Downloaded from SAE International by University of British Columbia, Tuesday, September 25, 2018

810494

Transient A/F Control

Characteristics of the
5 Liter Central Fuel
Injection Engine
C. F. Aquino
Engineering and Research Staff
Research
Ford Motor Co.
Dearborn, Ml

International Congress and Exposition

Cobo Hall, Detroit, Michigan
February 23-27, 1981

Reprinted from SP-487—"Engine Control Modeling"

 Downloaded from SAE International by University of British Columbia, Tuesday, September 25, 2018

ISSN 0148-7191
Copyright © 1981 Society of Automotive Engineers Inc.
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of British Columbia, Tuesday, September 25, 2018
IT HAS LONG BEEN KNOWN that suddenly opening the
throttle of a carbureted engine causes a momen-
tary lean excursion, and that this behavior is
closely related to the presence of liquid fuel
on the intake manifold walls. (1,2)* Since
these A/F excursions can cause driveability
problems, the need to eliminate them was immedi-
ately recognized. The solution of this problem
has been to heat the intake manifold and inlet
air to reduce the A/F excursions, and to provide
acceleration enrichment to the metered fuel to
compensate for the remaining lean excursion.
This approach has provided a more or less satis-
factory solution to the problems of driveability
until recent years when the need for reduced
exhaust emissions placed new emphasis on A/F
control. It has now become clear that the
acceleration enrichment provided to overcome
potential driveability problems may fall short
of completely eliminating the A/F excursions in
*Numbers in parentheses designate References at
end of paper.
ABSTRACT
Experiments have been conducted to deter-
mine the nature and causes of A/F transients
during changes in throttle angle on a 5 Liter
central fuel injected dynamometer engine. Tests
consisted of a series of one-second throttle
ramps of various magnitudes at constant engine
speed. Fuel metering calculation was adjusted
to give error free metering, so that observed
A/F transients were due to induction system
characteristics such as manifold wall wetting,
air charging, and injector phasing. The effects
of throttle body and manifold temperature were
investigated and a comparison of speed-density
1
810494
Transient A/F Control
Characteristics of the
5 Liter Central Fuel
Injection Engine
C. F. Aquino
Engineering and Research Staff
Research
Ford Motor Co.
Dearborn, Ml
all cases, and the need for tighter control
(especially with the three-way catalyst) has
stimulated a renewed interest in the exact
nature and causes of transient A/F excursions.
With microprocessor-controlled electronic
fuel metering it is possible to use more sophis-
ticated strategies to compensate for the tran-
sient A/F excursions. For example, if the exact
causes of these excursions were understood, or at
least if their relationship to such variables as
throttle motion, manifold temperature, etc. were
known, calculations programmed in the micro-
processor could provide the proper amount of
compensating fuel as a function of the appropri-
ate variables. Present efforts are to charac-
terize (if not completely understand) A/F excur-
sions in such a way as to allow this type of
compensation. One of the first efforts was by
Stivender (3) who characterized the fuel and air
dynamics with simple transfer functions. He then
used the result of engine tests to identify the
time constant of the fuel lag as a function of
engine coolant temperature. More recently, Wu
and mass-flow metering strategies was made.
A simple continuous flow model was develop-
ed to predict the effects of manifold air
charging and wall wetting. Comparisons of model
predictions and experimental results show the
agreement for air flow to be within ± 4%.
Wall wetting is described by a linear,
first-order equation with two parameters; a
boiling time constant, and a percent impaction
parameter. Agreement between model prediction
and experiment is good if the percent impaction
parameter is allowed to vary linearly with
throttle angle.
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of British Columbia, Tuesday, September 25, 2018
(4) has developed a model based on physical
description of fuel impaction on manifold walls
and subsequent vaporization or reentrainment into
the air stream. In its simplest form this model
yields a first-order transfer function similar to
that of Stivender.
Another result of the renewed interest in
transient A/F behavior has been the development
of a fast response A/F ratio monitor by Ricardo
of England. With this device, A/F excursions
with rise times on the order of one-second can be
followed with a high degree of accuracy (this
rise time can be reduced to about 1/4 second with
electronic compensation). Using this device it
has been possible to characterize the transient
behavior of engines equipped with various fuel
metering systems. (5) This type of character-
ization is aimed at predicting the effects of
the A/F control of these fuel metering systems
on overall emissions and fuel economy rather than
for use in compensation. Hires, (6) on the other
hand, has developed a vehicle calibration method
of incorporating a dynamic model similar to those
of Stivender and Wu into a compensation scheme.
The purpose of this study is to examine, for
a particular engine package, the various possible
causes of A/F excursions, to quantify their
relative importance, and to lay the groundwork
for compensation by testing the validity of a
simple, control oriented model similar to those
of Stivender and Wu. The engine is the Ford,
five liter V-8 with exhaust heated aluminum dual
plane intake manifold. The fuel metering system
consists of two electronic fuel injectors located
in a dual bore throttle body, one injector being
above each throttle plate. The system has been
in production since 1980, and is described in a
paper by Czadzeck. (7)
DISCUSSION
Changes in A/F ratio which accompany a
change in throttle position are due to two dif-
ferent causes. The first is due to what can be
called steady-state metering errors. These
errors are due to the inability of the system to
meter a constant A/F ratio over the entire range
of operation and do not depend on how fast the
