehicle emissions and fuel economy. The goal
`is to achieve cleaner burning and more efficient autome
`biles, without compromising driveability. This requires
`precise air-fuel ratio (A/F) control, both in steady state
`and in transient engine operation. A challenging prob-
`lem for the Control Automotive Engineer is to keep the
`A/F close to stoichiometry during rapid changes in throt-
`tle position. Rapid changes in throttle position strongly
`influence the cylinder air charging process, mixture for-
`mation and transient performance of the engine. These
`rapid throttle movements reflect the driver’s demand for
`changes in torque and vehicle acceleration.
`The goal of the current work is to keep the A/F close to
`stoichiometry so that the Three Way Catalyst (TWC) op-
`erates with high efficiency, and to track the driver’s torque
`demand during rapid changes in throttle position. The
`torque set point to be achieved is a function of throttle
`position and engine speed. This function, when evaluated
`for all possible throttle positions and engine speeds, forms
`a nonlinear map, called the “demand map”.
`The control of the A/F around stoichiometry is usually
`based on regulating the fuel flow to follow the air flow
`changes imposed by the driver. The associated feedback
`control system does not have high enough bandwidth to
`accommodate fast transients seen in normal driving due
`primarily to the long delay in the induction-compression-
`combustion-exhaust cycle, plus the transport delay in the
`Control Systems Laboratory, Department of Electrical En-
`gineering and Computer Science, University of Michigan, Ann
`Arbor, MI 48109-2122; work supported in part by the National
`Science Foundation under contract NSF ECS-92-13551; match-
`ing funds to this grant were provided by FORD MO. CO.
`
`exhaust manifold. The addition of a feedforward term for
`the fuel set-point does not completely alleviate this prob-
`lem. Developments in the area of drive-by-wire (DBW)
`throttle systems [5] have indicated the need for an air con-
`trol scheme in addition to the fuel control, but have also
`originated questions on safety issues. In [2], a DBW throt-
`tle system has been used as a way of regulating (in the
`sense of predictability) the changes in air flow into the
`manifold caused by movements of the primary throttle.
`The present work moves a step beyond the DBW scheme
`by developing a joint air-fuel management system.
`The control scheme presented here is based on the in-
`troduction of secondary throttles before the intake ports
`of the cylinders (Fig. 1). The new control surfaces (e,)
`regulate the air flow into the cylinders. These control sur-
`faces in combination with the fuel injectors (Fe) achieve
`low A/F excursions and good tracking of torque demand
`by adjusting the air flow and the fuel flow into the cylin-
`ders. The control surfaces 8, smooth out rapid changes of
`the charging process during throttle movements so that
`the fuel control path is able to maintain stoichiometry.
`
`Primary Throttle
`
`RUMW
`
`Intake
`ValW
`
`Figure 1: Schematic representation of 4-cylinder engine
`with secondary throttles.
`
`The torque and A/F errors used by the controller are
`calculated by measuring the difference between actual and
`desired values. For now we are assuming direct measure-
`ment of the achieved torque; we have also used a lin-
`ear EGO sensor for the estimation of the A/F from the
`exhaust gas. The engine model used in this study is a
`continuous-time nonlinear, low-frequency, phenomenolog-
`ical model with uniform pulse homogeneous charge and
`a lumped parameter approximation of the breathing and
`
`0-7803-1 968-0/94$4.00@1994 JEEE
`
`2748
`
`Page 1 of 6
`
`FORD 1232
`
`

`

`rotational dynamics [3].
`Definition of the variables and their units is provided
`in the next section. An overview of the model is given
`in Section 3. Section 4 discusses the dynamics of the
`nonlinear breathing process after the introduction of the
`secondary throttles; the nonlinear feedforward design of
`the set points for the secondary throttles is discussed in
`Section 5. The relationship between the primary throttle
`position and the torque set-point for the control scheme is
`described in Section 6. The linear feedback design, results
`and comparisons are given in Section 7. Conclusions and
`future work are discussed in Section 8.
`
`2 Nomenclature
`air-fuel ratio, unitless
`mass flow, g/sec
`flywheel speed, rad/sec
`pressure, bar
`torque, Nm
`primary throttle position, degrees
`secondary throttle position, unitless (0 + 1)
`
`3 Engine Model
`
`This section gives a brief overview of the nonlinear
`mathematical representation of the engine model used in
`our study (see Fig 2). For the complete dynamic equations
`describing the primary throttle body, the engine p u m p
`ing and the torque generation, the reader is referred to
`the original paper [3]. A full description of the rotational
`dynamics as a function of the total inertia and the load
`torque is given in [6].
