Paolo Lino1

Department of Electrical
and Information Engineering,
Politecnico di Bari,
Evolutionary Optimization
Bari I-70125, Italy
e-mail: paolo.lino@poliba.it of Model Parameters for
Guido Maione
Department of Electrical
Electro-Injectors in Common
and Information Engineering,
Politecnico di Bari,
Bari I-70125, Italy
Rail Diesel Engines
e-mail: guido.maione@poliba.it
One of the main issues in the design, modeling, and control of innovative automotive
engines is to reduce energy consumption and emission of pollutants and, at the same
Fabrizio Saponaro time, to guarantee a high level of performance indices. In particular, enhanced model-
Department of Electrical based control of the injection process has been a hot research topic in recent years to
and Information Engineering, increase the combustion efficiency in common rail (CR) diesel engines and to meet strict
Politecnico di Bari, legislations. This paper focuses on the development of a more accurate model for the
Bari I-70125, Italy electro-injector in CR diesel engines. The model takes into account the mechanical defor-
e-mail: saponaro.fab@gmail.com mation of relevant parts of the electro-injector and the nonlinear fuel flow. Model param-
eters are then optimized by an evolutionary strategy. Simulation results confirm that the
Kang Li optimized model can be helpful for predicting the real trend of the injected fuel flow rate,
School of Electronics, evidenced by experimental data, thus can be helpful for injection control of CR diesel
Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, engines. [DOI: 10.1115/1.4032481]
Queens University Belfast,
Belfast BT9 5AH, UK
e-mail: k.li@qub.ac.uk

1 Introduction This paper presents an accurate model of a new generation

electro-injector for CR diesel engines, by tackling the problems
The automotive industry has been launching a major effort to
that arise in the development and calibration stages. Building an
reduce both fuel and energy consumption and emission of
accurate model, which should hold in every working condition, is
pollutants (gases like CO, NOx, HC, particulate matter, etc.) from
difficult due to high nonlinearities in complex fluid-dynamic proc-
internal combustion engine-based vehicles, as required by interna-
esses. Further, even if model complexity can improve accuracy
tional regulations, while guaranteeing a high level of performance
and prediction capability, it must be lowered to simplify the con-
and robustness. In this context, the use of CR injection systems in
trol design. Then, the number of parameters must be minimized.
diesel engines has allowed a more precise metering of the air/fuel
In synthesis, a tradeoff must be reached between model accuracy
mixture demanded by the engine speed and load, thereby resulting
and control simplicity and efficiency. Only the most significant
in better performance and lower emissions in every working con-
phenomena and parameters are considered. Namely, the mechani-
dition [14]. An accurate metering requires a precise control of
cal deformation of the main components in the electro-injectors,
both the injection timings, as specified by the opening time inter-
the nonlinear dynamics of fuel flow, and the electromagnetic com-
vals of electro-injectors, and the fuel injection pressure. Given
ponents are considered, because they determine the variations of
that this pressure can be accurately regulated, then the control of
the output injected flow rate.
injection timings requires an adequate knowledge of the opera-
The model calibration is performed by a simulation
tions of the injectors and the development of a suitable strategy.
optimization approach based on differential evolution (DE) strat-
Effective injection control strategies require sophisticated
egies. Optimization is based on a performance index that takes
actuators. In particular, the new generation electro-injectors allow
into account the prediction error of the injected flow rate, because
multiple and close-up injections to obtain the injection flow rate
it is one of the most important variables affecting the correct
shaping (IRS). The distance between the main injections is sensi-
metering of the fuel that is injected in the cylinder. The results of
bly reduced to obtain a single injection according to a desired pro-
the optimization are compared with experimental results available
file, which gives a more accurate fuel metering. However, the
from a real test bench.
implementation of an IRS strategy is not simple due to the com-
The paper is organized as follows: Section 2 describes the
plexity of involved phenomena. For example, each injection event
dynamic system and Sec. 3 introduces the model. Section 4 formu-
has effect on the following one in a way that depends on the
lates the optimization problem by DE. Then, some simulation results
injected fuel quantity and on the distance between two consecu-
are presented in Sec. 5. Finally, conclusions are given in Sec. 6.
tive injections. Experimental calibration is time consuming and
could not lead to an optimal solution. On the contrary, a model-
based approach could reduce the development time, by enabling
offline optimization of control strategies [57]. However, an effort 2 The CR Electro-Injector
must be paid to develop a suitable model of the electro-injector.
In a third generation diesel CR injection system, the high-
pressure pump raises the pressure of fuel coming from the low-
1
Corresponding author. pressure circuit and feeds the CR. The CR is a large steel volume
Contributed by the Dynamic Systems Division of ASME for publication in the
JOURNAL OF DYNAMIC SYSTEMS, MEASUREMENT, AND CONTROL. Manuscript received
directly supplying the electro-injectors, which send fuel to cylin-
May 28, 2015; final manuscript received December 22, 2015; published online ders. The accurate metering of the injected fuel requires the con-
February 3, 2016. Assoc. Editor: Ardalan Vahidi. trol of the rail pressure and injection opening time intervals. The

Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control APRIL 2016, Vol. 138 / 041001-1
C 2016 by ASME
Copyright V

