© All Rights Reserved

0 vistas

2009-01-0951closed loop pressure control.pdf

© All Rights Reserved

- Chap 15 Marlin 2002
- PID Controller Implementation Using Arduino _ Microcontrollers Lab
- Basic Concepts of Control System
- Fbs Loopsyn 16Nov16
- Control de Escoraje
- Self-Adaptive Control Systems
- chap7-130810220946-phpapp01
- control system
- Ziegler-Nichols Closed-Loop Tuning Method _ Control Notes.pdf
- Linear Feedback Controller for D-statcom in Dpg Fault
- Anti Windup
- Dvantages and Disadvantages of System With Feedback
- Chapter 15
- Advanced control theory presentation
- 8 Cascade and Ff
- 4.1-Fundamental_type of controller.pdf
- anti pid windup
- CL7201-Process Dynamics and Control
- Feedforward Feedback Control System IEEE
- P&ID-Seminar.pptx

Está en la página 1de 10

for an Automatic Transmission

Delphi Corporation

General Motors Corporation

Copyright © 2009 SAE International

accurate and robust pressure control system by applying

This paper presents the development of a transmission closed loop controls technology. The system includes a

closed loop pressure control system. The objective of hydraulic module with pressure control solenoids,

this system is to improve transmission pressure control pressure sensors, and a production intent transmission

accuracy by employing closed-loop technology. The control module. This control strategy uses both feed

control system design includes both feed forward and forward and feedback controls. The feed forward control

feedback control. The feed forward control algorithm algorithm does large and slow adjustments of the future

continuously learns solenoid P-I characteristics. The baseline, based on past and current data. The closed

closed loop feedback control has a conventional PID loop feedback control algorithm does fast fine-tune

control with multi-level gain selections for each control control in real time. These two algorithms compliment

channel, as well as different operating points. To further each other to deliver accurate pressure controls over a

improve the system performance, Robust Optimization is wide range of operating conditions.

carried out to determine the optimal set of control

parameters and controller hardware design factors. The The control algorithm is developed by using

optimized design is verified via an L18 experiment on Matlab/Simulink/Stateflow and run in a dSPACE

spin dynamometer. The design is also tested on vehicle. AutoBox. The algorithm is tested on actual transmission

hardware on a spin dynamometer. To further improve

INTRODUCTION the system performance, a Robust Optimization study is

carried out. The optimized system is installed in a test

Current production transmission control utilizes open- vehicle.

loop control of solenoid pressure, which requires

investment in hardware characterization and testing. This paper describes the details of the system setup,

This initial characterization provides good initial pressure control strategy development, dynamometer and vehicle

control quality under normal conditions. However, after testing results, as well as proposed future improvements

the product goes into market, there is no compensation for the control system.

for any variations of the desired pressure that may be

caused by factors like part-to-part variation, temperature, SYSTEM CONFIGURATION

transmission fluid quality, system interaction, or system

degradation over time. The alternative to achieve better The configuration of closed pressure control system is

pressure control is to add pressure sensors to the shown in Figure 1, which consists of a Transmission

system and employ closed loop control technology to Control Module (TCM), pressure control solenoids, and

improve overall pressure control accuracy. pressure sensors. In this development system, a

dSPACE rapid algorithm development unit is used in

conjunction with a TCM for the control system design.

The Engineering Meetings Board has approved this paper for publication. It has successfully completed SAE’s peer review process under the supervision of the

session organizer. This process requires a minimum of three (3) reviews by industry experts.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic,

mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of SAE.

ISSN 0148-7191

Positions and opinions advanced in this paper are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE. The author is solely responsible for the content of

the paper.

SAE Customer Service: Tel: 877-606-7323 (inside USA and Canada)

Tel: 724-776-4970 (outside USA)

Fax: 724-776-0790

Email: CustomerService@sae.org

SAE Web Address: http://www.sae.org *9-2009-01-0951*

Printed in USA

The TCM sends out pressure command for the solenoid This system is installed in a production transmission,

output pressure. The closed loop pressure control and tested on a transmission spin dynamometer. The

system calculates required solenoid current based on spin dynamometer is controlled by the dSPACE unit.

pressure command, pressure sensor feedback, and The spin dynamometer is capable of hot testing. For

operating conditions. cold testing, the spin dynamometer is rolled into a cold

box.