throttle is moved, nor do they die out when the
throttle is held fixed. The second cause is the
dynamic response of the system which produces
A/F excursions even when the steady-state errors
have been reduced to zero. In this study, the
steady-state errors were reduced to zero, so the
dynamic factors could be studied. For electronic
fuel metering with throttle body injection, the
following four factors are generally recognized
as being related to transient A/F control:
1) fuel lag due to wall wetting; 2) manifold
air charging; 3) injector phasing; and 4) sensor
and calculation delays. The experiments were
designed to sort out the relative importance of
these four factors by observing the effects on
A/F excursions when appropriate variables were
changed as discussed below.
The term "fuel lag" refers to the fact
that if both air flow and fuel flow increast at
the throttle body in the same proportion, the
increase in fuel flow is delayed before it
reaches the engine, whereas the increase in air
flow is not, thus resulting in the lean excursion.
The mechanism for this fuel delay is that a por-
tion of the fuel droplets strike the walls of
the manifold and throttle body and are thus held
up for some time. The strongest evidence for
this argument is that if the fuel is gaseous as
in the system described by Hamburg, (8) there
are no transient A/F excursions. What happens
to the droplets once they hit the walls is not
clear. People have suggested that a slow moving
liquid film flows along the walls until finally
reaching the intake port. This may be true for
some of the film, especially under very cold
conditions, but the evidence seems to indicate
that a large portion of the film is vaporized or
otherwise reentrained into the air stream before
it reaches the intake port.
A good starting point from which to consider
the state of liquid, vapor and air in the mani-
fold is the equilibrium condition. That is, if
fuel and air existed at a given A/F ratio at a
given temperature and pressure long enough to
reach equilibrium, what percent of fuel would be
vaporized? This question is not easily answered
because fuel is made up of many components each
having its own vapor pressure curve. By using
the method of Bridgeman, (9) however, we can get
a good answer to this question based on the
A.S.T.M. distillation curve of a given fuel.
Figure 1 shows the A.S.T.M. distillation curve
for Indoline (the fuel used in this study) along
with the equilibrium percent vaporized as a
function of temperature for various ratios of
air to fuel vapor. For an air/vapor ratio of
16:1, we see that 100% of the fuel is vaporized
at 85°F. Since the curves of Figure 1 are for a
pressure of one atmosphere, the temperature for
100% vaporization would be even lower with re-
duced pressure in the manifold (part throttle
operation). Since we observe a liquid film on
manifold walls under conditions of 100% equi-
librium vaporization, it is clear that the
induction process is one of nonequilibrium where
liquid droplets do not have time to vaporize
before hitting the walls.
Even though this impaction-reentrainment-
vaporization process is complex, it is clear
that induction system temperature is an impor-
tant parameter. For this reason, experiments
measuring the effect of induction system tem-
perature on A/F excursions were performed to
identify the importance of manifold wall wetting.
The second dynamic property related to A/F
control is manifold air charging. This refers
to the fact that as the throttle is opened, the
air flow at the throttle is momentarily greater
than that at the inlet port to the engine. This
is because of the increasing air density (and
therefore air mass) in the manifold during
throttle opening. This can be seen clearly in
Figure 2 which shows air flow at the throttle,
and manifold absolute pressure for a very rapid
throttle opening. The flow at the port is pro-
portional to manifold absolute pressure, so the
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of British Columbia, Tuesday, September 25, 2018
difference between the two curves is additional
air flow at the throttle required to "charge"
the manifold. Systems in which fuel is injected
at the throttle should use throttle air flow to
determine fuel flow, whereas systems in which
fuel is injected at the intake port should use
port air flow. Traditionally, port injected
systems have used the "speed-density" calcula-
tion to determine air flow at the inlet port
(see Equation 1 ) .
Since
the manifold pressure and temperature can be
measured to use in equation (1). If throttle-
injected systems (such as the one considered
here) use the speed density calculation rather
than actually sensing throttle air flow, an
error should be expected. To determine the
importance of this effect, experiments were run
to measure transient A/F excursions using the
speed density and throttle air flow (called "mass
flow") metering strategies, respectively.
The third cause of A/F excursions are
sensor, actuator, and calculation delays.
Clearly if there is a delay in the air flow
signal or any calculations required, the change
in fuel flow corresponding to a change in air
flow will be delayed, thus creating an error.
The delay of the production pressure sensor used
in the speed density calculation is shown in
Figure 2 in comparison with a fast laboratory
sensor.
The fourth factor relating to transient
response is injector phasing. Electronic fuel
metering systems using the solenoid actuated
fuel injectors (which include the majority of
systems currently in production) meter fuel by
pulse-width modulation. That is, the injectors
are turned on a given number of times per engine
revolution, and fuel flow is controlled by the
"pulse width" or length of time the injectors
remain on.
In the system under study here, each injec-
tor is turned on twice per revolution, which
means that there is one injector pulse for each
intake stroke of the engine. Since the length
of time an injector is on is typically short
compared to the duration of the stroke itself,
we end up with a burst of fuel entering the air
stream as it flows into the cylinder. It is
conceivable that "phasing" the injector to fire
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of British Columbia, Tuesday, September 25, 2018