Downloaded From: http://dynamicsystems.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jdsmaa/934983/ on 03/22/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/a

 injection pressure can be regulated by acting both on the metering
unit of the high-pressure pump and on the control valve placed on
the CR, which drains fuel toward the low-pressure circuit. The
injection timings are precisely driven by the electronic control
unit.
The CR electro-injector includes a control circuit, which is a
control chamber with an electrohydraulic valve, a feeding circuit,
which is made by an accumulation volume and a SAC volume
(see Fig. 1). The SAC (from cul-de-sac) is a small volume at the
end of the fuel flow path and is directly connected to the nozzles
of the injector. The CR delivers fuel to the control chamber and
accumulation volume by high-pressure pipes. A plungerneedle
element is placed between the control and the feeding circuit and
is operated to regulate the flow. In particular, the injection starts
when the needle moves up, so that the SAC and the accumulation
volume are connected. Thus, acting on the upper surface of this
element allows to properly reduce (increase) the control chamber
pressure and then to open (close) the injector. The control cham-
ber has circular symmetry and variable size due to the position of
the plunger. It is connected to the high-pressure CR through the
Z-hole and to a low-pressure circuit through the A-hole. The flow
section between the control chamber and low-pressure circuit is
regulated by the electrohydraulic valve that is driven by a pulse
width modulated (PWM) voltage signal. If the valve is closed, the
pressure on the top face of the plunger is almost equal to the rail
pressure, and the plungerneedle element is pushed down; if the
valve opens, the pressure in the control chamber diminishes and
the plungerneedle element is pushed up.
It is obvious that fuel has a complex fluid dynamics, because
injection determines a nonuniform distribution of the pressure in
the CR. Then, an accurate model-based prediction of the pressure
dynamics at different sections of the rail and an accurate model of
the electro-injectors are useful for fuel metering [8,9]. Moreover,
the fast operations determined by close and multiple injections
establish a water hammer effect that affects the propagation of
wave pressure in the pipes. Therefore, a sufficiently accurate
mathematical model is necessary to design an effective controller.
Fig. 1 Schematic representation of the CR electro-injector
(left) and complete mechanical plungerneedle model (right)
041001-2 / Vol. 138, APRIL 2016
Downloaded From: http://dynamicsystems.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jdsmaa/934983/ on 03/22/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/a
3 The Model
The electro-injector is basically an interconnection of different
volumes in which the fuel flows. The pressure in these different
subsystems is different and changes according to different dynam-
ics. A mathematical model can be obtained by applying the conti-
nuity equation, the momentum equation, and the Newtons second
law of motion for the mechanical parts. A lumped parameters rep-
resentation, i.e., a set of ordinary differential equations, can be
used for volumes in which a uniform and time-varying pressure
distribution is assumed. If a time-varying and nonuniform pres-
sure distribution is assumed, a set of partial differential equations
(PDEs) can represent dynamic phenomena due to the propagation
of pressure waves. Since a constant fuel temperature is assumed
in the whole system, the dynamics is completely defined by the
pressure variations in each volume.
Fuel properties change with operating conditions and are suit-
ably taken into account. In particular, for fuel compressibility, the
fuel bulk modulus Kf represents the pressure increment for a
decrease of a unitary volume
dp Kf dV
 (1)
dt V dt
where the fluid volume V changes by the motion of the mechani-
cal parts, i.e., plunger and needle, and its time variation depends
on the intake and outtake flow rates. Variations of fuel density q,
kinematic viscosity , and bulk modulus Kf, with the instantane-
ous pressure p inside each control volume, can be expressed as
follows [10]:
8  
>
> q p; T Kq1 1  e
p=Kq2 
> Kq3 pKq4
<  
Kf p; T KB1 1  ep=KB2  KB3 pKB4 (2)
>
>  
>
:  p; T K1 K2 pK3
where Kqi, KBi, and Ki are polynomial functions of the tempera-
ture T. Since a reliable measure of T in the injector is not avail-
able, a constant value of 80  C is assumed. Assuming the
nonlinear dependencies in Eq. (2) will allow better prediction than
by constant parameter values or linear functions, as in the prelimi-
nary lumped parameter model in Ref. [11].
3.1 Hydraulic Model. As for large accumulation volumes, a
lumped parameters representation is derived by reformulating
Eq. (1) in the following form [12]:
!
dp Kf dV X
  Ql Qi (3)
dt V dt i
P
where i Qi is the algebraic sum of intake and outtake flow rates,
and Ql is the leakage flow rate. Then, the pressure in each volume
is computed by time integration of Eq. (3), provided that flow
rates, instantaneous volumes, and initial conditions are available.
Flow rates are given by [12]
s
2 jDpj
Q sgn Dp cd A0 N (4)
q
where A0 is the flow section area through the holes, N is the num-
ber of holes, and Dp is the pressure gradient across A0. cd is a dis-
charge coefficient that depends on the difference between the
actual and ideal flows, because the flow rate is reduced by large
pressure gaps and narrow orifice sections. Moreover, the leakage
is considered between coupled mechanical elements that are in
relative motion and lubricated by the fluid. Ql is proportional to
the pressure drop Dp [13]