TCM

Supply

Pressure

Analog to Digital

Conditioning

Conversion

Signal

PSup

Pressure

Sensor

Pressure

Interface

Sensor

iS

Solenoid Driver

PSolAct

Circuit

SPI

To Control Valve

Sense

Resistor

Figure 2 shows the closed loop control block diagram. In As shown in Figure 2, the control system design uses

this design, both feed forward and feedback control are both feed forward and feedback control. Feedforward

employed in the design. The solenoid pressure control employs an innovative real-time learning scheme

command is sent by the TCU. The feed forward to adjust solenoid P-I characteristics for all operating

control algorithm dynamically learns the open loop map conditions. This real-time feed forward learning

lookup for pressure-current (P-I) curves. i_sol_OL is the algorithm works seamlessly with the closed-loop control

open loop solenoid control current. i_sol_CL is the algorithm to achieve the desired tracking performance.

closed loop solenoid control current. The closed loop The feed forward algorithm works by observing both the

controller provides the closed loop current adjustments. output solenoid current commanded after the effects of

The current controller delivers the current commanded feedback control, and the resulting pressure as observed

by the closed loop controls. Pressure sensor 1 through the same sensors that are used for feedback

measures the actuator feed pressure, and pressure control. Whenever both of these values stand still long

sensor 2 measures the solenoid output pressure. enough for transient effects to decay, the feed forward

records the pressure and current values as an observed

point in a P-I curve graph.

Pressure

Sensor

Solenoid

Output

Pressure

Pressure

Command Feed forward i_sol OL Current Transmission

Solenoid

Control (open loop) + Controller Solenoid

+

i_sol_CL

Controller

+ - Pressure

Sensor

enough for transient effects to decay, the feed forward own PID controller with multi-level controller gain

records the pressure and current values as an observed selections, which allows greater flexibility for controller

point in a P-I curve graph. tuning. Due to the complex nature of the system and

proprietary customer design information, base PID

The feed forward control can also distinguish between control gain tunings are carried out on transmission spin

points observed during times of rising pressure versus dynamometer. In addition to the conventional PID

points observed during times of falling pressure. When controller design, robust optimization technique is

it has enough points of each type, it uses simple utilized to select the optimal set of controller hardware

statistical analysis to understand the hysteresis in that and control algorithm calibrations. This is explained in

region of the P-I curve. The algorithm then attempts to more detail in the next session.

determine the center of the solenoid’s hysteresis curve.

This portion of the feed forward algorithm can assist the ROBUST OPTIMIZATION

feedback control with compensation for hysteresis,

although the feedback portion of the algorithm retains For this project, robust optimization techniques, as

primary responsibility for hysteresis. developed by Genichi Taguchi, are used to determine

the optimal settings for the select controller and system

When the feed forward learning algorithm has observed design parameters. The optimal settings of control

enough points in any given current range, it adjusts the factors will result in the design which comes closest to

pressure in that range to match the observed pressures achieving the “ideal” function for the closed loop

after accounting for any hysteretic effects it can observe. pressure regulation system, which is: Pactual=Pcommanded,

Figure 3 illustrates the adjustment of P-I curves. The as shown in Figure 4.

rate of this adjustment is capped to a maximum

adjustment rate, because an abrupt change could IDEAL FUNCTION

disrupt the feedback control. The newly adjusted P-I

curve becomes the baseline for feedback control going Pa: actual pressure

forward, as the system also continues to observe new Pc: commanded pressure

pressures and currents which will be used for the next

adjustment.

Pa

β=1

Pc

Observed Points

Figure 4: Dynamic Ideal Function

CONTROL FACTORS

Initial P-I curve considered for the robust design study.