at the beginning of the intake stroke would

result in different transient A/F excursions
than firing at the end of the stroke. The
limiting case would be firing so late in the
intake stroke that the intake valve closed before
that portion of air and fuel entered the cylinder.
The fuel and air would then remain in the mani-
fold runner until the next intake stroke of that
cylinder (2 revolutions later) at which time the
throttle would have opened slightly further
resulting in more air (and more required fuel)
for that cylinder. In this limiting (hypo-
thetical) case the amount of fuel inducted is
the amount corresponding to the air inducted on
the previous cycle. The importance of this
effect was determined by measuring the A/F
excursions for various injector phasings. It
should be mentioned at this point that since the
effect of wall wetting is greater than the other
three effects, the experiments concerning mani-
fold charging and injector phasing were done with
fully heated manifold.

EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE AND RESULTS cussed in more detail in the section comparing
experimental and predicted behavior.
A. TEST PROCEDURE AND INSTRUMENTATION - To The data was recorded on a Honeywell
simplify matters, a simple test was defined to oscillograph. A trace from a typical test is
represent transient operation. This was to move shown in Figure 4. The variables measured are
the throttle from its initial to final position as follows:
in one second while holding engine speed constant. 1) Throttle angle measured with a potenti-
Other types of transients can be envisioned; for ometer attached to the throttle shaft.
example, moving the throttle while engine speed 2) Air flow measured with a Meriam Laminar
changes, or changing engine speed at fixed Flow Element, located upstream of the
throttle. Since the main variables in the induc- throttle body. The volumes and pressure
tion processes are air flow and fuel flow, the drops in the air flow measuring system give
constant speed throttle ramp brings out the it a transient response similar to a first
essential dynamic features of the system. The order system with a time constant of 4-5
one second throttle ramp was chosen to be con- msec.
sistent with the response of the A/F monitor. 3) Manifold absolute pressure (production
As mentioned earlier, the instrument used sensor).
to measure exhaust A/F was originally developed 4) Manifold vacuum measured with a Validyne
by Ricardo of England. This instrument, de- differential pressure transducer. Response
scribed in a paper by Haslett and Eidson (10) flat to 80 Hertz. (trace shown in Figure 2)
measures oxygen partial pressure using a 5) Percent oxygen in exhaust measured with
zirconia sensor. The model used in this study Lambda Scan. For purposes of visualizing
is the improved Sensors, Inc. version called the traces, %O2 can be considered linearly
"Lambda Scan". The dynamic response of the related to A/F, with 1% O 2 approximately
instrument is limited by the sample handling equal to 1 A/F.
and mixing that must be done. To measure the
response, a special valve was designed that
could meter a controlled amount of air into the
exhaust of a running engine. With this valve
the A/F ratio in the exhaust could be modulated
with a sine wave of known amplitude and fre-
quency. The response of the instrument to inputs
with frequencies up to 2 Hertz is shown in Figure
3. As mentioned before, the frequency response
is improved by electronic compensation of the
output signal. This compensation is accomplished
by passing the output signal through a transfer
function that is approximately the inverse of
the measured response. The response of the
compensated signal is also shown in Figure 3.
When comparing measured A/F waveforms to
model predictions, the compensated instrument
itself was characterized as a second order system
to further improve accuracy. This will be dis-
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of British Columbia, Tuesday, September 25, 2018
6) Exhaust gas oxygen sensor output (E.G.O.
trace), This is the standard production
zirconia sensor which responds within
approximately 20 msec, but is very non-
linear, acting like a "switch" from zero
volts when lean of stoichiometric to 1 volt
when rich of stoichiometric.
Some general comments can be made about the
test procedure and data. As stated previously,
the tests consisted of a series of one second
throttle ramps at fixed engine speed. Since the
characterization study described in reference
(5) measured the A/F excursions for all engine
speeds and loads, it was decided to select a
single representative engine speed for this study.
All tests were run at 1400 RPM. The effects of
exhaust gas recirculation on A/F excursions were
also measured in the characterization study (1),
so this variable was eliminated by running all
tests at zero percent EGR. A given test series
consisted of five separate tests, each starting
at a throttle position of 10° (from closed
plate), and ramping to 13°, 15°, 17°, 19°, and
21°, respectively. Figure 5 shows engine torque,
air flow, and manifold pressure at 1400 RPM as a
function of throttle angle. It is seen that the
tests ranged from light to rather heavy "tip-ins"
which cover most of the range of driver demands.
As previously mentioned, the one second throttle
ramp was chosen to be consistent with the Lambda
Scan response. Typical driving often includes
faster ramps. To extend the results of this
study to faster ramps, the model must be used.
Even though this means using the model outside
the range for which it has been validated,
effects important to fast ramps (such as air
charging) have been included in the model.
The A/F excursions for all the tests had the
same general shape as that of Figure 4. That is,
a lean excursion accompanied throttle opening,
and a rich excursion accompanied throttle closing.
Due to the delay caused by the exhaust sample
line, the Lambda trace was shifted in time from
the rest of the data. Accurate information as
to the timing of the A/F excursion could only be
inferred from the E.G.O. trace. In most cases
it appeared that the A/F excursion started within
2-4 engine revolutions after the beginning of
throttle motion. As already mentioned, the
steady-state metering errors were eliminated so
that the A/F excursions were due only to the
dynamic properties of the system. The means of
eliminating the steady-state metering errors was
to adjust two parameters of the metering calcula-
tion in such a way as to obtain the same A/F
ratio at both end points of the throttle ramp.
The question then arises as to whether or not
the A/F remains constant between the two end
points. This was checked by ramping the
throttle very slowly (25 sec.) between the end
points and observing the A/F ratio during the
ramp. This procedure did not prove to be a good
check for two reasons. First, even with the 25
second ramp, there were still slight transient
contributions to the A/F excursion (note that
true steady-state errors produce mirror image
traces when the throttle opening is compared with
the throttle closing). Second, during such a
long ramp, long term effects due to things
such as temperature changes cause slight A/F
drift which would not take place during a one
second ramp. Another indication of steady-state
errors can be determined by adjusting A/F to be
equal at the end points for the largest throttle
ramp (10°-21°), and observing any offset in A/F
at the end points for the intermediate ramps.
Using both of the above methods, it is estimated
that steady-state metering errors account for
from zero to 10% of the observed A/F excursion,
with the speed-density strategy giving more
steady-state errors than the mass flow strategy,
mainly because of the nonlinearity of the volu-
metric efficiency term in Equation (1).
Repeatability was checked in two ways.
First, every ramp was repeated several times and
the traces compared. In this case, repeatability
was very good as will be seen in the section
comparing model predictions and experiment where
multiple traces are shown. Basically, the traces
only differed by the noise level on a given trace.
In day-to-day repeatability, slight differences
due to variation of temperatures, fuel properties,
etc. were observed. The scatter in the data
presented is due to these effects. In all cases,
unless otherwise mentioned, only the lean excur-
sions resulting from throttle openings will be
studied. In all cases, the rich excursions
follow the same trends as the lean ones.
One last comment can be made about the
traces of Figure 4. The apparent noise on the
air flow trace is due to the flow fluctuations
due to individual intake strokes. These show up
clearly in Figure 2.
B. EFFECT OF INDUCTION SYSTEM TEMPERATURES
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of British Columbia, Tuesday, September 25, 2018
ON A/F EXCURSIONS - In order to determine the
range of temperature to be studied, a preliminary
experiment was performed to observe some charac-
teristics of fuel boiling on a hot plate. This
was not meant to simulate conditions on the
manifold wall, but rather to give a general
indication of the impaction-vaporization process.
Fuel droplets from a hypodermic syringe were
allowed to fall onto a flat plate whose tempera-
ture was controlled. The ambient pressure was
controlled, and tests were run from one atmos-
phere down to about one third atmosphere. In
all cases, the air was quiescent. Visual obser-
vations were made, and it was observed that the
droplets wet the surface completely (with zero
angle of contact) and then completely vaporized.
As the surface temperature was increased, the
vaporization rate increased to the point where
the droplet completely vaporized in about 1/2
second. Further increases in surface tempera-
ture created the so-called "film boiling" or
"Liedenfrost" point where the droplet no longer
wet the surface, but remained suspended on a
layer of vapor. The pressure and temperature
at which this occurred is shown in Figure 6 for
indoline as well as two single component fuels;
one a high boiling point hydrocarbon (undecane),
and one a midrange hydrocarbon (isooctane). Also
plotted are the saturation curves for the two
single components (shifted up by 100 degrees F
for comparison with the film boiling curves).
If the manifold skin temperature were high
enough to cause the impacting fuel droplets to
behave similar to the film boilding behavior
observed here, there would be no wall wetting,
and thus A/F excursions due to wall wetting
would be eliminated. The impaction-vaporization
process in the manifold is more complex than this
simple experiment due to factors such as vari-
ations in air and fuel velocity, surface rough-
ness, and fuel composition changes due to
vaporization before impaction. With this in
mind, Figure 6 was used as an indication that
manifold skin temperatures in the neighborhood
of 400°F should be enough to eliminate wall
wetting.
To control manifold skin temperatures, a
jacket was built around the intake manifold which
allowed passage of either exhaust gas or tap
water. Controlling the flow of exhaust or
water allowed manifold temperatures to be con-
trolled. In these tests the exhaust crossover
which normally heats the manifold was used when
needed. Figure 7 shows temperatures at various
locations under the two extremes tested, as well
as for the normally heated engine.
For all tests, the inlet air was between
60°F and 70°F. The effect of inlet air tempera-
ture was not studied.
To demonstrate the effect of manifold skin
temperature, a series of tests was run from 70°F
to 200°F in increments of approximately 25°F.
A typical A/F excursion for skin temperatures of
70°F is shown in Figure 8. Comparing this with
Figure 4 where skin temperatures are 200°F,
shows that heating the intake reduces the ampli-
tude of the excursion and increases the rate of
delay back to steady-state. The amplitude of
A/F excursion is plotted vs. the ratio of mass
flow at the larger throttle opening (M1) to that
at the smaller throttle opening (M0) for six
temperature conditions in Figure 9. The corres-
ponding temperature conditions are shown in
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of British Columbia, Tuesday, September 25, 2018

