## Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

**Vol. 79, No. 5, May 2006, 449–464
**

Automotive engine hybrid modelling and control

for reduction of hydrocarbon emissions

P. R. SANKETI*, J. C. ZAVALA and J. K. HEDRICK

Vehicle Dynamics Lab, Department of Mechanical Engineering,

University of California, Berkeley, USA-94720

(Received 29 June 2005; in ﬁnal form 24 November 2005)

Automotive engine models vary in their complexity depending on the intended application.

Pre-prototype performance prediction models can be very complex in order to make accurate

predictions. Controller design models need to be as simple as possible since model-based

controllers must operate in real time. This paper develops hybrid models for engine control

that incorporate time and events in their formulation. The resulting hybrid controllers have

the capability of switching between two alternative control modes. The ﬁrst mode is designed

to reduce the raw hydrocarbon (HC) emissions while the second mode tries to increase the

temperature of the catalytic converter as rapidly as possible during the initial transient or

‘‘cold start’’ period. Reachability, as a tool for system analysis, is used to verify the properties

of the closed loop system.

1. Introduction

The synthesis of automotive engine controllers generally

employs simpliﬁed models, in particular mean value

models, which represent the engine behaviour well for

most conditions. There are, however, phases of the

engine operation for which more accurate description

is required. It is then that hybrid schemes can oﬀer

better modelling capabilities. In particular, these can

be used eﬀectively for the warm-up period of the

engine, which is the focus of this paper.

As much as 80% of the hydrocarbon (HC) emissions

in a typical engine drive cycle come from the initial

1–2 minutes of operation, commonly termed as the

‘‘coldstart’’ period. There are three main factors why

a signiﬁcant portion of the hydrocarbon emissions

occur during the coldstart: the ﬁrst is that the cold

engine walls weaken the ﬂame propagation due to the

heat transfer from the gas to the walls; the second is

that the catalytic converter is not active at temperatures

below 350

**C; and the third is that the oxygen sensor
**

does not reach its operating temperature during

coldstart. With emission standards getting stricter

every year, coldstart emissions reduction is an area

that needs immediate attention.

Developing a correct system model is a crucial part of

a control synthesis cycle. The model must consistently

represent the behaviour of the plant in the desired

regions of operation. This is diﬃcult to achieve for the

case of a combustion engine. The challenge is to ﬁnd

a level of representation that is detailed enough as to

contain the important dynamics of the system, but at

the same time is simple enough as to be useful for

control synthesis. A common approach in automotive

engine modelling is the use of mean value models

representing continuous ﬂow of air and fuel into the

engine and also continuous production of torque and

pollutants, as presented in Aquino (1981). Very complex

models exist that can accurately predict the performance

during the coldstart period but are too complex to run in

real time. An intermediate level of complexity and detail

of description is achieved by hybrid models. The cycle to

cycle variation of the engine variables make the hybrid

paradigm a natural approach to engine modelling. In

Balluchi et al. (2000a), a hybrid model for calculating *Corresponding author. Email: pannag@me.berkeley.edu

International Journal of Control

ISSN 0020–7179 print/ISSN 1366–5820 online ß 2006 Taylor & Francis

http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals

DOI: 10.1080/10556780600605079

active torque generation is introduced that captures

the car manufacturers’ requirements related to force

requests in the longitudinal motion of the car. The

hybrid plant model is relaxed to a continuous time

model and the corresponding continuous time optimal

control problem is solved by applying classical methods.

In Baotic et al. (2003), hybrid system theory is used to

obtain a state-feedback optimal control law for an

electronic throttle. After modelling the electronic

throttle as a piecewise aﬃne (PWA) system, an optimal

control law is derived for such a hybrid system via

dynamic programming. A similar approach is applied

to a multi-object adaptive cruise control problem in

Mobus et al. (2003). In Giorgetti et al. (2005), hybrid

tools are used to model and optimally control direct

injection stratiﬁed charge engines.

Alternative technologies have been proposed to

improve the coldstart emissions performance of the

engine. One such example is a catalyst that reacts to

the environment to achieve faster light-oﬀ, as shown

in Tanaka et al. (2001). In most of the cases where

physical changes to the catalyst have been proposed,

improvements have been shown in the performance of

the control of emissions. However, extra cost is added

as new devices and materials are incorporated into the

system. Simpliﬁed control oriented thermal models of

the catalytic converter and the engine are developed

in Shaw and Hedrick (2002), Shaw et al. (2002). Such

models are particularly useful for controller design.

Controllers with multiple control inputs have been

developed, although exhaust gas temperature, ignition

timing and air-fuel ratio (AFR) continue to be used

the most. Lean-limit control to reduce the HC emissions

is used in Lee et al. (2001). A practical approach is

followed in Chan and Hoang (1999): maintaining high

idle speed with a high value of ignition retard (HVIR)

with excess air factor; both together give high engine

exhaust temperature (T

exh

). In Sun and Sivashankar

(1998) the trade-oﬀ between catalyst light-oﬀ and raw

engine-out HC, and the eﬀect of diﬀerent operating

constraints on the catalyst light-oﬀ is discussed.

Isolated engine and catalyst models are used in Shaw

and Hedrick (2003) to determine optimum engine-out

parameter proﬁles that could reduce the overall tailpipe

HC emissions. It was assumed in this paper that AFR

was available for measurement, or that an observer

could be used. One such observer was developed in

Tunestal and Hedrick (2001), using in-cylinder

measurements to predict the engine AFR through a

heat-release analysis. In most of the attempts to make

a model-based controller, the main focus has been on

faster catalyst light-oﬀ achieved by increasing T

exh

using ignition retard.

In this paper, the concepts of hybrid systems are

applied to the area of engine modelling and control

for coldstart analysis. A hybrid model for engine

coldstart purposes is developed. Mean value model-

based non-linear controllers for catalyst temperature

and raw HC emissions are developed. Further, a

hybrid controller is designed which uses the two

non-linear controllers as its modes to reduce the HC

emissions. The catalyst subsystem and the closed loop

system properties are veriﬁed using reachability

analysis with the aid of the ‘‘Levelset’’ toolbox devel-

oped by Professor Ian Mitchell, Assistant Professor,

Department of Computer Science, University of

British Columbia in Vancouver, Canada. The paper is

organized as follows. In x 2, a hybrid model of the

engine for coldstart is described. In x 3, a derivation of

the mean value and hybrid controllers is oﬀered and

the trajectories of the closed loop system using both

mean value and hybrid models are displayed. Finally,

in x 4, reachable sets of the catalyst subsystem and

the closed-loop system are calculated. The reachability

analysis is done using the mean value engine model

with both the mean value and the hybrid controllers.

2. Engine hybrid model

2.1 Mean value engine model

A mean value model of the engine is described in this

section, which will form the basis of the hybrid model,

described in x 2.2. The mean value model uses the

main elements such as the air ﬂow, the fuel ﬂow rate

and the rotational inertia of the engine from the model

proposed in Cho and Hedrick (1989). The ﬁrst state of

the model is the mass air ﬂow m

a

through the intake

manifold. Its dynamics can be deﬁned as the diﬀerence

between the mass ﬂow rate into and out of the manifold

_ m

a

¼ _ m

ai

À _ m

ao

. ð1Þ

The mass ﬂow rate running into the manifold is calcu-

lated as the maximum ﬂow rate multiplied by throttle

angle and pressure ratio scaling factors

_ m

ai

¼ _ m

ai, max

Á TCðoÞ Á PRIðP

m

, P

a

Þ. ð2Þ

The mass ﬂow rate out of the manifold is a function of

engine displacement, V

e

; intake manifold volume, V

m

;

intake manifold pressure, P

m

; mass of air in the mani-

fold, m

a

; engine speed, o

e

and volumetric eﬃciency, j

v

;

and is given by

_ m

ao

¼

V

e

Á j

v

ðP

m

, o

e

Þ Á m

a

Á o

e

4¬ Á V

m

. ð3Þ

450 P. R. Sanketi et al.

The volumetric eﬃciency can be calculated using a

2-D look-up table with inputs o

e

and P

m

or a simpli-

ﬁed function with similar behaviour. The fueling

dynamics consist of the fuel ﬂow rate into the intake

port _ m

fo

as its state. As the fuel is injected into the

intake ports, part of the fuel vaporizes and part of

it deposits on the intake manifold as a liquid.