Transactions of the ASME
 p
p d g3 damping coefficient is given by c 2 n k  M, with n [0.001,
Ql sgn Dp jDpj (5) 0.01]. (Here, n 0.005 is used [10].) This relationship simplifies
12 l q  the optimization described in Sec. 4. The pressure forces depend
on the area of the section that is perpendicular to the motion
where d is the mean diameter of the cross section flow area, g is
direction.
the radial gap, l is the length of the mechanical coupling, and  is
The injection flow rate is computed by Eq. (4), where the dis-
a viscosity coefficient.
charge coefficient is a nonlinear function of the needle axial dis-
Propagation of pressure waves along the pipe from the injector
placement z, which equals the displacement z9 of mass M9 in Fig.
inlet section to the accumulation volume is represented by a dis-
1. Three different behaviors can be identified during motion [10].
tributed parameter model. More in detail, continuity and momen-
At the beginning of the opening phase, cd increases up to the value
tum equations form a set of two PDEs
cd(z0) according to a sinusoidal function of lift. Subsequently, a
8 linear dependence establishes up to the maximum value cd(zM).
>
> @p @u
< a2 q 0 Finally, cd remains constant at cd(zM) during the closing transient.
@t @x (6) It holds
>
> @u 1 @p ujuj
: f 0 8  
@t q @x 2D > pz
>
< cd z0 sin 0  z  z0
2z0
where x is the direction of propagation, a is the speed of sound in cd z (9)
>
> cd zM  cd z0
the fluid, f is a viscous friction coefficient, and D is the pipe inter- : z  z0 cd z0 z  z0
zM  z0
nal diameter. This representation is a further refinement to
improve previous predictions [11].
where z0 identifies the transition between the first two phases and
zM is the maximum needle lift, both depending on the rail pressure
3.2 The PlungerNeedle Model. The injected flow rate pCR according to zM K1pCR K2 and z0 K3 pCR K4. The
strictly depends on the axial position of the needle tip. The posi- parameters K1, , K4, cd(z0), and cd(zM) are constant and must be
tion is changed by the deformation of the plungerneedle mechan- experimentally determined. Considering cd as a nonlinear function
ical coupling, because of the high values and variation of the of the axial displacement (and thus of the flow section) allows to
pressure acting on the plunger and the needle surfaces. Then, the distinguish the different injection phases (e.g., to take into account
reduction of the axial length of the coupling increases the flow the effect of turbulent flows). A constant coefficient would not
section below the needle tip. The section is a nonlinear function properly take into account how deformation affects the injection
of the pressure acting on the mechanical parts, whose deformation flow.
depends on peculiar properties of the composing steel, as In summary, the injected flow rate is influenced by the deforma-
described in what follows. tion of the plungerneedle coupling. Thus, the focus is on the opti-
The dynamical behavior of the plungerneedle complex under mization of parameters of the mechanical model of the coupling,
high pressure can be represented by several interconnected which is an important part of the whole model that is necessary to
massspringdamper systems. Namely, both the plunger and nee- represent and simulate the system. In detail, the mechanical equa-
dle are a series of five and two elementary cylinders, respectively, tions are
each being characterized by a different section and mass. Then, 8
every intermediate element of the massspringdamper model is > M1 z 1 c1 z_ 1 k1 z1 F1
>
>
assumed to include halves of the masses of two adjacent cylinders, >
>
while the first and last elements in the chain include only one-half >
> M z 2 c1 z_ 2  z_ 1 c2 z_ 2  z_ 3
2
>
>
of the mass of the first and last cylinders, respectively (see Fig. 1). >
> k1 z2  z1 k2 z2  z3 F2
>
>
The link between different masses is achieved by spring and >
>
>
> M3 z 3 c2 z_ 3  z_ 2 c3 z_ 3  z_ 4
damping elements, which model elastic and viscous damping >
>
>
>
forces between the mechanical parts. More in detail, the models >
> k2 z3  z2 k3 z3  z4 F3
>
>
of the plunger and the needle are connected only by a spring rep- >
> M4 z 4 c3 z_ 4  z_ 3 c4 z_ 4  z_ 5
>
>
resenting the contact force. The right side of Fig. 1 represents the >
>
< k3 z4  z3 k4 z4  z5 F4
complete model of the plungerneedle combination that is also (10)
shown on the rightmost part of the figure. Then, the main problem >
> M5 z 5 c4 z_ 5  z_ 4 c5 z_ 5  z_ 6
>
>
is to represent a continuous mechanical system by the mentioned >
> k4 z5  z4 k5 z5  z6 F5
>
>
connections and to determine the optimal parameters that allow to >
>
reproduce an injected flow rate corresponding to the typically >
> M6 z 6 c5 z_ 6  z_ 5 k5 z6  z5 kz6  z7 F6
>
>
experimented trend. A free-body equation can be derived by >
>
>
> M7 z 7 c6 z_ 7  z_ 8 k6 z7  z8 kz7  z6 F7
applying the Newtons second law to each mass Mi of the >
>
>
>
massspringdamper model. For each mass of the chain, it holds >
> M8 z 8 c6 z_ 8  z_ 7 c7 z_ 8  z_ 9
>
>
(see Fig. 2) >
> k6 z8  z7 k7 z8  z9 F8
>
>
>
: M z c z_  z_ k z  z F
9 9 7 9 8 7 9 8 9
Mi z i ci1 z_ i  z_ i1 ci z_ i  z_ i1
X
ki1 zi  zi1 ki zi  zi1 Fi (7) where k is the fixed elastic constant of the link between the
i plunger and the needle, and F1, , F7 are the resultant applied
where z denotes the mechanical deformation of the mass element, pressure forces. The parameters to be optimized are the elastic
c is the viscous damping coefficient, k is the spring elasticP
con- constants k1,, k7 (see Table 1 for the optimized values) and the
stant of the ideal elements located between each mass, and i Fi
is the resultant of pressure forces on the half-modeled cylinder.
Theoretically, the spring constant is given by