A/F excursion with increasing manifold skin

temperature. It should be noted, however,
(Figure 10) that the manifold was not heated
uniformly in this series of tests. Rather the
manifold floor under the throttle body was cooler
than the rest of the manifold. This is because
heating was accomplished by passing exhaust
through the special jacket only and not through
the normal crossover passage.

Figure 10. Two things are clear from Figure 9.

First, that at a given temperature, the size of
the A/F excursion increases smoothly with in-
creasing change in throttle angle. Second, that
there is more or less continuous reduction in

Further increasing manifold skin temperature

up to 400°F by combining normal crossover heat
with heat through the special jacket resulted in
no further reduction in A/F excursions. Figure
11 shows A/F excursions vs. for the
normally heated manifold along with two condi-
tions where additional heat was added through
the special jacket. The fact that the A/F
excursions appear to increase as the intake mani-
fold is heated is related to the fact that
heating the manifold reduces air flow at the
higher throttle angles proportionately more than
at the lower throttle angles and, therefore, the
ratio is smaller for a given change in
throttle angle, whereas the amplitude of the A/F
excursion changes very little with increased
heating. Close comparison of Figures 9 and 11
shows that the curve for the normally heated
manifold condition of Figure 11 is not quite the
same as the warmest case of Figure 9 (this
difference is more than normal variability in the
data). The reason for this may be the difference
in manifold temperature distribution for the two
cases. The normally heated temperature distribu-
tion is shown in Figure 10 for comparison. The
effects of locally heating portions of the mani-
fold were not studied, although they have impor-
tant implications relative to the application of
"quick heat" to improve A/F control.
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of British Columbia, Tuesday, September 25, 2018