`
`me
`
`Figure 2: Engine model with secondary throttles.
`
`The discrete nature of the combustion process causes
`delays in the signal paths: between the mass charge for-
`mation and the torque generation there exists a delay
`equal to the compression stroke duration, and between
`the exhaust manifold and the EGO sensor there exists a
`delay which equals 3 times the intake event duration. The
`dynamics of the exhaust manifold and the linear EGO sen-
`sor are modeled by first order differential equations with
`timeconstants equal to 0.15 sec and 0.20 sec respectively.
`The model of the fuel puddling dynamics is given in [I]
`
`fi
`
`o.l.s+l
`
`by uf - 0 . 6 2 . s + l ~
`where r;ir; : injected fuel flow (g/sec)
`lkf : cylinder port fuel mass flow (g/sec)
`(3.1)
`Precise transient air-fuel ratio control during rapid
`changes in the throttle position by the driver, requires
`feed-forward computation of the fuel injector pulse width
`since the inherent delay in the air-fuel ratio feedback loop
`prohibits rapid corrections. The fuel injector pulse width
`is regulated on the basis of the estimated cylinder air
`charge. The cylinder air charge is calculated by the esti-
`mated air flow rate out of the intake manifold multiplied
`by the duration of the intake event [7]. The dynamics of
`the air flow meter are included in the model by a first
`order lag with a time constant of 0.13 sec. Finally, fuel
`injection is often timed to occur on a closed-valve prior to
`the induction event [7]; this inherent delay has not been
`included in the model at this time.
`
`4 Nonlinear Breathing Process
`
`This section concentrates on the nonlinear dynamics of
`the engine breathing process. The study of the breath-
`ing process behavior is used to investigate and determine
`the operating regions where the secondary throttles (e,)
`have control authority in regulating the air charge into
`the cylinders. The air charge for every intake event is a
`function of the mass air flow rate into the cylinders and
`the engine speed, and it is directly related to the torque
`produced throughout the power stroke. Control over the
`transient and the steady state value of the mass air flow
`is necessary to meet the objectives of good torque track-
`ing and maintaining the A/F at stoichiometry. The signal
`Oc must influence the static and dynamic behavior of the
`manifold pressure, the air flow into the manifold through
`the primary throttle position, and the air flow into the
`cylinders through the secondary throttles.
`The manifold acts as a plenum, where the rate of change
`of the manifold pressure (P,)
`is proportional to the mass
`air flow rate into the manifold ( h e ) minus the pumping
`mass air flow rate (hf) into the cylinders. The manifold
`dynamics are described by the following first order differ-
`ential equation (see [12]) that relates the rate of change
`of the manifold pressure (P,) to the flow rates into and
`out of the manifold ( h e and hf respectively)
`
`The mass air flow rate into the manifold ( h e ) through the
`primary throttle body is a function of throttle angle (e),
`the upstream pressure (Po), which we assume to be stan-
`dard atmospheric, i.e. Po = 1 bar, and the downstream
`pressure, which is the manifold pressure (P,). When the
`manifold pressure is less than half of atmospheric pres-
`sure, i.e. Pm/Po < 0.5, the flow m e through the throttle
`body is described as sonic flow and depends only on the
`
`2749
`
`Page 2 of 6
`
`FORD 1232
`
`

`

`primary throttle position. The function describing h e in
`the two flow regimes is given in [ll], and [13] by
`h e = f(o)g(Pm)
`f(e) = 2.821 - 0.052318 + 0.102998~ - 0.000638~
`if P, 5 Pol2
`dPmP0 - PA
`if Pm > P o l 2
`
`(4.2)
`The engine pumping mass air flow rate (hf) is a function
`of manifold pressure (Pm) and engine speed (N) and is
`given in (31 by
`
`hf = -0.366+0.008979NPm -0.0337NP; +0.0001N2 Pm
`(4.3)
`For the basic model (without the secondary throttles)
`the steady state operating point occurs at the intersection
`of the two trajectories of the mass air flow rates. This
`point is the nominal point shown in Figure 3. With the
`introduction of the secondary throttles it is possible to
`scale the engine pumping rate (hf) by different values
`depending upon the effective area of the passage that is
`regulated by opening and closing these new valves:
`
`rhcyl = 8,
`
`. +.