The fuel deposited on the intake manifold wall aﬀects

the in-cylinder air-fuel ratio as it becomes part of the

air stream. A model of these dynamics, as proposed

in Aquino (1981) and used in Souder and Hedrick

(2004), is given by

_ m

fo

¼ _ m

fv

þ _ m

ff

ð4Þ

t

f

€ m

ff

þ _ m

ff

¼ ð1 À cÞ _ m

fc

ð5Þ

_ m

fv

¼ c _ m

fc

, ð6Þ

where, c represents the portion of the fuel that enters

the cylinder directly as vapour, (1 À c) is the portion

of fuel that is deposited on the manifold walls, _ m

fc

is

the commanded fuel mass ﬂow rate, _ m

fv

is the mass

ﬂow rate of fuel entering the cylinder directly as

vapour, _ m

ff

is the mass ﬂow rate of fuel entering the

cylinder from the fuel puddle on the manifold walls.

The time constant t

f

is modeled as a constant here for

simplicity. Equations (4), (5) and (6) can be combined

into a single equation for use in the AFR controller

design

€ m

fo

þ

1

t

f

_ m

fo

¼ c € m

fc

þ

1

t

f

_ m

fc

. ð7Þ

The dynamics of the state due to the rotational inertia

of the engine can be given by

J

e

_ o

e

¼ T

i

À T

a

, ð8Þ

where J

e

is rotational inertia of the engine, T

i

is the

indicated torque and T

a

is the accessory load. T

i

is

modelled as a function of air mass per cylinder,

air-fuel ratio inﬂuence, spark timing inﬂuence and

crankshaft speed

T

i

¼

c

T

Á _ m

ao

Á AFIðzÞ Á SPIðÁÞ

o

e

, ð9Þ

where AFIðzÞ is the normalized air-fuel ratio inﬂuence

on torque production and SPIðÁÞ is the normalized

spark advance/retard inﬂuence on torque production.

c

T

is a constant which is roughly the same for engines

with the same compression ratio.

The dynamics of the exhaust gas temperature T

exh

,

based on the analysis provided in Shaw and Hedrick

(2002), can be given by

_

T

exh

¼

1

t

e

½ÀT

exh

þ ST Ã AFI , ð10Þ

where, ST ¼ 7.5Á þ 600, Á ¼Spark timing in deg after

top dead centre and AFI ¼ AFR inﬂuence factor.

The catalyst model describes the thermal interaction

between the catalyst mass, the exhaust gas and the

chemical reactions taking place in the catalyst.

The dynamics are described by equation (11) through

(15) as proposed in Shaw et al. (2002).

mC

p

T

cat

dt

¼

dQ

dt

gen

þ

dQ

dt

in

À

dQ

dt

out

ð11Þ

dQ

dt

gen

¼ j

conv

ÁH

gen

ð12Þ

dQ

dt

in

¼ h

in

A

in

ðT

exh

À T

cat

Þ ð13Þ

dQ

dt

out

¼ h

out

A

out

ðT

cat

À T

atm

Þ ð14Þ

j

conv

¼ 1 À exp Àa

1

z À z

0

Áz

m

1

Àa

2

T

cat

À T

0

ÁT

m

2

,

ð15Þ

where m is the catalyst mass, C

p

is the catalyst speciﬁc

heat, T

cat

is the catalyst temperature, j

conv

is the

conversion eﬃciency of the catalyst, ÁH

gen

is the heat

generated by the conversion of the pollutants inside

the catalytic converter, h

in

and h

out

are respectively

the inner and outer eﬀective heat transfer coeﬃcients

of the catalyst.

2.2 Engine hybrid model

A hybrid model was developed from the mean value

model described in the previous section. Hybridness

was introduced in the subsystems that oﬀered higher

modelling accuracy by being in a hybrid form. The

strokes of the engine deﬁne a diﬀerent set of dynamics

inside each cylinder and aﬀect the production of

torque, pollutants and heat. The stroke of the engine

also determines the amount of exhaust gas and hydro-

carbons produced at a given time. The variation of

these variables from stroke to stroke will be considered

here as the main element of hybridness. The crankshaft

angle (ç) is the decision variable for the transition from

one discrete state to another. Let us review the changes

to the proposed model due to the introduction of

hybridness. A diagram of the hybrid engine model is

Reduction of hydrocarbon emissions 451

shown in ﬁgure 1. The model consists of the following

subsystems: intake manifold, intake port, thermal

behaviour of the engine, torque production and catalyst.

The crankshaft angle ç(t) is used to index the moments

at which the exhaust mass corresponding to the combus-

tion cycle of each cylinder is available at the exhaust

port. In this manner, the production of hydrocarbons

is delayed by a combustion cycle. The intake manifold

integrates the diﬀerence given in equation (1). The

intake port subsystem uses equation (3) to determine

_ m

ao

, however, the mass ﬂow of air is separated for

each cylinder. This, mixed with the fuel, results in the

exhaust gas after being subjected to the combustion

cycle delay. The AFR and _ m

fo

are also calculated

inside the intake port. In the intake port, the angle

ç(t) forms the index of _ m

ao

. The exhaust temperature

and the raw emissions are calculated in the thermal

block according to equation (10) and (21). The torque

model contains a ﬁnite state machine for each cylinder,

consisting of four states: Intake I, Compression C,

Expansion E, and Exhaust X. The transition from one

state to the other is based on the position of the cylinder.

The top dead centre (TDC) is the starting position for

the intake stroke and is indexed with çðtÞ ¼ 0. At the

end of the intake stroke (çðtÞ ¼ ¬), there is a transition

to the compression mode. The expansion mode C

starts at çðtÞ ¼ 0 and the exhaust mode X at çðtÞ ¼ ¬.

The torque produced by each stroke is generated by

continuous functions f

1

through f

4

, corresponding

respectively to the four modes. Each of the torque func-

tions f

i

have the following inputs: the air mass ﬂow rate

_ m

ao

, the air-fuel ratio AFR, the spark timing delay Á

and the engine speed o

e

. The torque function f

i

has a

negative proﬁle for the intake, compression and exhaust

strokes, whereas it is positive for the expansion stroke.

The mean value of f

i

along the full cycle is positive.

The torque model accounts for the delay due to the

combustion cycle.

2.3 Comparison of models

In our experience, there are two main aspects that make

the mean value engine model diﬀerent from the hybrid

engine model.

.

The mean value model gives a good approximation

of the behaviour of the engine during warmed-up

operation and it is simple. On the other hand, it

is not suitable to capture all the events that are of

interest for the study of the coldstart period.

. The hybrid model is more complex and more diﬃcult

to validate, however it can be useful to describe

instantaneous events and short period transients,

which are important during coldstart.

The hybrid model presented here is diﬀerent fromthe one

developed in Balluchi et al. (2000a) mainly in the

following aspects. The ﬁrst diﬀerence is that we assume

that there is no load during the ﬁrst few seconds of

operation of the engine, hence our model does not

include the drivetrain dynamics. The second diﬀerence

is found in the torque generation. In our model, the

torque generated by each cylinder is a continuous func-

tion with diﬀerent proﬁles in diﬀerent strokes. During

the compression, exhaust and intake strokes, the torque

is negative due to the force that is applied by the other

pistons to compress, expel or suck the cylinder charge.