The effect of throttle body temperature on

A/F excursions was studied by heating the engine revolution (in this case
throttle body, walls by means of a special jacket N = 4)
which passed hot air around the outside of the
throttle body. Recall that the fuel is dis- and combining equations (1), (2), and (3) we
charged above the throttle plate thus partially get
wetting the walls of the throttle body. The
throttle plate was not heated in this study.
The effect of heating the throttle body on A/F
excursions is shown in Figure 12. The tempera-
tures corresponding to these tests are shown in
Figure 10. It appears that wall wetting in the
throttle body is a contributor to A/F excursions.
Its effect is important when the manifold is in
the normally heated condition.
Equation (4) is the calculation performed for
C. EFFECT OF MANIFOLD AIR CHARGING ON A/F
speed density metering, using measured values
EXCURSIONS - The effect of air charging on A/F
of manifold pressure and temperature.
excursions was studied by using the two metering
strategies "speed-density" and "mass flow" dis- For mass flow metering, equation (3) was
cussed above. Since the fuel is discharged at used along with the measured air flow signal
the throttle, tests run using the speed-density from the Meriam Laminar Flow Element. The
metering would include the effects of air equation for pulse width is
charging, whereas tests using mass flow metering
would not include these effects. By comparing
A/F excursions resulting from mass flow and
speed density directly, the extent of this con-
tribution could be measured.
Here the measured signals are and RPM. This
The speed density calculation was performed
calculation was performed by a Digital Equipment
by a prototype microprocessor. Using equations
Corporation LSI 11/02 minicomputer. With both
(1) and (2), along with the injector character-
calculations running concurrently, either mass
istics:
flow or speed density metering could be selected.
In this way a direct comparison was made by
running back-to-back tests. A typical compari-
son of the A/F excursions obtained with the two
metering strategies is shown in Figure 13. Two
things are evident. First, that the speed
density trace has a slightly higher amplitude,
and second, that the shapes of the two traces
are different. The A/F excursion associated
with speed density metering rises more quickly
and tends to be rather constant during a good
portion of the throttle ramp. This is because
the error due to the manifold air charging
reaches its full value rather quickly and then
remains fairly constant as the throttle con-
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of British Columbia, Tuesday, September 25, 2018
tinues to ramp, whereas the wall wetting
effects continue to accumulate during the entire
one second ramp. This will become evident when
the model is discussed. Figure 14 shows A/F
excursions for mass flow and speed density
plotted vs. The temperature conditions
for these data are normally heated manifold with
no throttle body heat; and normally heated mani-
fold with the addition of throttle body heat
(temperatures shown in Figure 10). It is seen
that although the use of speed-density calcula-
tion increases the A/F excursions in all cases,
the effect of throttle body wall wetting far
exceeds the effect of manifold air charging.
Note that this trend may be reversed for
faster throttle ramps; this will be discussed
in the model discussion.
D. EFFECT OF SENSOR AND CALCULATION
DELAYS - The means of determining the effects
of sensor and calculation delays on A/F
excursions was to measure the delays, and then
include these delays in the model. Since these
effects are rather straightforward, it was not
thought necessary to run experiments with various
amounts of delay to determine the effect on A/F
excursions. The primary sensor involved in the
speed density calculation is the MAP sensor.
The response of the production MAP sensor is
compared with that of a Validyne pressure trans-
ducer in Figure 2. The production sensor damps
out the pulsations and lags the Validyne trace
by about 12 msec. These response characteristics
are due to the properties of the sensor itself
as well as the length of tubing connecting the
sensor and source (which is about 10 inches for
the production installation). Following the
method of Iberall (11), the frequency response
of the Validyne installation is estimated to be
flat out to 80 Hertz, which.means no appreciable
attenuation or delay for the Validyne trace.
The sensor delay was characterized as a pure
12 msec delay, and its effect on A/F excursions
was to increase the amplitude of the excursion
by about 4½ percent (this will be shown in the
model discussion).
The calculation delays in the speed density
system are not straightforward. Looking at
equation (4), the term in brackets is calculated
in the microprocessor, and the time for this
calculation (including analog to digital con-
version of the sensor signals) is not constant,
but rather depends on various occurrences which
can interrupt, or change the processor sequence
of tasks. The most influential variable in
equation (4), however, is the manifold pressure
(P) with the terms in brackets being more of a
variable coefficient modifying the main variable
(P). The basic pulse width calculation then
(which is the proportionality between pulse width
and P) is then done by an analog circuit and
thus has no calculation delay. With this philos-
ophy, the basic calculation is done with no
delay, and the smaller effects of temperature
and volumetric efficiency are subject to a delay
of between 10 and 25 msec. For the one second
throttle ramps where the end points are adjusted
to the same A/F, it was assumed that calculation
delays have negligible effect on A/F excursions.
Sensor and calculation delays for the mass
flow system were small enough to be neglected.
Delays in the air flow signal are due to changes
in pressure in the volume between the meter and
throttle. The meter was sized to minimize this
effect. The resulting delay was first order
with a time constant of about 7 msec. The cal-
culation time (including A to D conversion) for
equation (5) in the LSI 11/02 was 3 msec. This
calculation was fast enough to follow the indi-
vidual intake strokes (which results in appreci-
able fluctuation as shown in Figure 2 ) . For
this reason, the "instantaneous" air flow upon
which a given pulse width is based depends on
the particular point of the air flow trace used
in the calculation (selecting the highest peak
would result in a leaner A/F than selecting
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of British Columbia, Tuesday, September 25, 2018
10
lower points on the trace). It was found that
progressively selecting points along the air
flow trace from the beginning to the end of an