`
`(4.4)
`
`Figure 3 shows the new trajectories of the air flow rate
`into the cylinders and the resulting new equilibriums (set
`points in Fig. 3) for the breathing process. For suffi-
`ciently large & < 1, the steady state value of the mass
`air %ow into the cylinder hCyl is adjusted by causing the
`new equilibrium to shift from the sonic flow regime to the
`subsonic region. A closer investigation of the two regimes
`illuminates their significance in the new control scheme.
`
`a
`
`.I
`
`1
`
`1
`
` A
`
`1
`
`1
`
` .7
`
`J
`
`1
`
`Figure 3: Trajectories of ke and hcyl for several values
`of e,.
`
`When the flow through the primary throttle body is
`sonic and therefore does not depend on the manifold pres-
`sure, we operate in the flat region of h e in Figure 3. Small
`changes in 0, cause no change in the steady state value of
`
`the mass air flow in and out of the manifold. For this rea-
`son, when the model of the breathing process is linearized,
`the secondary throttles have zero control authority on reg-
`ulating the steady state mass air flow into the cylinders.
`This can be shown by the following transfer function be-
`tween the control signal A& and the mass air flow into
`the cylinder Arhcyl:
`
`The DC gain of the above transfer function is clearly zero.
`The usual technique of incorporating an integrator to reg-
`ulate the steady state mass air flow into the cylinders can-
`not be used here, since the transfer function has a zero
`at the origin that cancels the integrator pole. It is also
`instructive to see this on a block diagram level. Figure
`4 shows the linear dynamics of the breathing process for
`sonic flow after the introduction of the secondary throttle.
`Note that the integrator loop, which is an intrinsic part of
`the manifold dynamics in sonic flow, rejects the signal 0,
`in steady state. Thus the control signal A& cannot ad-
`just the air charge into the cylinder by %moothing” the
`effect of rapid throttle changes. Consequently, the control
`command A0, has zero control authority on the A/F and
`the steady state value of the engine torque.
`
`Figure 4: Block diagram of the linearized breathing
`process.
`In the case where the flow is subsonic, i.e. PmlP, > 0.5,
`the air flow into the manifold depends on the primary
`throttle position and on the manifold pressure; thus the
`linear model of the engine breathing process is different
`from the above and the application of linear techniques is
`possible. The slope of the function that describes h e (see
`Fig. 3) indicates the control authority of its opearting
`point. It is clear now that the control authority of the
`secondary throttles around the set-point 2 in Figure 3
`is preferable to that around the set-point 1. Around set-
`point 2, the secondary throttles can be used to “smooth”
`any abrupt changes in air flow by regulating the air flow
`into the cylinders at a slower rate.
`In conclusion, a nonlinear feedforward design of the
`0, set-points that allows operation in the subsonic flow
`regime, where the secondary throttle have maximal con-
`trol authority, is necessary. This map will provide the
`steady state position of the new control surfaces.
`
`5 Feedforward Control Design
`
`The natural nominal position of the secondary throttles
`is wide open, i.e. 0, = 1. However, recall from Section
`
`2750
`
`Page 3 of 6
`
`FORD 1232
`
`

`

`4 that under these conditions the secondary throttles of-
`ten have zero control authority in adjusting the steady
`state value of the mass air flow into the cylinders. This
`paper proposes a solution that uses a control signal (ec),
`which consists of a nonlinear feedforward term (ecf ) plus
`a feedback term (ecf,). The feedforward design ensures
`maximal control authority and smooth engine operation.
`The feedback design is based on an LQG/LTR compen-
`sator.
`The nonlinear feedforward term (ecfw) is designed to
`satisfy the following three conditions: 1) it is a smooth
`and non-decreasing function of the primary throttle posi-
`tion (e) and the engine speed ( N ) , i.e. eCfw = eCfw(O, N ) ;
`2) the engine should deliver its maximum power output
`when operated at or close to wide open throttle (WOT),
`and 3) maximal control authority should be available
`without sacrificing combustion stability and performance.