Figure 1. Engine hybrid model.

452 P. R. Sanketi et al.

The positive torque is produced during the expansion

phase. In the model described in Balluchi et al. (2000a),

the torque is produced by a zero-order hold during

the expansion phase. In this manner, the torque is

characterized by constant levels for each stroke.

However, in Balluchi et al. (2001), a memoryless generic

function is used for the torque generation of the model,

allowing for non-constant proﬁles during the four

strokes. Both of the models presented in Balluchi et al.

(2000a, 2001) use the stroke state, the piston

position, the mass and fuel loaded into the cylinder and

the spark timing as parameters of the torque

function. The third diﬀerence is the number of states

in the FSM for the cylinders. In our model there are

four states, whereas in the model presented in Balluchi

et al. (1998) there is one state for each stroke, plus two

more corresponding to the expansion stroke under

advance and retard of spark timing.

3. Hybrid control

This section deals with the design of a hybrid controller

for minimizing the tailpipe HC emissions during the

coldstart period using the mean value engine model.

Initially, the problem is described in terms of the

inputs and outputs of the system. The control laws

designed are then explained. Further, the results are

presented and compared with those of mean value

controllers. The performance of the hybrid controller

is assessed by testing it with the hybrid engine model.

Finally, some notes on the stability of the proposed

controller are added.

3.1 Problem description

The objective is to minimize the cumulative tailpipe

hydrocarbons. The tailpipe HCs depend on the raw

HCs produced by the engine and the eﬃciency of the

catalyst. The catalyst is said to have achieved light-oﬀ

when its eﬃciency is above 50%. There is a trade-oﬀ

between how fast the catalyst light-oﬀ can be achieved

and how much the raw HCs can be reduced. Thus,

just reducing the raw emissions does not necessarily

mean minimizing the tailpipe emissions. The control

inputs available to optimize the performance index are

throttle angle o, commanded fuel injection rate _ m

fc

and the spark timing Á. It is assumed that the engine

speed sensor, linear air-fuel (UEGO) sensor, exhaust

gas temperature and catalyst temperature sensors and

HC analyser (raw and tailpipe emissions) are available

for measurement throughout the coldstart period.

However, in practice, the AFR sensors are not active

until around 10s, and the HC analyser delay is too big

to be used in real-time control. In Tunestal and

Hedrick (2001), an observer for the AFR using the

in-cylinder pressure measurements is designed. The

in-cylinder pressure is directly measured using a piezo-

electric pressure sensor. The raw HCs can be predicted

knowing the AFR and estimating the amount of fuel

injected. The amount of fuel injected can be predicted

using the injection duration. Alternatively, a black-

box model for the raw HCs can be developed by

analysing the constant delay in the FID HC analyser

measurements.

3.2 Hybrid controller

3.2.1 Motivation. Mean value controllers have been

developed in literature to control the engine exhaust

gas temperature T

exh

(Shaw and Hedrick 2003) and

the AFR (Souder and Hedrick 2004). In the context

of coldstart emissions control, T

exh

is important to get

the catalyst warmed up faster, whereas keeping the

AFR lean reduces the raw emissions itself. In this

paper, two high level dynamic surface controllers

(Song et al. 2002) for catalyst temperature and raw

HCs were developed using T

exh

and the AFR as

synthetic inputs respectively. As mentioned before,

there is a trade-oﬀ between the two. The two dynamic

surface controllers were designed without incorporating

the coupling between them, i.e. each controller tries to

achieve its own objective. Hence, a mean value control-

ler which consists of these two controllers running in

parallel with static gains may not exploit the trade-oﬀ.

By designing a switching controller consisting of two

modes where one of the two controllers is preferred in

each, the coupling between them is made use of and

either of the two objectives is not highly penalized.

In one mode, fast catalyst light-oﬀ is favoured and

in another reducing the raw HC emissions is favoured.

Achieving similar optimality with controllers having

constant gains would require designing a multi-input–

multi-output (MIMO) ‘‘dynamic surface control’’,

which is not easy. Also, the switching algorithm is

more robust with respect to varying driving conditions.

Next we discuss the components of the controller.

3.2.2 Modes of hybrid controller. The overall

hierarchical structure of the controller is shown in

ﬁgure 2. The topmost level controller is the hybrid

controller, followed by catalyst temperature (T

cat

) and

engine out raw emissions (

_

HC

out

) dynamic surface

controllers, T

exh

and AFR controllers, spark timing

and commanded fuel injection rate controllers in that

order. As seen in ﬁgure 3, the high-level hybrid

controller consists of two modes, namely T

cat

control

dominant mode and

_

HC

out

control dominant mode.

In the

_

HC

out

control dominant mode, the gain z

1b

on

Reduction of hydrocarbon emissions 453

the T

cat

controller (described further in x 3.2.2)

represented by surface S

1

is low and the gain z

3b

on

the

_

HC

out

controller (described further in x 3.2.3)

represented by surface S

3

is high. In the T

cat

control dominant mode, the gain z

1a

on T

cat

controller

is high whereas the gain z

3a

on

_

HC

out

controller is

low. The dynamic surface controller for T

cat

uses T

exh

as the control variable whereas the dynamic surface

controller for

_

HC

out

uses AFR as the control variable.

The low level T

exh

and AFR controllers use spark

timing (Á) and fuel injection rate ( _ m

fc

) as the inputs

respectively. These are designed as single-input–single-

output (SISO) controllers.

The high-level control strategy is as follows. Initially,

the controller is in T

cat

control dominant mode where

the gain on T

cat

control is high. Hence, there is an

eﬀort to increase the catalyst temperature helping fast

catalyst light-oﬀ, however at the expense of raw HC

emissions. When the raw HCs reach a certain upper

bound L

1

, the hybrid controller switches to the

_

HC

out

control dominant mode, where the gain on the T

cat

control is low. In this mode, there is no special eﬀort

to increase the catalyst temperature and the focus is

on getting the raw emissions rate as low as possible.

When the raw emissions reach a certain lower bound

L

2

, the hybrid controller switches back to T

cat

control

dominant mode. The switching continues till the catalyst

light-oﬀ is achieved. The constituents of the hybrid

controller are described in detail next.

3.2.3 Controller derivation – T

cat

control. Catalyst

temperature is strongly dependent on the engine exhaust

temperature, which is strongly dependent on the ignition

timing. Using dynamic surface control, we control T

cat

treating T

exh

as a synthetic input. We deﬁne a sliding

surface equal to the diﬀerence between the actual and

desired value of the catalyst temperature.

S

1

¼ T

cat

À T

cat, d

_

S

1

¼

_

T

cat

À

_

T

cat, d

.

ð16Þ

Substituting for the dynamics of the catalyst

temperature from equation (11), we get,

_

S

1

¼

_

Q

gen

þ

_

Q

in

À

_

Q

out

mC

p

À

_

T

cat, d

.

Denoting the catalyst internal surface area and heat

transfer coeﬃcient as A

in

and h

in

respectively, we have

_

Q

in

¼ h

in

A

in

ðT

exh

À T

cat

Þ.

Similarly,

_

Q

out

¼ h

out

A

out

ðT

cat

À T

atm

Þ,

where T

atm

is the ambient temperature.

Treating T

exh

as the input, we design the control law

to obtain

_

S

1

¼ Àz

1

S

1

,

where z

1

is a positive gain. This leads to the following

equation

"

T

exh

¼

ð

_

T

cat, d

À z

1

S

1

ÞmC

p

À

_

Q

gen

þ

_

Q

out

h

in

A

in

þ T

cat

, ð17Þ

Figure 2. Hierarchy of controllers.