k E  A=l0 (8)

where E is the Youngs modulus, A is the cross section area of the

considered cylinder, and l0 is the initial length of the element. The Fig. 2 Representation of adjacent masses

Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control APRIL 2016, Vol. 138 / 041001-3

Downloaded From: http://dynamicsystems.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jdsmaa/934983/ on 03/22/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/a

 viscous damping coefficients c1, , c7. However, pthe latter can be Table 1 Theoretical and optimal values of the plungerneedle
determined by using the relation c 0:01 k  M with the opti- model parameters
mized values of the elastic constants.
However, note that the prediction of the injected flow takes into Element Parameters Theoretical values (N/m) Optimal values (N/m)
account all the components of the injection system that are mod-
Plunger k1 x1 1.22 108 3.03 108
eled with a sufficient degree of accuracy. Moreover, simplicity is k2 x2 8.08 107 8.26 107
preserved both for fast simulation and for efficient and effective k3 x3 8.21 107 8.35 107
model-based control. On this basis, the solution of the system (10) k4 x4 9.44 107 1.41 108
provides the displacement z  z9, which is related to the position k5 x5 9.43 107 1.05 108
of the conic shutter in Fig. 1. This position depends on the acting
pressures, the CR pressure, and the operation of the valve. Then, Needle k6 x6 1.86 108 3.50 108
it determines the closing/opening of the nozzles. k7 x7 5.82 107 6.44 107
In particular, the displacement of the conic shutter changes the
outflow section from the SAC to the nozzles (see bottom of left
drawing in Fig. 1). In its turn, cd depends on the instantaneous modulus and are used as initial solutions for the optimization. The
shutter position and on the difference between the pressures overall number of decision variables is np 7.
before and after the nozzles. Then, z9 affects the outflow section The optimization problem can be expressed as
and, together with the variation of cd, concurs to the pressure-
 
dependent variation of the injected flow rate according to Eq. (4). min J x 2 Rjqx > 0; hx  0 (13)
Finally, note that a simplification is not possible, at the moment. x2X
Namely, the previous developments lead to a minimum number of
parameters, because the masses correspond to the relevant physical where J(x) is an objective function able
to quantify the model
pre-
components of the plungerneedle coupling (five and two cylinders, diction accuracy; q(x) and hx h1 x; h2 x; ; h2np x are
see Fig. 1). An oversimplified model would decrease the level of ac- the constraints, whose components are defined in Table 2. The
curacy significantly (see the results by a rigid body model in Fig. 6). optimization procedure is based on experimental data obtained
from a test bench. More in detail, the so-called EVI (from German
Einspritzverlaufsindikator, i.e., injection curve indicator) profile
3.3 The Electromagnetic Model. The dynamics of the elec- is assumed as a reference. This indicator represents the injection
trohydraulic valve that regulates the flow section between the con- flow rate as a function of time, when exciting the electro-injector
trol chamber and low-pressure circuit is also modeled. The by a predefined driving
instantaneous position of the valve shutter, which is coupled with P current. Then, the objective function can
be expressed as J tk jymod tk  y exp tk j, where yexp(tk) is the
the magnet anchor, is computed by applying the Newtons second experimental value at sampling time tk, and ymod(tk) is the corre-
law and considering the applied forces. The pressure forces come sponding model predicted value.
from the hydraulic model, while the electromagnetic force is com-
puted as follows.
The Faradays law gives the magnetic flux u within the whole 4.1 Constraints on Decision Variables. Decision variables
magnetic circuit, with N u_ vev  R iev , where R is the coil resist- must satisfy specific conditions to be feasible solutions of the opti-
ance with N turns, vev is the applied voltage, and iev is the drawn mization process. Constraints on the decision variables restrict the
current. The flux leakage and eddy currents are neglected. The search space and are set on the basis of physical considerations.
drawn current is related to the magnetomotive force (MMF) that The first set of constraints is derived from the geometrical dif-
produces the magnetic flux ferences among cylindrical elements composing plunger and nee-
dle and their stiffness. They are enforced for consistency with the
MMF 1 1
iev Ha la Hs ls (11) real system layout and its physical properties. Since spring con-
N N N stants ki depend on the ratio between the cylinders cross sections
and lengths, some inequality constraints must be satisfied between
where Ha, Hs, la, and ls are the magnetic field strength and the
the variables x1, , xnp. For example, for the needle component,
flow path lengths in the air gap and in the steel, respectively.
since the cylinder of mass m7 is characterized by a greater stiff-
While ls is almost constant, la depends on the instantaneous posi-
ness than the cylinder of mass m6, the inequality constraint k7 < k6
tion of the anchor. If the magnetic flux cross section is assumed
is imposed on elastic constants. For the whole plungerneedle
constant
 along the circuit, then Ha u=l0 Ag , while
coupling, the inequalities
Hs f u=Ag , with Ag being the air gap cross section and l0
being the magnetic
 permeability
 of air, respectively. The nonlin- k7 < k2 < k3 < k5 < k4 < k1 < k6 (14)
ear function f u=Ag directly relates to the magnetization curve
of the material. The overall state equation for the magnetic flux is
always hold, which can also be written as k7  k2 < 0; k2
  k3 < 0; k3  k5 < 0; k5  k4 < 0; k4  k1 < 0; k1  k6 < 0.
1 R R u
u_ vev  2 u la  2 f ls (12) The resulting np  1 linear inequality constraints on the first np
N N l0 Ag N Ag decision variables can be expressed in the matrix form
qx A  x~ > 0, where x~ x1 x2 x3 x4 x5 x6 x7 T , and A is
and the electromagnetic force is Fev u2 =2l0 Ag .
2 3
0 1 0 0 0 0 1
4 Parameter Optimization by Evolutionary Strategies 6 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 7
6 7
6 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 7
The aim is now to identify and analyze the influence of some A6 6 0
7 (15)
mechanical parameters of the dynamical model, in order to 6 0 0 1 1 0 0 7 7
improve the prediction of the trend of the injection rate. In partic- 4 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 5
ular, the set of parameters to be optimized are related to the 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
mechanical displacement of the plunger and needle, and include
the elastic constants of the massspringdamper model. Decision The second set of constraints is related to the maximum varia-
variables xi are listed in Table 1 together with the corresponding tion allowed for each decision variable xi with respect to the corre-
theoretical values denoted by xi,ref, with i 1, , np. The latter sponding nominal values xi,ref. More in detail, it is requested that
are obtained by considering geometric dimensions and Youngs each decision variable must stay within the percentage range of

