MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2319718675 · doi:10.4271/2016-01-0088

Enhanced Injector Dead Time Compensation by Current Feedback

2016· article· en· W2319718675 on OpenAlexaff
Tervin Tan, Jin Seo Park, Patrick Leteinturier

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReal-time simulation and control systems
Canadian institutionsInfineon Technologies (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurrent (fluid)Compensation (psychology)InjectorControl theory (sociology)Dead timeComputer scienceElectrical engineeringPhysicsEngineeringControl (management)Artificial intelligenceMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The constant motivation for lower fuel consumption and emission levels has always been in the minds of most auto makers. Therefore, it is important to have precise control of the fuel being delivered into the engine. Gasoline Port fuel injection has been a matured system for many years and cars sold in emerging markets still favor such system due to its less system complexity and cost. This paper will explain injection control strategy of today during development, and especially the injector dead-time compensation strategy in detail and how further improvements could still be made. The injector current profile behavior will be discussed, and with the use of minimum hardware electronics, this paper will show the way for a new compensation strategy to be adopted. In conclusion, this compensation strategy would show how fuel mass could be accurately delivered into the cylinder, in-spite of actuator parameters (resistance/inductance) change with temperature and actuator positive terminal voltage fluctuation in the field. In other words, this helps to address production variation of injectors and their subsequent aging effect. The product of TLE8888, Infineon U-chip, used as injector driver will be used to support the discussion in this paper.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.220 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper seriesSame topicReal-time simulation and control systemsFrench-language works237,207