intake stroke resulted in a variation in A/F
(under steady operation) in a way which paral-
leled the air flow trace as one would expect.
Rather than filtering the air flow trace, it was
decided to base the calculation on a fixed point
in the intake stroke. This resulted in a satis-
factory operation with a pulse width that did
not vary more than 4 percent from one pulse
to the next.
E. EFFECT OF INJECTOR PHASING - The
effect of injector phasing was measured by
running a given throttle ramp for injector
timings from 70° before top center to 20° after.
The results of this test are shown in Figure 15.
It is seen that the smallest A/F excursions
correspond to initiating the injector pulse at
top center. Since the volume of manifold
through which a charge passes is about half the
volume of air inducted in a given intake stroke,
half the charge entering the cylinder consists
of air and fuel that has been residing in the
manifold runner since the previous intake stroke
(a discussion of manifold storage is given in
reference (12)). Initiating the injection much
later than top center results in some fuel
entering the air that resides in the manifold
until the following stroke. Injecting much
before top center is the same as being after
top center for the previous stroke. It is not
surprising, therefore, that injecting at top
center gave the smallest transients.
MODEL DESCRIPTION
The objective of the model is two-fold.
First, to represent a simplified concept of the
essential features of the physical process, to
be used in conjunction with experiments to gain
improved understanding; and second, to provide
a basis for a transient compensation scheme.
The model describes wall wetting and air charging
(and sensor delay as already mentioned) and
neglects effects of individual intake strokes
and injector pulses. Air and fuel flow are
handled separately by assuming the air flow to
be independent of the presence of fuel.
Using the "uniform flow" approach to model
the air flow through the manifold, all proper-
ties are assumed to be uniform throughout the
volume of the manifold. The temperature of the
air in the manifold is assumed constant, and
taken as the average of measured temperatures.
The air is assumed to behave like an ideal gas.
The continuity equation for the manifold
volume is
where M is the mass of air in the manifold and
are air mass flow rates at the throttle
and port, respectively. From the ideal gas
relation, we can express M as
where V is the total volume between the throttle
plate and intake valve (includes manifold and
cylinder head passages).
Now from equations (1) and (2), can be
written
If were thought of as an input inde-
pendent of P, and if h vol were constant,
equation (7) would be a simple first order
equation showing the response of manifold pres-
sure to a change in mass air flow at constant
engine speed. The time constant would be the
manifold volume divided by the volume flow rate
out. In reality, and hvol depend on P, but
this simple picture gives an intuitive feel for
the air charging process.
Although volumetric efficiency depends on
factors such as valve overlap, engine speed,
and manifold design, it can be approximated
(13) by the following
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of British Columbia, Tuesday, September 25, 2018
The flow rate at the throttle can be cal-
culated by assuming no pressure recovery down-
stream of the throttle, so that the pressure at
the maximum velocity point equals the manifold
pressure (P). We have
Combining equations (7), (8) and (9) allows
for numerical solution of the air flow at
throttle and inlet port during a throttle ramp
at constant engine speed. Figure 16. shows cal-
culated air flow and manifold pressure compared
to measured values for a fast throttle ramp.
The effect of ignoring individual strokes is
clearly evident. Model inputs are ambient tem-
perature and pressure, engine speed, manifold
charge temperature, and throttle angle, and the
parameters to be chosen are E and C d . The pre-
dicted values of manifold pressure and air flow
at the initial and final throttle positions were
within ± 4 percent of measured values for all
tests.
The fuel flow process is not as straight-
forward. The essential feature is that it is a
nonequilibrium process where some portion of the
fuel impacts various surfaces and vaporizes or
is otherwise reentrained. In reality, there is
more than one mechanism. For example, at least
11
half of the fuel impacts the throttle plate where
the primary mechanism for reentrainment is the
high air velocity with very little heat transfer
from the plate. High speed movies suggest that
the time constant for reentrainment is on the
order of a single intake stroke. Observing the
manifold walls during cold operation shows an
appreciable liquid film, and the decay of A/F
excursions (see Figure 8) suggests a time con-
stant on the order of several seconds. Other
factors such as the multi-component properties
of fuel, and dependence of vaporization on
pressure and air velocity as well as temperature
further complicate matters. With this in mind,
a simple model is postulated which makes no
attempt to address these realities, but rather
predicts the gross behavior. It is assumed that
the metered fuel is proportional to air flow,
and that some percent (X) impacts and forms a
film on the walls. It is also assumed that fuel
leaves this film in proportion to the amount of
fuel in the film. These two assumptions form
the basis of the wall wetting model. The con-
tinuity equation for the fuel film can be
written
Now, if it were not for the air charging,
we would simply say the fuel reaching the engine
is the nonimpacting liquid plus the reentering
vapor , and solve (10) for
Mf to give the A/F as a function of time. In
fact, when the effect of air charging is small
compared to wall wetting (as in Figure 14), the
additional complexity to be described may not be
required for a compensation scheme. If the
effect of air charging is large, however, this
approach leads to erroneous results. For
example, suppose we had a carburetor for which
X = 0 so that none of the fuel impacts the walls,
and we considered a rather fast transient where
the difference between throttle flow and port
flow were appreciable (as in Figure 2). Then
using the above approach, the fuel reaching the
engine would be which would be proportional
to , whereas the air reaching the engine would
be which is less than . The result would
be a rich transient, which does not in fact
happen. To account for this detail, it was
assumed that the vapor coming from the film
fills the manifold volume uniformly. The con-
tinuity equation for fuel vapor in the manifold
is then written
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of British Columbia, Tuesday, September 25, 2018