041001-4 / Vol. 138, APRIL 2016 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://dynamicsystems.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jdsmaa/934983/ on 03/22/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/a

      

1  ai;min =100 xi;ref ; 1 ai;max =100 xi;ref around the ref- xj;i;0 xj;min rndj xj;max  xj;min (17)
erence theoretical value xi,ref, where ai,min and ai,max [0, 100]
are fixed at the beginning of the optimization process. Therefore, for j 1,, np and i 1,, Npop, with rndj
U(0, 1) being a ran-
two inequalities hold for each decision variable xi, i 1, , np, dom number between 0 and 1 taken from a uniform distribution,
corresponding to its upper and lower bounds, respectively, result- so that the search space is covered at best. Then, the initial popu-
ing in (2np) inequality constraints bounding the whole set of lation is evaluated by using the objective function: f(xi,0), for
decision variables i 1,, Npop, provides the initial result of the optimization
8   process.
>
> a
>hi x xi  1  i;min xi;ref  0
< The differential mutation step creates a new solution for each
 100 member of the population (DE/rand/1 strategy)
(16)
>
> ai;max
>hinp x 1
: xi;ref  xi  0 vi;g xr1i ;g F xr2i ;g  xr3i ;g (18)
100

To conclude, the complete set of constraints on decision varia-
bles is composed of (3np) elements as listed in Table 2.
4.2 Evolutionary Optimization Technique. To define the
optimization technique, some preliminaries are presented on
the basics of the intelligent parameter optimization techniques. If
x x1 ; ; xnp  2 Rnp is the vector of real parameters, S is the
search space including the optimized solution x* and constraining
the optimization procedure, and f() is a real-valued objective
function to minimize, then the problem is to find x* such that
f(x*)  f(x) for every x S. Since analytical solutions are difficult
to find for several reasons (nonlinearity, number of parameters,
lack of continuity and differentiability of f, and lack of convexity),
U(0, 1), while
heuristic and stochastic search are often employed [14].
As a simple, easy-to-use and efficient scheme with few algo-
rithmic parameters to tune, DE has been widely used for industrial
application-oriented optimization problems [1519]. It is particu-
larly useful for the modeling problem in this paper. First, proto-
typing hardware components or software tools of innovative but
large-scale engines often requires to save time and costs. Second,
compared with other metaheuristic approaches, DE is often more
effective in finding the optimum solutions for given time and
computation constraints. Recent studies on benchmark problems
confirmed that DE has, in most cases, superior performance (in
reducing the objective function) and robustness (in reproducing
the same results for different random initial conditions) with
respect to other evolutionary techniques, especially for problems
with real-valued parameters and related to real-world applications
[16].
DE improves a population of candidate solutions {xi,g,i 1, ,
Npop} through successive generations (g 0, 1,, Gmax) in order
to find a solution as close as possible to the optimum [17].
Each candidate xi,g is a vector of unknowns, i.e.,
xi;g x1;i;g ; ; xnp ;i;g  2 Rnp , which represent the np parameters
to be optimized. A population of Npop solutions is iteratively
evolved through the generations. Evolution starts from an initial
guess (g 0) and goes on until the optimum is obtained or until a
predefined stop criterion is met: to simplify, the procedure is
stopped after a fixed number Gmax of generations. To synthesize,
DE is characterized by the population size, Npop, and the number
of generations, Gmax, which are usually determined by trial-and-
error.
More in detail, each generation undergoes the phases of muta-
tion, recombination, and selection. First, solutions are mutated to
explore the search space. Second, solutions are recombined by
crossover to increase the potential diversity in the population
while including the best solutions from the previous generation.
Finally, the best obtained solutions are selected. The population
size is maintained constant and the search space is defined by
proper limits: for each solution i and generation g, it
holds xmin  xi;g  xmax , where xmin x1;min ; ; xnp ;min  and
xmax x1;max ; ; xnp ;max  depend on the specific constrained
optimization problem.
Evolution is initialized by taking a random generation from a
uniform distribution so that the generic initial solution xi,0 is
defined by
for i 1,, Npop, with mutually exclusive integers rki 6 i, with
1  rki  Npop (k 1, 2, 3), and the scaling factor 0 < F < 2. In
other words, three random and distinct solutions, different from
xi,g, are chosen from the population and used to generate the
mutant solution vi,g.
Binomial crossover is then used to recombine solutions [17]
and obtain a new vector ui;g u1;i;g ; ; unp ;i;g  by applying the
following rule for j 1,, np and i 1,, Npop:

v if rndj;i  CR or j jrand
uj;i;g j;i;g (19)
xj;i;g if rndj;i > CR and j 6 jrand
where the crossover ratio 0 < CR < 1 and rndj,i
jrand {1,, np} is taken randomly from the uniform distribution
so that ui,g inherits at least one component from vi,g and is differ-
ent from xi,g. The number of inherited parameters obeys a nearly
binomial distribution.
The final operation is selecting the solutions based on the mini-
mization of the objective function f. For i 1,, Npop, each ele-
ment in the population of the next generation is determined by the
original or recombined solution