Figure 3. Modes of hybrid controller.

454 P. R. Sanketi et al.

where

"

T

exh

is the synthetic input. To track the desired

value of the synthetic input, we need to ﬁnd its deriva-

tive, which can lead to too many terms called the

‘‘explosion of terms problem’’ (Swaroop et al. 2000).

Also, the term

"

T

exh

may include uncertainties which

can lead to problems in diﬀerentiation. Hence, the

desired value of T

exh

to be tracked is found by passing

the synthetic input through a low-pass ﬁlter so that

‘‘explosion of terms’’ problem and taking unknown

derivatives is avoided

t

T

_

T

exh,d

þ T

exh,d

¼

"

T

exh

. ð18Þ

Then, we deﬁne a sliding surface based on the diﬀerence

between the actual and the desired exhaust gas

temperature. This part of the T

exh

tracking controller

is based on Shaw and Hedrick (2003).

S

2

¼ T

exh

À T

exh,d

_

S

2

¼

_

T

exh

À

_

T

exh,d

.

ð19Þ

Knowing that T

exh

depends on the spark timing Á,

we design the control law to obtain

_

S

2

¼ Àz

2

S

2

where z

2

is a positive gain.

Using the plant dynamics given by equation (10),

we get the control law as,

Á ¼

1

7.5

t

e

AFI

T

exh

t

e

þ

_

T

exh,d

À z

2

S

2

À 600

. ð20Þ

3.2.4 Controller derivation – Engine exhaust HC

control. The engine-out HC emissions denoted by

_

HC

out

are strongly dependent on the AFR. Therefore,

AFR is treated as a synthetic input to control HC

out

.

The inversion of the following expression in terms

of AFR is used to devise the controller

_

HC

out

¼ _ m

f

ðr

c

À 1Þ

r

c

exp Àa

±

EVO

À ±

0

Á±

m

, ð21Þ

where, r

c

is the compression ratio, ±

EVO

is the exhaust

valve opening angle and

±

0

¼ k

1

ðÁÞ þ k

2

Á± ¼ k

3

ðAFR À 14.7Þ

2

þ k

4

k

2

, k

3

, k

4

, a and m being the model parameters.

Deﬁne a sliding surface as the diﬀerence between the

engine out HC emissions rate and the desired rate.

S

3

¼

_

HC

out

À

_

HC

out, d

ð22Þ

Diﬀerentiating,

_

S

3

¼

€

HC

out

À 0 ð23Þ

Since the calculation of

€

HC

out

is complex, it will be

diﬃcult to invert that equation in terms of AFR.

Hence, we pass

_

HC

out

through a ﬁrst order ﬁlter to

obtain

_

HC

f, out

as follows:

t

p

€

HC

f, out

þ

_

HC

f, out

¼

_

HC

out

¼)

€

HC

f, out

¼

1

t

p

ð

_

HC

out

À

_

HC

f, out

Þ. ð24Þ

Substituting equation (24) in equation (23), and using

AFR as a synthetic input, we design the controller to get

_

S

3

¼

1

t

p

ð

_

HC

out

À

_

HC

f, out

Þ ¼ Àz

3

S

3

z

3

being a positive gain. After some algebra, we get

the synthetic input as

"

AFR ¼ X

À1,m

1

±

EVO

À ±

0

À k

4

1

k

3

1,2

þ14.7, ð25Þ

where

X ¼

1

a

log

_ m

f

ðr

c

À 1Þ

ð

_

HC

f, out

À t

p

z

3

S

3

Þr

c

" #

.

Again, this is passed through a ﬁlter to get the desired

AFR

d

) and

_

AFR

d

. As mentioned before, explosion of

terms and taking unknown derivatives is avoided using

this method

t

A

_

AFR

d

þ AFR

d

¼

"

AFR. ð26Þ

To track the desired AFR, we deﬁne a sliding surface

as follows:

S

4

¼ _ m

fo

À ,

, ¼

_ m

ao

AFR

d

¼)

_

S

4

¼ € m

fo

À _ ,,

ð27Þ

Reduction of hydrocarbon emissions 455

where, _ m

ao

is the manifold out air ﬂow rate. This part

of the AFR tracking controller is based on Souder and

Hedrick (2004). Using the fuelling dynamics given by

equation (7),

_

S

4

¼

1

t

f

½À _ m

fo

þ _ m

fc

À _ ,.

The commanded fuel ﬂow is used as the input to obtain

_

S

4

¼ Àz

4

S

4

,

where z

4

is a positive gain. After further simpliﬁcation,

we get the following control law

_ m

fc

¼ _ m

fo

þ t

f

€ m

ao

AFR

d

À

_ m

ao

_

AFR

d

AFR

d

2

À z

4

S

4

" #

. ð28Þ

3.3 Results and analysis

3.3.1 Controller performance. The controllers designed

were applied to the engine and the catalyst models

and the performances were simulated at idle

condition. First, a mean value controller that uses the

catalyst in the feedback loop in real-time was simulated.

If the catalyst is not in the feedback loop, such as the

controller described in Shaw and Hedrick (2003), then

the inputs to the catalyst have to be calculated oﬄine,

and hence, the catalyst properties such as temperature

and eﬃciency cannot be controlled directly. Also,

having the catalyst in the closed loop is useful in

accounting for ageing of the catalyst. The mean value

controller comprises a T

cat

controller and a

_

HC

out

controller described in xx 3.2.2 and 3.2.3 respectively.

The controllers work in parallel, but their gains are

tuned constant. Figure 4 shows the performance of the

controller (mean value controller implies T

cat

controller

and

_

HC

out

controller running in parallel with tuned

static gains), where the cumulative HC emissions are

seen to be 7.5 g. As mentioned previously, this controller

with constant gains does not really take advantage of

the trade-oﬀ between the two controllers. Next, the

hybrid controller (described in x 3.2) in which the gains

on the two lower level controllers can be changed in

real-time was simulated.

Figure 5 shows the performance of the hybrid control-

ler. Even though the catalyst light-oﬀ is not as fast,

the cumulative tailpipe HC emissions are about 3.5 g

as compared to around 7.5 g in the previous controller.

Figure 6 indicates the hybrid nature of the controller.

The oscillations in the HC ppm graph correspond to

the switching of the hybrid controller between its two

modes. By doing so, it exploits the trade-oﬀ between

the raw emissions and the catalyst light-oﬀ. Hence, the

hybrid controller performs better than the mean value

controller. On zooming into ﬁgure 6, it is found that

switching takes place approximately every two engine

cycles (refer to ﬁgure 7). It is feasible to control the

AFR in practice in that interval since the delays

associated with the measurements of AFR and HC are

at most one combustion cycle. In case the HC

measurements were not available, HC measurements

can be observed through the estimation of AFR (using

in-cylinder pressure measurements) and the amount of

fuel injected.

Finally, the hybrid controller was assessed with

the hybrid model described in x 2.2. Its performance

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

0

500

Catalyst Temperature

T

e

m

p

(

°

C

)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

0

0.5

1

E

t

a

h

c

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

0

5

10

Cumulative Tailpipe HC

H

C

t

p

C

u

m

(

g

)

Time (s)

Figure 4. Mean value controller: Catalyst eﬃciency and

cumulative tailpipe HC.

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

0

500

Catalyst Temperature

T

e

m

p

(

°

C

)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

0

0.5

1

E

t

a

h

c

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

0

2

4

Cumulative Tailpipe HC

H

C

t

p

C

u

m

(

g

)

Time (s)

Figure 5. Hybrid controller: Catalyst eﬃciency and

cumulative tailpipe HC.