Present Commanded

Point

Control Factors Levels

1. KI Gain Calibration 2

2. KP Gain Calibration 3

3. Feed Forward 2

Enabled

Figure 3: Illustration of Feed Forward Learning 4. Sensor Type 2

Algorithm 5. Algorithm Factor 1 3

6. Algorithm Factor 2 3

7. Controller Factor 1 2

FEEDBACK CONTROLLER DESIGN 8. Controller Factor 2 3

control structure. Each pressure control channel has its

An L18 experimental array is selected based on the variance minimally affected by temperature or speed.

number of factors and levels chosen for evaluation. Based on this observation, the L18 experiment is

performed at the most convenient temperature and

NOISE ASSESSMENT speed, and the feed forward parameter is enabled for all

18 runs. Figure 7 and Figure 8 show the noise test

Table 2 lists of noise factors that are initially considered results with feed forward enabled.

for the study.

Variance Plotted by Gear State - Rising - Open Loop

Table 2: List of Potential Noise Factors

Noise Factors

Ve (kPa^2)

1. Supply Pressure Low Temp

2. Temperature High Temp

3. Transmission Input Speed

4. Solenoid Pressure Command

Direction

Speed

Speed

Speed

Speed

Speed

Speed

Speed

Speed

High

High

High

High

Low

Low

Low

Low

5. Run-to-Run Variation

6. Aged Fluid Gear State Gear State Gear State Gear State

7. Aged Transmission Hardware 1 2 3 4

(sensors, clutches, etc)

Figure 5: Noise Test, Rising Pressure, Open Loop

To reduce the scope of the project, temperature and

transmission input speed are chosen as the primary

noise factors. The solenoid pressure command direction Variance Plotted by Gear State - Falling - Open Loop

is also included as this information can be derived from

the test profile. To further reduce the test effort,

temperature and transmission input speed can be

Ve (kPa^2)

from the transmission control hardware. A full factorial High Temp

test between temperature and speed is performed to

determine how to combine the noise factors. Table 3

shows the noise assessment test plan. Since a control

Speed

Speed

Speed

Speed

Speed

Speed

Speed

Speed

High

High

High

High

Low

Low

Low

Low

system, by design, will eliminate any pressure offsets,

variance is used to assess the noise strategy. Gear State Gear State Gear State Gear State

1 2 3 4

Table 3: Noise Assessment Test Plan

Figure 6: Noise Test, Falling Pressure, Open Loop

Low Speed High Speed

Gear State 1 Gear State 1

Low Gear State 2 Gear State 2

Temp Gear State 3 Gear State 3 Variance Plotted by Gear State - Rising

Gear State 4 Gear State 4 Feed Forward Enabled

Gear State 1 Gear State 1

High Gear State 2 Gear State 2

Ve (kPa^2)

Gear State 4 Gear State 4

High Temp

loop system, with the following results. A combination of

Speed

Speed

Speed

Speed

Speed

Speed

Speed

Speed

High

High

High

High

Low

Low

Low

Low

amount of variance in the measured pressure. A Gear State Gear State Gear State Gear State

combination of high speed and high temperature results 1 2 3 4

in the smallest amount of variance. At cold temperature

pressure variance is not significantly affected by input Figure 7: Noise Test, Rising Pressure, Feed Forward

speed. Pressure variance at cold temperature is similar Enabled

to the variance observed during high temperature and

high speed. Figure 5 and Figure 6 show the noise test

results with open loop.

forward portion of the algorithm activated to determine

its impact. The result of this study shows that pressure

Variance Plotted by Gear State - Falling

The outer array consists of pressure measurements

Feed Forward Enabled from the last three cycles of the test profile, with the

measurements in the rising direction (“U”) separated

from the measurements in the falling direction (“D”). The

pressure measurements are then used to calculate the

Ve (kPa^2)

Low Temp

signal-to-noise ratio (S/N Ratio). Figure 11 shows the

High Temp

L18 summary for Gear State 4. Figure 12 and Figure

13 show the response plots from cycle 5 of Gear State

4.