xi;g if f xi;g < f ui;g
xi;g1 (20)
ui;g if f ui;g  f xi;g
To conclude, note that the speed of convergence depends also on
the value of F (usually between 0.4 and 1) and of CR (greater than
0.6 in many cases to speed up convergence).
5 Simulation Results
Simulation is performed in the MATLAB/SIMULINK environment
by implementing the nonlinear model of the electro-injector. Each
relevant volume of the injector is separately modeled and linked
to adjacent modules in a block diagram [9]. All the nonlinear
equations (for the electrical, mechanical, and fluid-dynamic phe-
nomena) are integrated and solved inside the blocks. Boundary
conditions (voltage command to the valve, pressures in the CR
and in the cylinder, etc.) are used as inputs to these blocks. Since
the CR pressure is used as a time-varying input and is made avail-
able by measurements in real significant operating conditions, the
oscillations induced by the injector opening and closing are
implicitly taken into account, and so are the effects on the injected
fuel. The overall output is the flow rate that is injected from the
Table 2 Constraints
Constraint Expression
q(x) A  x~ > 0; x~ x1 ; ; xnp T
 
ai;min
hi(x) xi  1  xi;ref  0; i 1; ; np
100
 
ai;max
hinp x 1 xi;ref  xi  0; i 1; ; np
100

Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control APRIL 2016, Vol. 138 / 041001-5

Downloaded From: http://dynamicsystems.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jdsmaa/934983/ on 03/22/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/a

 SAC volume into the cylinder. Note that cavitation is also consid- between an elementary cylinder and its housing can be very small
ered in the accurate simulation model to dynamically evaluate the (e.g., see Fig. 1 for the location of cylinders associated to k1 and
outflow coefficient from the nozzles. k6), more intense friction forces reduce the deformation of this
A total of 520 data samples is used for the modeling phase. cylinder. From a modeling point of view, this implies that the
They are the values of the injected flow rate that are experimen- apparent elasticity of the components in the massspringdamper
tally measured for a time period of 1.2 ms after opening the injec- model could be higher than the real elasticity of elements subject
tor for 700 ls at a rail pressure of 160 MPa (1600 bar). Two to greater friction forces, which is better estimated by optimiza-
different sets of 520 samples each are then used for the validation tion. In this way, equal forces transmitted by the contiguous ele-
phase: they are the experimental values available for 700 ls and ments cause a reduced shift of an elementary mass. This aspect is
80 or 120 MPa (see dashed plots in Fig. 6). In synthesis, assuming very important for the prediction capabilities. Namely, the defor-
three different operating conditions, one for optimization and two mation of the plunger and needle affects the fuel outflow section
for validation, increases the reliability of prediction and avoids during the injection, hence the quantity of fuel that is instantane-
overfitting problems. ously injected.
The optimization procedure is schematized in Fig. 3. The initial A further indication of the DE performance is given by the box
values of the parameters in x0 [k1,0 k7,0], and then the associ- and whiskers plots representing the diffusion of results around the
ated initial values c1,0,, c7,0, are determined randomly and then optimum solution during the search. Figure 5 shows the plots for
loaded as input data. In particular, the random generation by Eq. the seven parameters (outliers are suppressed, median values are
(17) is inside ranges around the theoretical values according to shown by thin bars, and minimum and maximum values by thick
Eq. (16). The experimental flow rate is loaded as well. Then, the bars). Most searched values of k6 are close to its maximum. More-
characteristics of the DE algorithm are set together with the search over, the optimized and theoretical values practically coincide
space bounds that are defined by the previous ranges around the only for k2 and k3 while they are very close for k5 and k7. The dif-
theoretical values (see upper left part of Fig. 3). ferences are remarkable for k1 and k6 and significant for k4.
A simulation is performed for each candidate solution from the Namely, the difference between optimized and theoretical values
initial or subsequent populations. The simulated injected flow rate is higher when the clearance of elementary cylinders is smaller.
allows to compute the objective function to evaluate the solution. The model prediction performance can be evaluated by compar-
Note that Newpop(i) represents the ith solution xi,g from the ing the results provided by the optimized model and the
current new population, which is initially randomly generated by
Eq. (17) (see upper right part of Fig. 3) and then updated to xi,g 1
after performing mutation by Eq. (18), crossover by Eq. (19), and
selection by Eq. (20) (see lower right part of Fig. 3). In particular,
Vpop(i) represents the ith mutated solution vi,g, while Upop(i) rep-
resents the ith crossover solution ui,g. The best solutions are found
by minimizing the objective function J.
Tuning the DE characteristics is not an easy task, because of
the complexity and nonlinearity of the problem. Moreover, the
optimized parameters must respect the constraints specified in
Table 2. The choice can be made by trial-and-error and must
achieve a tradeoff between speed of convergence and accuracy of
prediction by the optimized model with respect to other models.
CR 0.8 (frequently suggested value) is selected as a good trade-
off value and F is not fixed but randomly generated between 0.4
and 1 (typical suggested range) each time a mutation by Eq. (18)
is performed. A different random value of F is used for each ele-
ment in the population and for each optimized parameter.
Then, the DE-based optimization is executed several times by
changing Gmax and Npop. If the average Javg between the minimum
values in the three cases (80, 120, and 160 MPa) is considered,
then the best results are achieved with (Gmax, Npop) (70, 50):
Javg 153.88 (see Table 3). Then, this choice identifies the opti-
mized parameters that are used for prediction (see Fig. 6). Note
that Npop 70 is in agreement with a common rule of thumb that
suggests a population size ten times the dimensionality of the
problem [15] to prevent both premature convergence (by a too
small size) and stagnation (by a too large size).
Figure 4 depicts the time evolution of the objective function in
the modeling phase (160 MPa). Both the best values and the mean
values in each generation are indicated. The rapid convergence
can be verified. Other results obtained by different combinations
of Gmax and Npop are listed in Table 3. Less generations and a
smaller population may speed up the optimization, but they can
give higher errors especially in the conditions used for validation
(see the case of 80 MPa).
Table 1 compares the optimized values of the parameters with
the theoretical ones given by the formula in Eq. (8). The opti-
mized values are higher. This result can be explained as follows.
The massspringdamper model used to represent the deformabil-
ity of the plunger and needle subject to pressure forces does not
take into account the friction forces. These forces counteract the
deformation of each elementary physical cylinder that composes Fig. 3 Schematic diagram of the parameter optimization
the plunger and needle. As a consequence, since the clearance procedure