456 P. R. Sanketi et al.

is shown in ﬁgures 8 and 9. The performance of

the hybrid control is very similar to that of the mean

value engine model. We believe that the hybrid model

can be advantageous during the ﬁrst few cycles of

operation of the engine, when the amount of

hydrocarbon emissions are the highest. During

those cycles, it can be useful to determine how many

hydrocarbons are emitted due to each cycle and how

the fuel dynamics in the manifold inﬂuences those

emissions. The design of the controller can be then

adapted to consider those factors.

The switching time of the controller was found to be

related to the values of the gains of the two modes of

the controller. As the gains are changed, the dynamics

of the closed-loop system is aﬀected and the controlled

variables react at diﬀerent velocities. However, the

performance of the controller is not aﬀected

signiﬁcantly by small variation in the switching times.

Thus, the change of the gains in the modes of the

controller allows for adjustment of the switching

times if required. Regarding the synchronization

of the controller with the engine cycle, our model

does not time the fuel injection events or spark

events, hence, synchronization is not required.

Synchronization becomes crucial during the controller

implementation, when the fuelling dynamics have to

be considered for fuel injection timing.

0 1 2 3 4 5

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

Raw and Tailpipe HC Comparison (Detail)

H

C

p

p

m

R

a

t

e

Time (s)

TP

Exh

Figure 7. Hybrid controller: Tailpipe and raw HC

comparison (Detail).

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

0

500

Catalyst Temperature

T

e

m

p

(

°

C

)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

0

0.5

1

E

t

a

h

c

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

0

2

4

Cumulative Tailpipe HC

H

C

t

p

C

u

m

(

g

)

Time (s)

Figure 8. Hybrid controller with hybrid model: Catalyst

eﬃciency and cumulative tailpipe HC.

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

Raw and Tailpipe HC Comparison

H

C

p

p

m

R

a

t

e

Time (s)

TP

Exh

Figure 9. Hybrid controller with hybrid model: Tailpipe and

raw HC comparison.

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

Raw and Tailpipe HC Comparison

H

C

p

p

m

R

a

t

e

Time (s)

TP

Exh

˚

Figure 6. Hybrid controller: Tailpipe and raw HC

comparison.

Reduction of hydrocarbon emissions 457

3.3.2 Notes on the stability of the sliding surfaces. To

analyse the convergence properties of the controller,

it is important to look at the evolution of the sliding

surface S

i

ðÁÞ ¼ 0 as a function of time.

Figures 10 and 11 show respectively the evolution

of the sliding surfaces when the mean value controller

and the hybrid controller are used with the mean value

engine model. All the surfaces reach the boundary

layer near zero without any instabilities. The presence

of oscillations in T

exh

is due to the hybrid nature of

the controller. Figure 12 shows the evolution of surfaces

when the hybrid controller is used with hybrid engine

model. Though there are inherent delays in the hybrid

model, the surfaces still converge well. To analyse the

eﬀect of sensor delays and transport delays on the

controller performance, the mean value and hybrid

models were subjected to such delays of the order of a

combustion cycle (besides the delays already present in

the formulated models). Figures 13 and 14 demonstrate

the eﬀect of delays on the evolution of the surfaces for

mean value and hybrid controllers. As seen from these

ﬁgures, instabilities usher in for a short period and the

surfaces stabilize after some time. When the delay is

increased to more than a combustion cycle, for both

the mean value and the hybrid controllers, the closed

loop system becomes unstable.

4. Reachability analysis

4.1 Motivation

Even though eﬃcient tools are available for simulation

of the engine plant, the question of stability and evolu-

tion of the states under a hybrid modelling scheme has

not been answered completely. One reason is that

model simulations cannot cover all possible trajectories

inside a set. An approach to the problem is to apply

the concepts of reachable sets, which would give an indi-

cation of how the states can evolve with time given the

bounds on inputs and disturbances. Excellent examples

of application of reachability analysis in hybrid control-

ler synthesis can be found in Balluchi et al. (2000b) and

Tomlin et al. (1998). In particular, our objective is to

verify the properties of the controllers that we have

designed. First a backwards reachable set of the open-

loop catalyst subsystem is calculated which establishes

the required capability of the controller. Further, to

verify the stability and safety of the controller, both

the forward and backward reachable sets of the system

under closed-loop control are calculated.

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

−20

0

20

S

1

,

r

a

d

/

s

S1, speed surface

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

−2

0

2

× 10

−18

S

2

(

k

g

)

S2, manifold air mass

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

−500

0

500

S

3

(

K

)

S3, exhaust temperature surface

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

−50

0

50

S

4

(

)

S4, Air to fuel ratio surface

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

−400

−200

0

Time (s)

S

5

(

K

)

S5, Catalytic Converter Temperature

Figure 10. Sliding surfaces: Mean value controller with

mean value model.

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

−20

0

20

S

1

,

r

a

d

/

s

S1, speed surface

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

−1

0

1

× 10

−18

S

2

(

k

g

)

S2, manifold air mass

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

−500

0

500

S

3

(

K

)

S3, exhaust temperature surface

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

−5

0

5

S

4

(

)

S4, Air to fuel ratio surface

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

−500

0

500

Time (s)

S

5

(

K

)

S5, Catalytic Converter Temperature

Figure 11. Sliding surfaces: Hybrid controller with mean

value model.

458 P. R. Sanketi et al.

4.2 Introduction to reachability

As engineering systems have become more complex,

methods for verifying the correct behaviour of such

systems have been developed. Model checking, in

particular, is an important issue in this regard. It is

a veriﬁcation method in which the state space of the

design is explored in order to determine whether the

system can enter into an unsafe or incorrect state.

Many model checking algorithms attempt to compute

a reachable set, which can be of two types. A forwards

reachable set is the set of states that can be reached by

system trajectories which start in a given set of initial

states. A backwards reachable set is the set of states

that can give rise to trajectories which subsequently

pass through some given set of target states. The

target of a backwards reachable set can deﬁned as

‘‘safe’’ or ‘‘unsafe’’. The ﬁrst type is used to determine

the states from which the system will eventually reach

a desired safe set. The latter case is to determine

from which states, the system will eventually reach an

undesired unsafe set.

Consider the backwards reachable set from a target

set T of a continuous system with dynamics

_ x ¼ fðx, a, bÞ, where x is the state of the system, a is

an input seeking to keep the system from entering T,

and b is an input seeking to drive the system into T.

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

−10

0

10

S

1

,

r

a

d

/

s

S1, speed surface

−2

0

2

× 10

18

× 10

3

S

2

,

[

k

g

]

S2, manifold air mass

−1000

0

1000

S

3

,

[

K

]

S3, exhaust temperature surface

−1

0

1

S

4

,

[

]

S4, Air to fuel ratio surface

−500

0

500

Time [s]

S

5

,

[

K

]

S5, Catalytic Converter Temperature

Figure 12. Sliding surfaces: Hybrid controller with hybrid

model.

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

−10

0

10

S

1

,

r

a

d

/

s

S1, speed surface

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

−1

0

1

× 10

−18

S

2

(

k

g

)

S2, manifold air mass

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

−1000

0

1000

S

3

(

K

)

S3, exhaust temperature surface

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

−1

0

1

× 10

−3

S

4

(

)

S4, Air to fuel ratio surface

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

−500

0

500

Time (s)

S

5

(

K

)

S5, Catalytic Converter Temperature

Figure 13. Sliding surfaces with delays: Mean value

controller with mean value model.

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

−10

0

10

S

1

,

r

a

d

/

s

S1, speed surface

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

−1

0

1

× 10

−18

S

2

(

k

g

)

S2, manifold air mass

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

−1000

0

1000

S

3

(

K

)

S3, exhaust temperature surface

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

−2

0

2

× 10

−3

S

4

(

)

S4, Air to fuel ratio surface

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

−500

0

500

Time (s)

S

5

(

K

)

S5, Catalytic Converter Temperature

Figure 14. Sliding surfaces with delays: Hybrid controller

with hybrid model.