`To achieve these objectives over a wide range of engine op-
`erating conditions we should consider the effects of com-
`bustion stability, thermodynamic performance indices and
`idle operating conditions. Presently we have not com-
`pleted such an extended analysis, which we hope the re-
`sults of this paper will initiate. Based only on a controlla-
`bility analysis, we have developed the following map (see
`Fig. 5):
`
`ecfw =
`
`' 0.55
`0.6445 - 0.0126. e
`e2
`+i.3125.
`. e3
`+2.1875
`1 - ( F ) 2
`1
`
`if 0" < 0 < 12"
`
`if 120 5 e < 20"
`if 20" 5 0 < 60"
`if 60" 5 0 < 90"
`
`Rly-
`
`0
`
`Figure 5: Static feedforward nonlinear term of the
`control signal 0,
`
`The reasoning behind this map is briefly explained.
`First of all, usual driving conditions in urban areas cor-
`respond to partly open primary throttle (e) interrupted
`by rapid requests for acceleration and deceleration (which
`are the main causes of A/F excursion). At partly open
`throttle, the maximum power of the engine is not required
`and hence Ocfw < 1 is acceptable. In addition, Ocfw has
`
`been adjusted to ensure that the breathing process is o p
`erating near set-point 2 in Fig. 3. When the primary
`throttle is at or near WOT, the secondary throttles must
`smoothly operate close to the wide open position to en-
`sure that maximum engine output can be achieved. Under
`WOT conditions, P,,,/P, % 1. Therefore the secondary
`throttles are operating in the maximal control authority
`region. However, they have freedom of movement only
`towards one direction. They can reduce the passage of
`the inlet runners and regulate the transient air flow rate
`into the cylinders during acceleration to cause lower A/F
`excursions. On the other hand, not much can be done
`when the driver closes the primary throttle: the secondary
`throttles cannot open further (0 < 0, 5 1) to "smooth"
`the abrupt decrease of the air flow into the manifold by
`providing additional air. Finally, when the primary throt-
`tle is nearly closed, there is a minimum position for the
`secondary throttles below which idle stability issues have
`to be addressed.
`In the present work, we use the above map to investi-
`gate the contribution of the new control actuator to drive-
`ability improvement and emissions reduction. Thermody-
`namic evaluation is needed to determine the interaction
`of the new control surfaces with the various engine per-
`formance indices. An initial assessment of the influence
`of the suggested feedforward scheme shows that the feed-
`forward term is beneficial to the manifold dynamics. The
`engine operates at P,/P, s 0.9, i.e. manifold almost
`fully charged, which causes considerably faster manifold
`filling dynamics during part throttle driving. Achieving
`fast quasi-steady conditions close to atmospheric pressure
`in the intake manifold can eliminate wide variation in the
`time constant of the fuel puddling dynamics. This might
`reduce the uncertainty inherent in the fuel flow transient
`behavior. We also expect a reduction of the pumping
`losses due to low manifold vacuum . However, the ad-
`ditional complication in the intake system of the engine
`might decrease the volumetric efficiency. Further investi-
`gation of all the above issues will determine the effect of
`the new control scheme on fuel economy.
`Usage of the feedforward term shown in Fig. 5 makes
`linearization fruitful. The Section 7 describes the linear
`feedback design for the secondary throttles and the fuel
`injectors.
`
`6 DemandMap
`
`In the proposed control scheme, the primary throttle
`position is the input. It is measured but not controlled.
`The torque set-point is calculated from the primary throt-
`tle position and the engine speed measurements. This re-
`quires a demand map, similar to the one used in DBW
`schemes [5], to determine the torque set-point for any
`throttle position and engine speed. The engine model,
`after the introduction of the feedforward term of the sec-
`ondary throttles was used to create the nonlinear static
`map. The torque from the demand map will be used as
`
`275 1
`
`Page 4 of 6
`
`FORD 1232
`
`

`

`the desired torque when the torque error is calculated to
`adjust the control signals.
`
`7 Simulation Example
`
`The purpose of this example is to illustrate some of the
`properties of the closed loop system using the secondary
`throttles. The operating point about which we chose to
`linearize the engine model lies in the acceleration curve
`of the engine and third gear was used in the power-train
`rotational dynamics. The nominal primary throttle posi-
`tion used was f? = 20°, and the nominal set-point for the
`secondary throttles was 61% open, resulting in a manifold
`pressure of P,,, = 0.96 bar. The air flow into the cylinders
`was 15.4 g/sec at 3000 RPM producing 31.5 Nm of torque.