12

The vapor fuel flow to the engine is then

. The liquid flow to the engine is
not simply (1-X) again because of air-
charging, but is given by .
This approach, although somewhat oversimplified,
accounts for all the metered fuel, and eliminates
the errors discussed above. Solving equations
(10) and (11) gives the fuel flow to the engine
from which A/F can be calculated as a function
of time. The parameters to be chosen to fit the
data are X and τ.

COMPARISON OF PREDICTED AND MEASURED RESULTS

Comparison of model predictions and

engine data were made by running the model for
conditions which match a particular engine run,
and comparing measured and predicted exhaust
oxygen traces (recall that the response charac­
teristics of the Lambda Scan shown in Figure 3
are included in the model). Measured and pre­
dicted values of air flow and manifold pressure
were also compared. The total number of pa­
rameters available for adjustment was four, two
for the air flow (CD and E) and two for the fuel
flow (X and τ). The air flow parameters were
set at 0.81 and 0.84, respectively, and only
needed to be changed for the case of heated
throttle body. The adjustment of fuel flow pa­
rameters will be discussed below.
Oxygen traces for two typical runs are
shown in Figure 17 (a) and (b) - Curve (a) for
the cold manifold (Figure 10, Curve A) and
Curve (b) for a moderately heated manifold
(Curve E, Figure 10). The throttle ramp for
both cases is the same. It is immediately
evident that the predicted decay back to steady
state does not match the actual decay for the
cold condition. The two curves match well for
about the first second of decay, beyond which
the actual decay becomes much slower than pre­
dicted. A possible reason for this could be
the multicomponent nature of the fuel which
would tend to vaporize the more volatile com­
ponents at a higher rate, leaving the less
volatile components on the wall to vaporize at
a slower rate. Included in Figure 17 for com­
parison is trace (c) for a test where the fuel
was isooctane, a single component fuel, again
with the same throttle ramp. The decay for this
trace falls closer to the exponential decay
predicted by the model.
It is of interest to see how well the
model predictions fit the data if the parameters
are set to a given value to match a particular
throttle ramp, and then left unchanged for other
throttle ramps. Figure 18 shows the amplitude
of the A/F excursion plotted against vaporization rate (τ). For this reason, only τ
comparing the data of Figure 9 to model pre­ was adjusted to account for the six temperature
dictions. In light of the physical inter­ conditions. Each model prediction curve of
pretation of the parameters X and τ, it would Figure 18 represents a single value of τ. In
seem that manifold temperature should have no order to fit the data, it was necessary to allow
effect on droplet impaction (X) but should affect X to vary as a linear function of throttle angle.
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of British Columbia, Tuesday, September 25, 2018

13

This then created a third parameter for fuel

(since now two values are necessary to specify
X as a linear function of throttle angle). The
function selected to fit the data of Figure 18
is

which implies that the percent impacting in-

creases from 30 percent at closed throttle to
100 percent at 90 degrees. It is not hard to
imagine a greater percentage of fuel impacting
the manifold walls as the throttle is opened
further. Figure 19 shows the value of used
in the model as a function of manifold tempera-
ture (middle front skin temperature). This plot
suggests the kind of functional relationship
which could be used in a compensation scheme.
Inspection of Figure 18 shows very good
fit except for the fully warmed up case. A
further refinement can be made to gain an even
better fit. This is to allow X to vary linearly
with throttle angle as before, but to introduce
a maximum value beyond which X does not increase
This now creates a fourth fuel parameter which
we can call the maximum allowed impaction per-
cent. Figure 20 shows the model predictions and
measured traces for a typical throttle ramp.
Also shown is the oxygen level in the exhaust
(before being attenuated by the Lambda Scan).
The close fit of model to experiment generally
holds true for the "warmed-up" cases with only
slight degradation caused by not using the
"maximum allowed impaction" parameter. Note
also that for the one-second throttle ramps
the compensated Lambda Scan produces a trace
very close to the actual levels in the exhaust.
Figure 21 shows model predictions for the
data of Figure 14. The value of is set to 0.4
seconds and 0.1 seconds (for cold and hot
throttle body respectively) for both the mass
flow and speed density cases, and X is given by

to know the effect of these two variables acting

Since the parameter values are the same for the
mass flow and speed density cases, the curves of
Figure 21 show how well the model predicts the
effect of air charging. For the case of un-
seated throttle body, the prediction is quite
good, with the data showing a slightly larger
effect of air charging than the model prediction.
For the case of heated throttle body, the model
predicts a larger difference between mass flow
and speed density than actually measured.
As discussed previously, the tests were
limited to one-second throttle ramps. This in
effect coupled the throttle opening rate to the
change in mass flow . It is of interest
separately. Although very little testing was
done at throttle ramps other than the one-second
ramps already described, what data there are
show that changing the throttle rate while
keeping constant does affect the A/F
excursion in the way which is predicted by the
model. The results of comparing a one-second
throttle ramp to a one-and-one-half second ramp
(both with the same change in angle) are shown
in Figure 22 along with model predictions. The
model parameters have the same values in both
cases. It is clear that the amplitude of the
A/F excursion is smaller for the one-and-one-
half second ramp, and that the shape of the
trace changes as expected. The good fit suggests
that the model may be valid over a wider range
than that studied here, and should therefore
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of British Columbia, Tuesday, September 25, 2018