Reduction of hydrocarbon emissions 459

Considering T as an unsafe set, a should be considered

a controller keeping the system safe, and b consists of

disturbances or model uncertainties which are assumed

to try to make the system unsafe. Computation of the

backwards reachable set is normally encoded as a

terminal value Hamilton-Jacobi (HJ) PDE, the same

as an initial value PDE, but with the time running

backwards (Mitchell 2005). The reach set is represented

by an implicit surface function çðx, tÞ. The terminal

value of the implicit surface function is same as the

target set, so çðx, 0Þ should be a representation of T.

Evolution of the backwards reachable set is

accomplished by solving the following equation

backwards in time.

D

t

çðx, tÞ þmin½0, Hðx, D

x

çðx, tÞÞ ¼ 0, ð29Þ

where

Hðx, pÞ ¼ max

a

min

b

p

T

fðx, a, bÞ ð30Þ

H(x, p) being the Hamiltonian. (In case of T being a

‘‘safe set’’, the input a will minimize the Hamiltonian.)

The solution çðx, tÞ is an implicit surface representation

of the ﬁnite time backwards reachable set. For our

analysis, a Level Set Method Toolbox (Mitchell 2005)

developed by Prof. Ian Mitchell was used to calculate

the backwards reachable set. The toolbox is designed

for solving initial value PDEs. For autonomous systems,

converting the terminal value PDEs to the initial

value PDE form used in the toolbox simply requires

multiplying f by À1 (Mitchell 2005).

4.3 Backwards reachability of catalyst subsystem

As stated before, catalyst light-oﬀ is one of the essential

factors in coldstart control. With an aim to ﬁnd out the

time required to achieve the light-oﬀ of the catalyst

starting from a particular initial condition, we analyze

the reachability of the catalyst subsystem. The back-

wards reachable set at any instant t gives the range of

T

cat

in which the system should start so as to reach

the light-oﬀ temperature within time t. Obviously, the

reachable set at time t ¼ 0 s is a very small interval

around the catalyst light-oﬀ temperature, which is

approximately 350 to 400

**C. Note that the target set
**

here is the set that the system wants to reach.

The reach set can only grow as the time increases. The

reach set, hence, gives an idea of the input to be given

to the system so as to be able to achieve the light-oﬀ

within a given time period, which in turn reﬂects on

the required capability of the controller.

4.3.1 Results and analysis. Referring to the dynamics

of the catalyst temperature given by equation (11), the

AFR and the T

exh

can be considered as the inputs to

the catalyst subsystem. The AFR is assumed to be

constant around stoichiometric value and the only

active input is T

exh

.

The state equation of T

cat

is aﬃne in the input, and

thus calculating the Hamiltonian is not very diﬃcult.

The maximum input that can be given to the catalyst

is limited to a certain constant value. The results

obtained for an AFR of 14.8 and a maximum input of

400

**C are shown in ﬁgure 15. The y-axis represents
**

the level set as a function of catalyst temperature

which is represented on the x-axis (for higher dimen-

sions, just the surface çðxÞ ¼ 0 is shown). The ﬁgure

shows how the level set grows with time. The reachable

set that we are interested in is the interval in which the

level set is negative. For example, the reach set at

t ¼ 50 s is the interval between 310 K (37

C) and 675 K

(402

C), i.e. if the catalyst is at 37

C to start with,

then the light-oﬀ can be achieved within 50 s if the

T

exh

can be maintained at least at 400

C. From control-

ler’s standpoint, if the system starts at 37

C, we know

that an input of T

exh

¼ 400

C is required to achieve

the light-oﬀ in 50 s. If you want to achieve a faster

light-oﬀ, then a higher level of input is needed.

Figure 16 indicates that to achieve a light-oﬀ in 30 s

starting from the same initial point 37

C, an input

level of 700

**C is required. Hence, this analysis provides
**

useful inputs for control design. It can be seen that the

reach set moves in the right direction and it does not

have any abrupt changes in direction.

300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

T

cat

(K)

L

e

v

e

l

s

e

t

f

u

n

c

t

i

o

n

Catalyst Reachability Analysis

t=0 s

t=10 s

t=20 s

t=30 s

t=40 s

t=50 s

Figure 15. Backward reachability analysis of catalyst:

T

exh, max

¼ 400

C.

460 P. R. Sanketi et al.

The analysis was repeated for various values of AFR.

The results indicated that for either rich or very lean

values of AFR, more time is required for the catalyst

light-oﬀ.

It is interesting to note that in practice, once the

engine warms-up and T

exh

reaches its maximum

value, it would take hours for the engine to cool

down. This means that the input can be applied in

only one direction. However, it is ﬁne for our analysis,

since it makes sense to apply the maximum possible

input to reach the target set from a given initial condi-

tion in minimum possible time. In practice, spark

timing can be used as an input to eﬀectively achieve

the required T

exh

.

4.4 Forward reachability of closed-loop system

In order to analyse the stability of the controller

designed, the forward reachable set of the closed-loop

system was calculated. We wanted to show that the

states remain bounded under the closed-loop control.

Initially, the forward reachable set for the whole

system comprising of 5 states was attempted.

However, the reach set calculation was very slow, even

on a coarse grid. Hence, a subset of 3 states was

analysed. The simpliﬁcations made were that the

engine speed and the amount of air inside the intake

manifold were ﬁxed, which is reasonable at idle.

The values of the constant states were chosen such

that the trajectories of the original closed loop system

matched those of this simpliﬁed version.

Figure 17 shows the forward reach set at t ¼ 50 s of

the closed loop system starting from a set which is the

set of all possible initial conditions (the _ m

fo

axis is

scaled by 10

5

for better visualization. The variables

corresponding to the diﬀerent axes are X ¼ _ m

fo

Â

10

5

kg/s, Y ¼ T

exh

ðKÞ, Z ¼ T

cat

ðKÞ). It was observed

that the reach set does not move as much as expected

(found through various ODE simulations) in the direc-

tion of T

cat

. Another reach set was calculated with the

initial conditions being the set corresponding to the

values expected at around 30 s. Also this reach set was

found not to move much in the T

cat

direction.

On further research, it was found that the result was

similar unless the initial set was chosen corresponding

to the time when the dynamics of the system slow

down. The reason for this behaviour, as pointed out

by Prof. Ian Mitchell, is that the system consists of

dynamics that have diﬀerent time scales. In particular,

the fuel dynamics are much faster than the catalyst

temperature dynamics. Unfortunately, the level set

code deals poorly with such systems. They require

very small timesteps, and the reach set might quickly

converge to an incorrect ﬁxpoint. Hence, the forward

reach set of the closed-loop system with the hybrid

controller was calculated starting from 50 s when the

system dynamics are expected to settle relatively soon.

The reach set was found to grow, although at a slow

rate and then it became invariant in all directions.

The reach set is shown in ﬁgures 18 and 19. Hence,

all the states remain bounded under the closed-loop

control.

250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

Catalyst Reachability Analysis

T

cat

(K)

L

e

v

e

l

s

e

t

f

u

n

c

t

i

o

n

t=0 s

t=10 s

t=20 s

t=30 s

Figure 16. Backward reachability analysis of catalyst:

T

exh, max

¼ 7008C.

Figure 17. Forward reachable set for closed-loop system.

Reduction of hydrocarbon emissions 461

4.5 Backward reachability of closed-loop system

The forward reachability analysis presented in the

previous section helped us verify the stability of the

closed-loop system. It would be useful to also verify

the possibility of the system reaching an ‘‘unsafe’’ set.