041001-6 / Vol. 138, APRIL 2016 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://dynamicsystems.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jdsmaa/934983/ on 03/22/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/a

 Table 3 Minimum values of J and their average obtained by DE for different combinations of the number of generations and popu-
lation size
CR pressure (MPa) (50, 30) (50, 50) (50, 70) (60, 30)
160 167.62 166.84 161.60 163.99
120 144.43 155.81 154.48 146.38
80 159.21 151.87 156.93 401.63
Javg 157.09 158.17 157.67 237.33
experimental output. Moreover, the optimized model is compared
to: (a) the theoretical nonoptimized model in which the parame-
ters are set by Eq. (8) (see Table 1) and (b) a model that was
recently obtained for the injector system by considering the
plungerneedle complex as a unique rigid body [8]. All the mod-
els considered several factors: the connection between the control
chamber and the low-pressure circuit that is established by apply-
ing the so-called method of characteristics; the variation of den-
sity, bulk modulus, and kinematic viscosity with pressure; and the
deformation of the plungerneedle complex as a result of the com-
pression forces (not considered by the rigid body model).
Figure 6 shows the optimization results with (Gmax, Npop) (70,
50) for the testing datasets. The left part shows the flow rate pre-
dicted by different models and the right part depicts the errors
between the simulated and experimental responses. The compari-
son is performed on the flow rate as a function of time (EVI
curves), when exciting the injector by a predefined current. The
three previously mentioned operating conditions are considered.
The actual output is sampled at 1 kHz, which is suitable for an
accurate representation of the injection process.
The plot obtained from experimental data (dotted line) is com-
pared to those obtained from the optimized model (solid line), the
rigid body model (dashed/dotted line), and the theoretical nonopti-
mized model (dashed line). To improve the optimization results,
the data in the phase (for t > 1.2 ms) in which the injected rate is
dramatically reduced are filtered out, because a very complex
unmodeled fluid dynamics occurs and it is difficult to adapt the
prediction.
A first remark is that the two parameter-based models greatly
outperform the rigid body model. The latter produces less oscilla-
tions and smoother response but with much higher errors in the
delicate rising phase where the injected flow rate rapidly
increases, in the intermediate period where the rate saturates or
slowly increases by a small amount, and in the final descent phase
Fig. 4 Evolution of the objective function over generations for
(Gmax, Npop) 5 (70, 50) in the 160 MPa condition
Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control
Downloaded From: http://dynamicsystems.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jdsmaa/934983/ on 03/22/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/a
(Gmax, Npop)
(60, 50) (60, 70) (70, 30) (70, 50) (70, 70)
168.01 162.14 168.50 169.97 164.19
148.93 141.92 145.53 153.54 147.81
158.06 158.95 148.74 138.12 157.69
158.33 154.34 154.26 153.88 156.56
where the rate rapidly decreases to zero. These phases are some-
what different and have different duration in the three considered
conditions. The rigid body model shows a delay because it does
not consider the deformation and displacement of the
plungerneedle in an accurate way; thus, the injection is slower,
with a delayed start (opening of the injector) and anticipated end
(closure of the injector).
In the condition of 160 MPa, the deviation of the theoretical
model from the experimental trend is more evident both in the ris-
ing transient (roughly for 0  t  0.4 ms) and in the descent period
(roughly for 1.0  t  1.2 ms). In particular, an anticipated rise
would imply an anticipated opening of the injector, and a delayed
descent would determine a postponed closure. The optimized
model provides a better prediction.
In the condition of 120 MPa, the prediction by the theoretical
model shows a delay in the opening of the injector (0  t  0.4 ms)
and a remarkable deviation at the end of the intermediate phase
(roughly for 0.8  t  1 ms); then, the prediction by the optimized
model is again preferable. If the injection is predicted to start with
a certain delay and finish in advance with respect to the real data,
then prediction is incorrect. An accurate estimate of the injection
starting time is of paramount importance for model reliability.
Namely, the start of combustion inside cylinders directly depends
on when the injection starts, and strongly affects the combustion
efficiency, formation and emission of pollutants, combustion
noise, etc. Therefore, an uncorrect/unprecise estimate of the start-
ing time can determine a wrong prediction of these phenomena;
then, it can further jeopardize the mechanical optimization of the
system layout and the design of injection control strategy. Finally,
in the condition of 80 MPa, the improvements by the optimization
are higher for the rising period and for the intermediate phase
(0.3  t  0.8 ms).
To synthesize, it is clear that the optimized model outperforms
the theoretical one with constant parameter values.
Fig. 5 Boxplots of the parameters for the DE-optimization with