`The same amount of torque is produced by the conven-
`tional engine at a primary throttle position of 0 = 11.801
`with a manifold pressure of 0.51 bar. Note that this op-
`erating point falls into the low control authority region
`explained in Section 4. The resulting linear model has 10
`states and is augmented with the two integrated states of
`the A/F and torque error.
`The closed loop performance of the engine with the sec-
`ondary throttles (&-scheme) is compared with the con-
`ventional A/F control scheme (&scheme) and with a
`DBW throttle scheme (DBW-scheme). The conventional
`A/F control scheme regulates the fuel pulsewidth dura-
`tion usually with a PI controller. Seeking a fair compari-
`son between the conventional and the proposed controller,
`the conventional fuel pulsewidth duration regulation is de-
`signed based on an LQG/LTR controller. Both A/F and
`torque measurements are used to improve the estimation
`process. The DBW throttle system is designed to track
`the demanded torque and regulate A/F to stoichiometry.
`The multivariable control law used is based on LQG/LTR
`design methodology.
`Fijpre 6 is a simulation of the nominal response of the
`&-scheme and the Fc-scheme for a 10% step change in
`primary throttle position, which corresponds to 16% step
`change in torque demand. The C-scheme has f0.14%
`A/F excursion and essentially zero A/F and torque er-
`ror after 50 intake events. The integrated error of A/F
`during a rapid throttle movement can be used as a mea-
`surement of engine emissions during that period. The
`integrated error of A/F for the Fc-scheme is 0.0402 and
`for the &-scheme is 0.0051, which indicates a possible
`reduction of engine emissions. Also, the engine reaches
`the specified torque faster than in the Fc-scheme, improv-
`ing driveability significantly. Note that the conventional
`fuel pulsewidth duration control does not affect the torque
`performance of the engine.
`The simulation in Fig. 7 demonstrates the torque trak-
`ing performance of the proposed scheme in comparison
`with the DBW-scheme. The emissions performance is
`equivalent in the two systems. The integrated A/F er-
`ror (during one of the throttle step changes pictured in
`Fig 7) in the &-scheme is 60% Iess than that in the
`
`f
`
`e
`
`
`
`f "r-
`
`I
`
`Figure 6: Simulation of the &-scheme and &scheme.
`
`DBW-scheme. Though both responses are well within
`the high-efficiency window of the catalyst, the absence
`of the lean spike in the A/F in tip-in conditions in the
`DBW-scheme is immediately noticable. In DBW throttle
`systems, the engine is decoupled from the disturbances
`caused by the rapid throttle movements which are im-
`posed by the driver. The closed loop system has the fea-
`ture of isolating the high bandwidth torque demands by
`breaking the linkage between the driver and the primary
`throttles, facilitating smooth A/F control during transient
`engine operation. To achieve the same good A/F results
`we will need to form a smoother torque response in the
`engine. In the future we will incorporate the trade-off
`between the fast torque response and the small A/F ex-
`cursion in the control design for the secondary throttles.
`
`-kponr
`
`I " " '
`
`
`
`" " " " ~ " " ' ~ ~ *
`
`~
`
`~
`
`'
`
`'
`
`'
`
`. '
`'
`
`
`'
`
`. .
`
`o
`
`5
`
`n
`
`it
`
`m
`t.onb
`Figure 7: Closed loop response of the &-scheme and
`DBW-scheme for a square wave in the demanded torque.
`
`U
`
`n
`
`n
`
`a
`
`The performance of the &-scheme was also tested un-
`
`2752
`
`Page 5 of 6
`
`FORD 1232
`
`

`

`der uncertainty in the fuel puddling dynamics due to their
`importance in accurate transient A/F control. Figure 8
`shows the torque and A/F response of the above control
`schemes using a time constant of 0.2 sec in the puddling
`dynamics (see Section 3). The simulation results show
`a limited performance degradation of the closed loops,
`however the &-scheme maintains the improvement of the
`torque response better than the other two methods: inte-
`garted A/F error in the Fc-scheme is 0.0547, and in the
`&-scheme it is 0.0084; the A/F response of the DBW-
`scheme also slightly degrades and the A/F integrated er-
`ror is 0.0085. Therefore the &-scheme maintains emis-
`sions results comparable to the DBW-scheme.