This can be done by calculating the backwards

reachable set of the closed-loop system starting from

an undesired state. If the backwards reach set does not

intersect the set of possible initial states within the

time of interest, then the system can be termed safe

with respect to the given ‘‘unsafe’’ state. In

particular, we are interested in ﬁnding out if the catalyst

temperature can rise to very high values, thus damaging

the catalyst.

The same simpliﬁed system as that in the previous

section was used for analysis. However, only the mean

value controller was used since the methods for calculat-

ing the backwards reachable set for a hybrid system are

still under development. The target or ‘‘unsafe’’ set for

the backwards reachability analysis in this case was

a small ball around the center given by catalyst tempera-

ture of 1023 K (750

**C) and the other states close to their
**

steady state values. Figure 20 shows the backwards

reachable set. The speciﬁed target set can be reached

from values of T

exh

and _ m

fo

outside the boundaries of

the set shown, but we are interested in determining if

the reach set ever intersects the set of initial conditions.

It can be seen that at t ¼ 60 s, the set reaches 644 K

(371

C) in the T

cat

direction. Since we are analysing

the coldstart problem, it is valid to assume that the

catalyst temperature is close to the atmospheric

temperature when the engine starts. Hence, any initial

condition of the engine does not belong to the back-

wards reachable set we obtained. In other words, the

backwards reachable set does not intersect the set of

all possible initial conditions. Thus, we can conclude

that the closed-loop system is ‘‘safe’’ with respect to

the speciﬁed unsafe set.

5. Conclusions

Utilizing the structure of a mean value model as the

base, hybridness was introduced in selected engine

subsystems. The resulting hybrid model accounted for

the diﬀerent strokes during the coldstart operation of

Figure 18. Forward reachable set for closed-loop system.

Figure 19. Forward reachable set for closed-loop system:

Another view.

Figure 20. Backward reachable set for closed-loop system.

462 P. R. Sanketi et al.

the engine. Even though this model describes reasonably

well the engine torque generation, it can still be extended

to include other event based eﬀects, such as valve timing,

spark timing, etc. The complexity of the interaction of

the engine subsystems is a limiting factor in the inclusion

of all the hybrid elements in the model.

Mean value model based exhaust gas temperature

and air-fuel ratio controllers were used to synthesize

a dynamic surface controller where the eﬀects of the

catalyst were included in the feedback loop for real-

time control. In this way, catalyst temperature control

combined with raw HC emissions control was achieved.

As an approach to optimizing the trade-oﬀ between

minimizing the raw HC emissions and decreasing the

catalyst light-oﬀ time, a hybrid controller was derived.

The simulations show a decrease in the production of

cumulative HC. Hence, the application of the hybrid

automata for improvement in coldstart control is

demonstrated.

In order to investigate how the states of the system

evolve with time, the LevelSet Toolbox developed by

Prof. Ian Mitchell was used for reachability analysis

of the system. The ﬁrst objective was to calculate the

backwards reachable set for the catalyst subsystem.

The reach set obtained matches the expected behaviour

of the catalyst and gives a description of the required

capability of the catalyst temperature controller.

Further, forward reachability analysis was performed

for the closed-loop system in order to verify the stability

of the proposed hybrid controller. The resulting reach

set was not as expected for certain initial conditions

due to the multiple time scales in the system dynamics.

The fuelling dynamics are much faster than the catalyst

dynamics. The reach set starting from close to steady

operation was found to be invariant after some time,

thus indicating the stability of the hybrid controller.

Furthermore, to verify the safety property of the

controller, a backwards reachable set of the closed-

loop system was calculated starting with an unsafe set

where the catalyst temperature is very high. However,

only the mean value controller was used since the

methods for calculating the backwards reachable set

for a hybrid system are still under development.

The backwards reach set was found not to intersect

with the set of possible initial conditions of the system,

thus concluding the safety of the controller with respect

to the speciﬁed unsafe set.

In summary, hybrid modelling and control provides

us with useful tools to address the coldstart problem.

Acknowledgements

Authors acknowledge the ﬁnancial support provided

by the National Science Foundation (under by NSF

Cooperative Agreement No. CCR-0225610), Toyota

Motor Corporation and CONACYT (Consejo

Nacional de Ciencia y Technologa de Mexico).

The authors would like to thank Prof. Shankar Sastry,

Prof. Ian Mitchell, Dr. Jonathan Sprinkle and Prof.

Claire Tomlin for their help. We would like to acknowl-

edge in particular the eﬀort and time put in by Prof.

Mitchell in assisting us with the reachability analysis.

We would also like to thank the reviewers of this

paper for their useful suggestions and comments.

References

C.F. Aquino, ‘‘Transient a/f control characteristics of the 5 liter central

fuel injection engine’’, SAE 810494, 1981.

A. Balluchi, L. Benvenuti, M.D. Di Benedetto, C. Pinello and

A. Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, ‘‘Automotive engine control and

hybrid systems: Challenges and opportunities’’, in Proceedings of

the IEEE, 88, pp. 888–912, 2000a.

A. Balluchi, L. Benvenuti, M.D. Di Benedetto, G.M. Miconi, U. Pozzi,

T. Villa, H. Wong-Toi and A.L. Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, ‘‘Maximal

safe set computation for idle speed control of an automotive

engine’’, 1790, pp. 32–44, 2000b.

A. Balluchi, L. Benvenuti, M. Di Benedetto, A. Ferrari, C. Pinello and

A. Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, ‘‘Hybrid systems and the design of

embedded controllers for automotive engine management’’, in

Proceedings of the 37th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control,

TP01-7, pp. 2656–2661, 1998.

A. Balluchi, M.D. Di Benedetto, C. Pinello and A.L. Sangiovanni-

Vincentelli, ‘‘Mixed models of computation in the design of

automotive engine control’’, in Proceedings 40th IEEE Conference

on Decision and Control, Orlando, Florida, pp. 2656–2661, 2001.

M. Baotic, M. Vasak, M. Morari and N. Peric, ‘‘Hybrid systems

theory based optimal control of an electronic throttle’’,

in Proceedings of the American Control Conference, Denver,

Colorado, USA, Vol. 6, pp. 5209–5214, 2003.

S.H. Chan and D.L. Hoang, ‘‘Modeling of catalytic conversion of

co/ch in gasoline exhaust at engine coldstart’’, SAE Technical

Paper 1999-01-0452, 1999.

D. Cho and J.K. Hedrick, ‘‘Automotive powertrain modelling for con-

trol’’, Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurements and Control, 111,

pp. 568–576, 1989.

N. Giorgetti, A. Bemporad, I. Kolmanovsky and D. Hrovat, ‘‘Explicit

hybrid optimal control of direct injection stratified charge engines’’,

Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Industrial

Electronics, Dubrovnik, Croatia, June, pp. 247–252, 2005.

A.T. Lee, M. Wilcutts, P. Tunestal and J.K. Hedrick, ‘‘A method of

lean air-fuel ratio control using combustion pressure measurement’’,

Society of Automotive Engineers of Japan, Inc. and Elsevier Science,

Vol. 22, No. 4, pp. 389–393, 2001.

I. Mitchell, A Toolbox of Level Set Methods. Version 1.1 beta,

Vancouver, Canada: University of Bristish Columbia, 2005

R. Mobus, M. Baotic and M. Morari, ‘‘Multi-object adaptive

cruise control’’, Hybrid Systems: Computation and Control, 2623,

pp. 359–374, 2003.

B. Shaw and J.K. Hedrick, ‘‘Coldstart engine combustion modelling

to control hydrocarbon emissions’’, in Proceedings of 15th

Triennial World Congress of the International Federation of

Automatic Control, Barcelona, Spain, 21–26 July, 2002.