(Gmax, Npop) 5 (70, 50) in the 160 MPa condition
APRIL 2016, Vol. 138 / 041001-7
 Fig. 6 Prediction of injection flow rate by different models and experimental trend (left) and
prediction error (right): (dotted line) experimental data, (dashed/dotted line) rigid body model,
(dashed line) theoretical model, and (solid line) optimized model
6 Conclusion
In this paper, an accurate model is introduced for an electro-
injector in a diesel CR engine. The injector is partitioned in sev-
eral volumes. The model takes into account not only the nonlinear
phenomena associated to the fuel flow and the pressure variation
in the volumes but also the mechanical deformation of the main
part affecting the flow section in the injection process, i.e., the
plungerneedle element.
An evolutionary strategy optimizes the parameters affecting the
injected flow rate. The optimized model is compared to a nonopti-
mized model based on constant values of the parameters obtained
by closed-form expressions. Another model, which assumes that
the plunger and needle behave as a whole rigid body, is also con-
sidered. Results show that the optimized model improves predic-
tion, as evidenced by the experimental data.
References
[1] Guzzella, L., 2009, The Automobile of the FutureOptions for Efficient Indi-
vidual Mobility, 3rd IEEE Multiconference on Systems and Control, Saint
Petersburg, Russia, July 810, pp. ii.
[2] Dyntar, D., Onder, C., and Guzzella, L., 2002, Modeling and Control of CNG
Engines, SAE Paper No. 2002-01-1295.
[3] Lino, P., Maione, B., and Amorese, C., 2008, Modeling and Predictive Control
of a New Injection System for Compressed Natural Gas Engines, Control Eng.
Pract., 16(10), pp. 12161230.
[4] Yan, F., Chen, S., Zeng, X., Zhao, J., and Wang, J., 2013, Modeling and Anal-
ysis of Fuel Injection Split for Diesel Engine Active Fueling Control, ASME J.
Dyn. Syst., Meas., Control, 135(6), p. 061016.
[5] Lino, P., and Maione, G., 2013, Design and Simulation of Fractional-Order
Controllers of Injection in CNG Engines, 7th IFAC Symposium on Advances
in Automotive Control (AAC 2013), Tokyo, Sept. 49, pp. 582587.
[6] Lino, P., and Maione, G., 2003, Fractional Order Control of the Injection Sys-
tem in a CNG Engine, 12th European Control Conference (ECC 2013), Zurich,
Switzerland, July 1719, pp. 39974002.
[7] Lino, P., and Maione, G., 2014, Switching Fractional-Order Controllers of
Common Rail Pressure in Compressed Natural Gas Engines, 19th IFAC World
Congress, Cape Town, South Africa, Aug. 2529, pp. 29152920.
041001-8 / Vol. 138, APRIL 2016
Downloaded From: http://dynamicsystems.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/journals/jdsmaa/934983/ on 03/22/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/a
[8] Saponaro, F., Lino, P., and Maione, G., 2014, A Dynamical Model of
Electro-Injectors for Common Rail Diesel Engines, 22nd Mediterranean
Conference on Control and Automation (MED), Palermo, Italy, June
1619, pp. 207211.
[9] Lino, P., Maione, G., and Saponaro, F., 2015, Fractional-Order Modeling of
High-Pressure Fluid-Dynamic Flows: An Automotive Application, 8th Vienna
International Conference on Mathematical Modelling, Vienna, Austria, Feb.
1820, pp. 386391.
[10] Dongiovanni, C., and Coppo, M., 2010, Accurate Modeling of an Injector for
Common Rail Systems, Fuel Injection, D. Siano, ed., Sciyo (HRV), Rejeka,
pp. 95119.
[11] Lino, P., Maione, G., Saponaro, F., and Li, K., 2014, Evolutionary Parameter
Optimization of Electro-Injector Models for Common Rail Diesel Engines,
Intelligent Computing in Smart Grid and Electrical Vehicles (Communications
in Computer and Information Science, Vol. 463), K. Li, Y. Xue, S. Cui, and Q.
Niu, eds., Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp. 539551.
[12] Lino, P., Maione, B., and Rizzo, A., 2005, A Control-Oriented Model of a
Common Rail Injection System for Diesel Engines, 10th IEEE Conference on
Emerging Technologies and Factory Automation (ETFA 2005), Catania, Italy,
Sept. 1922, Vol. 1, pp. 557563.
[13] Streeter, V., Wylie, K., and Bedford, E., 1988, Fluid Mechanics, 9th ed.,
McGraw-Hill, New York.
[14] Dellino, G., Lino, P., Meloni, C., and Rizzo, A., 2007, Enhanced Evolutionary
Algorithms for Multidisciplinary Design Optimization: A Control Engineering
Perspective, Hybrid Evolutionary Algorithms (Studies in Computational Intel-
ligence, Vol. 79), C. Grosan, A. Abraham, and H. Ishibuchi, eds., Springer, Hei-
delberg, pp. 3976.
[15] Storn, R., and Price, K., 1997, Differential Evolution: A Simple and Efficient
Heuristic for Global Optimization Over Continuous Spaces, J. Global Optim.,
11(4), pp. 341359.
[16] Vesterstrm, J., and Thomsen, R., 2004, A Comparative Study of Differ-
ential Evolution, Particle Swarm Optimization, and Evolutionary Algo-
rithms on Numerical Benchmark Problems, Congress on Evolutionary
Computation (CEC2004), Portland, OR, June 1923, Vol. 2, pp.
19801987.
[17] Price, K., Storn, R., and Lampinen, J., 2005, Differential EvolutionA Practi-
cal Approach to Global Optimization, Springer, Berlin.
[18] Das, S., Konar, A., and Chakraborty, U., 2005, Two Improved Differential
Evolution Schemes for Faster Global Search, 7th Annual Conference on
Genetic and Evolutionary Computation, H. Beyer, ed., Washington, DC, June
2529, ACM-SIGEVO, pp. 991998.
[19] Chakraborty, U., 2008, Advances in Differential Evolution, Springer-Verlag,
Berlin.
Transactions of the ASME