Speed

Speed

Speed

Speed

Speed

Speed

Speed

Speed

High

High

High

High

Low

Low

Low

Low

Pressure

Gear State Gear State Gear State Gear State

1 2 3 4

Algorthim Calibration 1

Algorithm Calibration 2

Feed Forward Enabled

Controller Factor 1

Controller Factor 2

Figure 8: Noise Test, Falling Pressure, Feed

Forward Enabled

K-P Table

K-I Table

Cycle 3

Cycle 4

Cycle 5

P-DIAGRAM

Run A B C D E F G H U D U D U D

Figure 9 shows the final P-diagram after the noise 1 1 1 Y 1 1 1 1 1

assessment experiments are complete. The only noise 2 1 1 Y 2 2 2 2 2

factor that is considered is solenoid pressure command 3 1 1 Y 2 3 3 1 3

4 1 2 Y 1 2 2 1 3

direction since the test temperature and transmission 5 1 2 Y 2 3 3 1 1

input speed are fixed. 6 1 2 Y 2 1 1 2 2

7 1 3 Y 2 1 3 2 3

8 1 3 Y 2 2 1 1 1

9 1 3 Y 1 3 2 1 2

Control Factors 10 2 1 Y 2 3 2 2 1

K-I Gain Level 11 2 1 Y 1 1 3 1 2

K-P Gain Level 12 2 1 Y 2 2 1 1 3

Sensor Type 13 2 2 Y 2 3 1 1 2

Algorithm Calibration Factor 1 14 2 2 Y 2 1 2 1 3

Algorithm Calibration Factor 2 15 2 2 Y 1 2 3 2 1

Controller Factor 1

16 2 3 Y 2 2 3 1 2

Controller Factor 2

17 2 3 Y 1 3 1 2 3

18 2 3 Y 2 1 2 1 1

Desired Actual

Convert pressure command Pressure, Y

Figure 10: L18 Experimental Layout

Pressure, M

into pressure at solenoid

valve. ROBUST EXPERIMENT RESULTS

Noise Factors

1. Solenoid pressure command direction (Up and

From the response plots of S/N shown in Figure 12, the

Down) best performing combination of factor levels for Gear

State 4 will be A2, B3, D2, E1, F2, and H2. For factor G,

there is a conflict between the results from the rising

Figure 9: P-Diagram after Noise Experiments pressure direction and the falling pressure direction.

Since the impact is small for both directions, the optimal

EXPERIMENT LAYOUT choice can be decided based on considerations such as

cost or design simplicity.

Figure 10 shows the L18 experimental layout for one

gear state. The layouts for each of the four gear states The response plots of are shown in Figure 13. The

are identical. The inner array consists of Columns A-H. results show that the closed loop pressure control

Also shown in the figure is the number of levels system achieves the commanded pressure regardless of

assigned to each factor. As previous discussed, Column the factor level choice. It is interesting to note that

C – Feed Forward Enabled, is fixed at “Y” (Yes). response plots show the effect of hysteresis.