`
`Figure 8: Closed loop performance under uncertainty
`in the fuel puddling dynamics.
`
`8 Conclusions and fiture Work
`
`In this paper we investigated a control scheme for tran-
`sient A/F and torque control during rapid changes in the
`primary throttle position. The air and fuel management
`scheme based on the secondary throttles seems promising.
`The modelling and control scheme developed is closely re-
`lated to variable cam timing engines (VCT). This will be
`pursued in future work.
`An important feature that we have to account for in
`the design is the discrete nature of the A/F system. A
`discrete nonlinear engine model with sample rate syn-
`chronous with crank-angle (event-based), as opposed to
`the conventional time synchronous sampling rate, can
`more accurately represent the combustion process, its de-
`lays and the availability of measurements. On the other
`hand, the continuous processes of the manifold breathing
`characteristics and the rotational dynamics of the vehicle
`enclose the discrete combustion process and result in a hy-
`brid system. Designing an associated nonlinear compen-
`sator which functions over the entire operating envelope
`of the engine is our next task.
`
`References
`C. F. Aquino, “Transients A/F Control Character-
`istics of the 5 Liter Central Injection Engine”, SAE
`Paper No. 810494, 1981.
`C.-F. Chang, N. P. Fakete and J. D. Powell, “En-
`gine Air-Fuel Ratio Control Using an Event-Based
`Observer”, SAE Paper No. 930766, 1993.
`P. R. Crossley and J. A. Cook Ford Motor Company,
`“A Nonlinear Model for Drivetrain System Devel-
`opement” , IEE Conference ’Control 91’, Edinburgh,
`U.K., March 25-28, 1991. IEE Conference Publica-
`tion 332 Vol. 2, pp 921-925.
`J. C. Doyle and G. Stein, “Multivariable Feedback
`Design: Concepts for a Classical/Modern Synthesis”,
`[EEE Trans. Automat. Contr., Vol. AE26, No. 1,
`1981.
`A. L. Emtage, P. A. Lawson, M. A. Passmore, G.
`G. Lucas and P. L. Adcock, “The Development of
`an Automotive Grive-By-Wire Throttle System as a
`Research Tool”, SAE Paper No. 910081, 1991.
`A. M. Foss, R. P. G. Heath and P. Heyworth,
`Cambridge Control, Ltd., and J. A. Cook and J.
`McLean, Ford Motor Co., “Thermodynamic Simu-
`lation of a Turbocharged Spark Ignition Engine for
`Electronic Control Development”, Proc. of the Inst.
`Mech. Eng. Seventh International Conference on Au-
`tomotive Electronics, London, U.K., C391/044 pp
`195-202, October, 1989.
`J. W. Grizzle, J. A. Cook and W. P. Milam, “Im-
`proved Transient Air-Fuel Ratio Control using Air
`Charge Estimator”, Proc. 1994 Amer. Contr. Conf.,
`Vol. 2, pp 1568-1572, June 1994.
`E. Hendricks, M. Jensen, P. Kaidatzis, P. Rasmussen
`and T. Vesterholm, “Transient A/F Ratio Error in
`Conventional SI Engines Controllers”, SAE Paper
`No. 930856, 1993.
`P.-W. Manz, “Influence of a Rapid Throttle Opening
`on the Transient Behavior of an Otto Engine”, SAE
`Paper No. 922234, 1992.
`R. Nishiyama, S. Okhubo and S. Washino, “An
`Analysis of Controlled Factors Improving Transient
`A/F Ratio Control Characteristics”, SAE Paper No.
`890761, 1989.
`J. M. Novak, “Simulation of the Breathing Process
`and Air-Fuel Ratio Distribution Characteristics of
`Threevalve, Stratified Charge Engines”, SAE Paper
`No. 770881, 1977.
`B. K. Powell and J. A. Cook, “Nonlinear Low
`Frequency Phenomenological Engine Modeling and
`Analysis”, Proc. 1987 Amer. Contr. Conf., Vol 1, pp
`332-340, June 1987.
`R. Prabakhar, “Optimal and Suboptimal Control of
`Automotive Engine Efficiency and Emissions”, Ph.D.
`Thesis 1975, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.
`
`Page 6 of 6
`
`FORD 1232
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket