Over the past 20 years, with the increase in the complexity of engines, and the combinatorial explosion of engine variables space, the engine calibration process has become more complex, costly, and time consuming. As a result, an efficient and economic approach is desired. For this purpose, many engine calibration methods are under development in original equipment manufacturers and universities. The state-of-the-art model-based steady-state design of experiments (DOE) technique is mature and is used widely. However, it is very difficult to further reduce the measurement time. Additionally, the increasingly high requirements of engine model accuracy and robust testing process with high data quality by high-quality testing facility also constrain the further development of model-based DOE engine calibration. This paper introduces a new computational intelligence approach to calibrate internal combustion engine without the need for an engine model. The strength Pareto evolutionary algorithm 2 (SPEA2) is applied to this automatic engine calibration process. In order to implement the approach on a V6 gasoline direct injection (GDI) engine test bench, a simulink real-time based embedded system was developed and implemented to engine electronic control unit (ECU) through rapid control prototyping (RCP) and external ECU bypass technology. Experimental validations prove that the developed engine calibration approach is capable of automatically finding the optimal engine variable set which can provide the best fuel consumption and particulate matter (PM) emissions, with good accuracy and high efficiency. The introduced engine calibration approach does not rely on either the engine model or the massive test bench experimental data. It has great potential to improve the engine calibration process for industries.

References

1.
Hong
,
H.
,
Parvate-Patil
,
G. B.
, and
Gordon
,
B.
,
2004
, “
Review and Analysis of Variable Valve Timing Strategies—Eight Ways to Approach
,”
Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., Part D
,
218
(
10
), pp.
1179
1200
.
2.
Fujita
,
T.
,
Onogawa
,
K.
,
Kiga
,
S.
, and
Mae
,
Y.
,
2008
, “
Development of Innovative Variable Valve Event and Lift (VVEL) System
,”
SAE
Paper No. 2008-01-1349.
3.
Heywood
,
J. B.
,
1988
,
Internal Combustion Engine Fundamentals
,
McGraw-Hill
,
New York
.
4.
Ulmer
,
H.
,
Kruse
,
T.
, and
Lang
,
T.
,
2011
, “
New Simulation and Automation Solutions for the Optimized Calibration of Complex Electronic Systems
,” 11th Electronica and Productronica China, Shanghai, China, Mar. 20–22.
5.
Rpke
,
K.
,
Nessler
,
A.
,
Haukap
,
C.
,
Baumann
,
W.
,
Khler
,
B.
, and
Schaum
,
S.
,
2009
, “
Model-Based Methods for Engine Calibration—Quo Vadis
,”
Third International Symposium on Development Methodology
, pp.
65
75
.
6.
Kianifar, M., Campean, L., and Richardson, D., 2013, “
Sequential DoE Framework for Steady State Model Based Calibration
,”
SAE Int. J. Engines
,
6
(2), pp. 843–855.
7.
Kruse
,
T.
,
Kurz
,
S.
, and
Lang
,
T.
,
2010
, “
Modern Statistical Modelling and Evolutionary Optimisation Methods for the Broad Use in ECU Calibration
,”
Sixth IFAC Symposium on Advances in Automotive Control
, Munich, Germany, July 12–14, pp.
739
743
.
8.
Park, S., Kim, Y., Woo, S., and Lee, K., 2017, “
Optimization and Calibration Strategy Using Design of Experiment for a Diesel Engine
,”
Appl. Therm. Eng.
,
123
, pp. 917–928.
9.
Kesgin
,
U.
, 2004, “
Genetic Algorithm and Artificial Neural Network for Engine Optimisation of Efficiency and Nox Emission
,”
Fuel
,
83
(
7–8
), pp. 885–895.
10.
Zhou
,
Q.
,
Zhang
,
W.
,
Cash
,
S.
,
Olatunbosun
,
O.
,
Xu
,
H.
, and
Lu
,
G.
,
2017
, “
Intelligent Sizing of a Series Hybrid Electric Power-Train System Based on Chaos-Enhanced Accelerated Particle Swarm Optimization
,”
Appl. Energy
,
189
, pp.
588
601
.
11.
Fogel
,
L. J.
,
Owens
,
A. J.
, and
Walsh
,
M. J.
,
1966
,
Artificial Intelligence Through Simulated Evolution
,
Wiley
,
New York
.
12.
Ma
,
H.
,
Xu
,
H.
,
Wang
,
J.
,
Schnier
,
T.
,
Neaves
,
B.
,
Tan
,
C.
, and
Wang
,
Z.
,
2015
, “
Model-Based Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithm Optimization for HCCI Engines
,”
IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol.
,
64
(
9
), pp.
4326
4331
.
13.
McCarthy
,
M.
,
Eisinger
,
D.
,
Hafner
,
H.
,
Chinkin
,
L.
,
Roberts
,
P.
,
Black
,
K.
,
Clark
,
N.
,
McMurry
,
P.
, and
Winer
,
A.
,
2006
, “
Particulate Matter: A Strategic Vision for Transportation-Related Research
,”
Environ. Sci. Technol.
,
40
(
18
), pp.
5593
5599
.
14.
Coello
,
C. C.
,
Lamont
,
G. B.
, and
Veldhuizen
,
D. A.
,
2007
,
Evolutionary Algorithms for Solving Multi-Objective Problems
,
Springer
,
New York
.
15.
Chinchuluun
,
A.
,
2008
,
Pareto Optimality, Game Theory and Equilibria
,
Springer
,
New York
.
16.
Deb
,
K.
, and
Goel
,
T.
,
2001
, “
Controlled Elitist Non-Dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithms for Better Convergence
,”
First International Conference on Evolutionary Multi-Criterion Optimization
(
EMO’01
), Zürich, Switzerland, Mar. 7–9, pp.
67
–81.http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.20.7474
17.
Zitzler
,
E.
, and
Thiele
,
L.
,
1999
, “
Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithms: A Comparative Case Study and the Strength Pareto Approach
,”
IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput.
,
3
(
4
), pp.
257
271
.
18.
Zitzler
,
E.
,
Laumanns
,
M.
, and
Thiele
,
L.
,
2001
, “
SPEA2: Improving the Strength Pareto Evolutionary Algorithm
,” ETH Zurich, Zürich, Switzerland, Report No.
103
.http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.22.4617
19.
Li
,
M.
,
Yang
,
S.
, and
Liu
,
X.
,
2014
, “
Shift-Based Density Estimation for Pareto-Based Algorithms in Many-Objective Optimization
,”
IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput.
,
18
(
3
), pp.
348
365
.
You do not currently have access to this content.