B. Shaw and J.K. Hedrick, ‘‘Closed-loop engine coldstart control to

reduce hydrocarbon emissions’’, in Proceedings of the American

Control Conference, San Diego, CA, USA, pp. 1392–1397, 2003.

B. Shaw, G.D. Fischer and J.K. Hedrick, ‘‘A simplified coldstart

catalyst thermal model to reduce hydrocarbon emissions’’, in

Proceedings of 15th Triennial World Congress of the International

Reduction of hydrocarbon emissions 463

Federation of Automatic Control, Barcelona, Spain, 21–26 July,

2002.

B. Song, A. Howell and K. Hedrick, ‘‘Robust stabilization and

ultimate boundedness of dynamic surface control systems via

convex optimization’’, International Journal of Control, 75,

pp. 870–881, 2002.

J. Souder and J.K. Hedrick, ‘‘Adaptive sliding mode control of air-fuel

ratio in internal combustion engines’’, International Journal of

Robust and Nonlinear Control, 14, pp. 525–541, 2004.

J. Sun and N. Sivashankar, ‘‘Issues in cold start emission control

for automotive IC engines’’, in Proceedings of the American

Control Conference, Philadelphia, PA, 21–26 June, Vol. 3,

pp. 1372–1376, 1998.

D. Swaroop, J.K. Hedrick, P.P. Yip and J.C. Gerdes, ‘‘Dynamic

surface control for a class of nonlinear systems’’, IEEE

Transactions on Automatic Control, 45, pp. 1893–1899, 2000.

H. Tanaka, M. Uenishi and I. Tan, ‘‘An intelligent

catalyst’’, SAE Technical Paper 2001-01-1301, 2001.

C. Tomlin, J. Lygeros and S. Sastry, ‘‘Synthesizing controllers for

nonlinear hybrid systems’’, in First International Workshop,

HSCC’98, Hybrid Systems: Computation and Control, Lecture

Notes in Computer Science, T. Henzinger and S. Sastry, Eds, 1386,

1998, pp. 360–373.

P. Tunestal and J.K. Hedrick, ‘‘Cylinder air/fuel ratio estimation

using net heat release data’’, 3rd IFAC Workshop on Advances

in Automotive Control, Karlsruhe, Germany, March 2001.

464 P. R. Sanketi et al.

- E.M.E UNIT-II
- Compute Torque Control
- Lecture1 Slides Syllabus History Applications
- Advances in the Theory of Control Signals and Systems With Physical Modeling Lecture Notes in Control and Information Sciences 407
- Phd Thesis
- Exer 2 Internal Combustion Engine
- Abbaszadehmosayebi (2014)
- Lecture 6
- Artigo LMI
- https
- Download 3d Geo Information Sciences Lecture Notes in Geoinformation and Cartography.pdf
- basics of control system
- I.C.INGINE
- Temperature Control System
- Variable Speed Pumps KSB
- Thesis_12_02_2005
- N2kmQ5 - 0521644895_0521642779Engines.pdf
- fdesc
- Introduction to Control
- A14 Integrating Experimental Design And SPC in Quality
- Adaptive nonlinear control using input normalized neural networks.pdf
- Diesel Engines
- GEH-6676B (2)
- Process dynamics control notes
- Relay PID Auto Tuning
- DCMotorWithInertiaDisk
- article_3
- Study on Pid Parameters Tuning Method Based on MatlabSimulink
- UNIT.I AE

Skip carousel

- UT Dallas Syllabus for ee4310.001.08s taught by Gerald Burnham (burnham)
- UT Dallas Syllabus for ee4310.002.08s taught by Charles Bernardin (cpb021000)
- UT Dallas Syllabus for ee4310.501.11s taught by Charles Bernardin (cpb021000)
- UT Dallas Syllabus for ee4310.001.11f taught by Nicholas Gans (nrg092000)
- UT Dallas Syllabus for opre7346.001 06s taught by Alain Bensoussan (axb046100)
- UT Dallas Syllabus for ee4310.501.09f taught by Gerald Burnham (burnham)
- UT Dallas Syllabus for mech4310.001.11f taught by James Hilkert (jmh011500)
- UT Dallas Syllabus for ee4310.501.11f taught by Gerald Burnham (burnham)
- UT Dallas Syllabus for mech4310.002.11s taught by James Hilkert (jmh011500)
- tmp4D3F.tmp
- Tuning of PI Controller using Integral Performance Criteria for FOPTD System
- UT Dallas Syllabus for ee4310.001.11f taught by Nicholas Gans (nrg092000)
- tmpEF5E.tmp
- A Review on Model Based Methods to Degrade Nonlinearity Effects for Control Prosthetic Arm
- Position Control of Satellite In Geo-Stationary Orbit Using Sliding Mode Control Algorithm
- PSO based optimization of a PI controller for a Real time Pressure process
- tmp67C0.tmp
- UT Dallas Syllabus for ee4310.501.08f taught by (jmh011500)
- UT Dallas Syllabus for ee4310.001.07f taught by Louis Hunt (hunt)
- UT Dallas Syllabus for ee4310.501.11f taught by Gerald Burnham (burnham)
- UT Dallas Syllabus for ee4310.001.10s taught by Charles Bernardin (cpb021000)
- UT Dallas Syllabus for ee4310.5u1.08u taught by (jmh011500)
- UT Dallas Syllabus for ee4310.0u1.11u taught by Nicholas Gans (nrg092000)
- UT Dallas Syllabus for ee4310.001 06f taught by Gerald Burnham (burnham)
- UT Dallas Syllabus for ee4310.001.07s taught by Gerald Burnham (burnham)
- UT Dallas Syllabus for ee4310.021.07u taught by (jmh011500)
- tmp5C4F.tmp
- UT Dallas Syllabus for ee4310.001.09f taught by Charles Bernardin (cpb021000)
- UT Dallas Syllabus for ee4310.5u1.09u taught by (jmh011500)
- UT Dallas Syllabus for ee4310.0u1.10u taught by James Hilkert (jmh011500)

- IACs Essential Guide to Consciousness Astral Projection (1)
- eltesorodelasombra-091205004944-phpapp01 (1) (2).pdf
- 61209474-algebra-preuniversitaria-140428211600-phpapp01.pdf
- User Instructions
- 61772305-Resolving-Problems.pdf
- AP Physics B 2013 Practice Workbook3
- unmapadelviaje.pdf
- unmapadelviaje.pdf
- 2100-Asanas_-The-Complete-Yoga-Poses-Daniel-Lacerda.pdf
- 2o Torneo Bowling 2016-PDF
- Network-Analysis-sample-chapter.pdf
- alejandro-jodorowsky-habla-mi-dios-interior-121030161326-phpapp01.pdf
- 272397150-The-Great-stillness-the-Water-method-of-Taoist-meditation-series-volume-2.pdf
- CollegePhysicsforAPCourses LR
- peace-mind.pdf
- 61772305-Resolving-Problems.pdf
- Thesis
- Samsung_S5360_Galaxy_Y_User_manual.pdf
- apunteMaquinas (1).pdf
- AutoboicotBernardo.Stamateas (1).pdf
- Sesión 5 Ética(2).pdf
- Wisdom+of+Yoga.pdf
- 272397150-The-Great-stillness-the-Water-method-of-Taoist-meditation-series-volume-2.pdf
- Staffel (2012) - Can There Be Reasoning With Degrees of Belief
- Sesión 5 Ética(2)
- vt2_tratamientos_avanzados_de_aguas_residuales_industriales.pdf
- 21374
- 5545568-souchkov-breakthrough-thinking-with-triz-for-business-and-management.pdf
- The Essentials of Mahamudra Practice
- 37200

Sign up to vote on this title

UsefulNot usefulClose Dialog## Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

Close Dialog## This title now requires a credit

Use one of your book credits to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.

Loading