14

contributes to A/F excursions. Heating the

throttle body (with manifold at 200°F) reduced
excursions by a factor of 2.
3) The effect of manifold air charging
produced A/F excursions 30 percent larger with
speed-density metering than with mass flow
metering. This effect should be even more pro-
nounced at higher rates of throttle opening
than the one-second ramps studied here.
4) Injector phasing can affect A/F
excursions by as much as 40% for large tran-
sients, with the smallest excursions correspond-
ing to injection initiation at top center.
5) Sensor delay accounts for less than
10 percent of the observed excursions, with the
effect expected to become more pronounced at
higher rates of throttle opening.
6) A simple continuous flow, control
oriented model demonstrates the ability to
predict the essential effects of wall wetting,
air charging and sensor delays, but does not
accurately describe all details. The effect of
manifold temperature on A/F excursion can be
predicted by allowing the "Boiling Rate" pa-
rameter to vary as a function of temperature.
Since A/F excursions depend on temperatures in
various locations (such as the manifold and
throttle body), the relative importance of these
temperatures must be determined. The "Impaction
Percent" parameter must be allowed to vary
linearly with throttle angle for good fit.
7) The air flow portion of the model
predicts air flow and manifold pressure within
± four percent for the conditions studied (no
exhaust gas recirculation and a single engine
speed). The parameters describing the throttle
plate discharge coefficient and engine volumetric
efficiency were held constant except for the case
of heated throttle body.

LIST OF VARIABLES

A Throttle flow area

A0 Fuel flow rate from open injector
A1 Injector delay time
(A/F) Air fuel ratio
Cd Throttle discharge coefficient
D Engine Displacement
E Engine volumetric efficiency parameter
be useful in determining the effects of faster K Ratio of specific heats for air
transients. M Mass of air in intake manifold
Mf Fuel mas in wall film
CONCLUSIONS Mfm Metered fuel
Mv Mass of fuel vapor in intake manifold
Based on this study of transient A/F Map Mass air flow rate at inlet port
control of the five liter central fuel injected Mat Mass air flow rate at throttle
engine, the following conclusions can be drawn: Mo Initial mass flow rate
M1 Final mass flow rate
1) Manifold wall wetting is the most N Total number of injections per engine
important factor contributing to A/F excursions. revolution
The amplitude of a typical A/F excursion can be P Manifold absolute pressure
reduced by approximately a factor of 3-4 by Pb Barometric pressure
heating the manifold from 70°F to 200°F. Further PW Injector pulse width command
heating beyond 200°F has little effect on A/F R Ideal gas constant
excursions. r Engine compression ratio
2) Wetting of throttle body walls also RPM Engine revolutions per minute
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of British Columbia, Tuesday, September 25, 2018

15

Ta Ambient temp tion, Detroit, MI, February 1981.

Tm Manifold absolute temperature 6. S. D. Hires and M. T. Overington,
V Intake manifold and cylinder head passage "Transient Mixture Strength Excursions: An
volume Investigation of Their Causes and the Development
X Percent of metered fuel impacting walls of a Constant Mixture Strength Fueling Strategy."
hvo1 Engine volumetric efficiency To be presented at 1981 SAE International Con-
Intake charge density gress and Exposition, Detroit, MI, February 1981.
Throttle angle 7. G. H. Czadzeck and R. A. Reid, "Ford's
Boiling time constant 1980 Central Fuel Injection System." SAE Paper
No. 790742, 1979.
8. D. R. Hamburg and J. E. Hyland, "A
REFERENCES Vaporized Gasoline Metering System for Internal
Combustion Engines." SAE Paper No. 760288, 1976.
1. W. S. James, H. C. Dickenson, and 9. 0. C. Eridgeman, "Equilibrium Volatility
S. W. Sparrow, "Intake-Manifold Temperatures and of Motor Fuels from the Standpoint of Their Use
Fuel Economy." SAE Transactions V. 15, Part II, in Internal Combustion Engines." National
1920. Bureau of Standards Research Paper No. R.P. 694,
2. J. 0. Eisinger, "Engine-Acceleration 1934.
Tests." SAE Transactions V. 22, Part II, 1927. 10. R. A. Haslett and T. M. Edison,
3. D. L. Stivender, "Engine Air Control- "Equivalence Ratio Meter." SAE Paper No. 770219,
Basis of a Vehicular Systems Control Hierarchy." 1977.
SAE Paper No. 780346, 1978. 11. A. S. Iberall, "Attenuation of
4. H. Wu, "A Computer Model for a Oscillatory Pressures in Instrument Lines."
Centrally-Located, Closed-Loop, Automotive Fuel National Bureau of Standards Research Paper
Metering System." Presented at ASME Inter- No. R.P. 2115, 1950.
national Computer Technology Conference, San 12. H. Wu and P . N . Blumberg, "An
Francisco, CA, August 1980. Attenuation and Transport Delay Model for Single
5. P. N. Blumberg, H. Wu, and J. E. Point Closed-Loop Fuel Metering Systems." SAE
Auiler, "A Methodology for Evaluation and Paper No. 790172, 1979.
Optimization of Three-Way Catalyst Based, Low 13. C. F. Taylor and E. S. Taylor, "The
NO x Emission Control Systems." To be presented Internal Combustion Engine." Second Edition
at 1981 SAE International Congress and Exposi- International Textbook Co., 1970.
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of British Columbia, Tuesday, September 25, 2018

This paper is subject to revision. Statements and
opinions advanced in papers or discussion are the
author's and are his responsibility, not the Society's;
however, the paper has been edited by SAE for uni-
form styling and format. Discussion will be printed
with the paper if it is published in SAE Transactions.
20 page booklet.
For permission' to publish this paper in full or in part, contact the
SAE Publications Division.
Persons wishing to submit papers to be considered for presentation
or publication through SAE should send the manuscript or a 30,0
word abstract of a proposed manuscript to Secretary, Engineering
Activity Board, SAE.
Printed in U.S.A.