S/N

Algorithm Calibration 1

Algorithm Calibration 2

Feedforward Enabled

Controller Factor 1

Controller Factor 2

Sensor Type

K-P Table

K-I Table

Cycle 3

Cycle 3

Cycle 4

Cycle 4

Cycle 5

Cycle 5

Run A B C D E F G H U D U D U D

1 1 1 Y 1 1 1 1 1 -23.17 -23.34 -23.04 -23.39 -23.29 -23.69

2 1 1 Y 2 2 2 2 2 -24.20 -22.58 -23.32 -21.99 -23.39 -21.98

3 1 1 Y 2 3 3 1 3 -24.68 -23.05 -24.76 -22.75 -25.33 -23.79

4 1 2 Y 1 2 2 1 3 -22.71 -24.49 -22.28 -24.08 -22.26 -24.17

5 1 2 Y 2 3 3 1 1 -22.40 -22.57 -22.56 -22.23 -22.63 -22.22

6 1 2 Y 2 1 1 2 2 -22.60 -21.44 -23.36 -22.02 -22.40 -21.44

7 1 3 Y 2 1 3 2 3 -21.82 -21.81 -21.85 -21.51 -21.65 -21.78

8 1 3 Y 2 2 1 1 1 -21.90 -21.31 -21.37 -20.96 -21.72 -21.13

9 1 3 Y 1 3 2 1 2 -21.97 -21.11 -21.96 -21.32 -22.10 -21.32

10 2 1 Y 2 3 2 2 1 -22.07 -22.19 -22.18 -22.25 -22.18 -22.19

11 2 1 Y 1 1 3 1 2 -21.78 -22.63 -21.32 -22.73 -21.83 -22.17

12 2 1 Y 2 2 1 1 3 -21.75 -23.43 -22.42 -22.58 -23.65 -23.53

13 2 2 Y 2 3 1 1 2 -21.02 -21.68 -21.42 -22.04 -21.42 -22.26

14 2 2 Y 2 1 2 1 3 -22.14 -21.10 -22.19 -21.35 -22.33 -20.82

15 2 2 Y 1 2 3 2 1 -23.17 -21.55 -21.68 -21.89 -23.24 -22.31

16 2 3 Y 2 2 3 1 2 -21.11 -20.66 -21.15 -21.18 -21.08 -21.06

17 2 3 Y 1 3 1 2 3 -22.18 -21.37 -21.79 -21.43 -21.95 -21.93

18 2 3 Y 2 1 2 1 1 -20.81 -20.80 -21.05 -20.56 -20.88 -20.82

-20

B1

B2

B3

D1

D2

E1

E2

E3

F1

F2

F3

G1

G2

H1

H2

H3

A1

A2

-21

S/N

-22

-23

-24

-20

B1

B2

B3

D1

D2

E1

E2

E3

F1

F2

F3

G1

G2

H1

H2

H3

A1

A2

-21

S/N

-22

-23

-24

- Rising Dire ction

1.10

1.05

S/N

1.00

0.95

0.90

B1

B2

B3

D1

D2

E1

E2

E3

F1

F2

F3

G1

G2

H1

H2

H3

A1

A2

- Falling Dire ction

1.1

1.1

S/N

1.0

1.0

0.9 B1

B2

B3

D1

D2

E1

E2

E3

F1

F2

F3

G1

G2

H1

H2

H3

A1

A2

CONFIRMATION RESULTS Figure 14 shows the partial step test results for open

loop system, the “worst” closed loop system and the

Table 4 shows the results of confirmation testing for all optimal closed loop system. The “worst” closed loop

four gear states. Baseline in this case is the system here refers to the worst case of closed loop test

combination of factors that results the most economical case based on robust experiment. It is still a valid closed

system in terms of both cost and process efficiency. It loop design. The comparison clearly shows the closed

should be noted that not all of the gear states show loop system delivers much better performance in terms

equal levels of predictability. Part of the reason is the of tracking accuracy. The optimal closed loop design

placement choice of some of the pressure sensors. gives the best overall tracking performance.

State 1 A B D E F G H Predicted Actual Diff Predicted Actual Diff

Optimal 2 2 2 1 3 1 1 -16.57 -19.29 2.72 -15.75 -18.56 2.80

Baseline 2 2 2 3 1 2 3 -21.74 -20.78 -0.95 -20.22 -20.21 -0.01

Worst 1 3 1 3 1 2 3 -26.43 -21.69 -4.74 -25.35 -20.94 -4.40

State 2 A B D E F G H Predicted Actual Diff Predicted Actual Diff

Optimal 2 3 2 1 1 1 1 -16.52 -16.64 0.11 -16.57 -17.00 0.43

Baseline 2 3 2 3 1 2 3 -18.86 -18.80 -0.06 -18.47 -18.24 -0.23

Worst 1 1 1 3 1 2 3 -21.41 -21.00 -0.40 -20.45 -20.17 -0.28

State 3 A B D E F G H Predicted Actual Diff Predicted Actual Diff

Optimal 2 2 2 1 3 1 1 -17.85 -17.97 0.12 -17.35 -18.76 1.41

Baseline 2 2 2 3 1 2 3 -19.72 -21.43 1.71 -21.05 -21.39 0.34

Worst 1 1 1 3 1 2 3 -23.38 -22.12 -1.26 -24.00 -22.27 -1.72

State 4 A B D E F G H Predicted Actual Diff Predicted Actual Diff

Optimal 2 3 2 1 3 1 1 -20.96 -21.28 0.32 -20.61 -21.21 0.60

Baseline 2 3 2 3 1 2 3 -21.90 -21.85 -0.06 -21.51 -21.86 0.35

Worst 1 1 1 3 1 2 3 -24.37 -23.86 -0.51 -24.23 -22.89 -1.34

Figure 14: Test Result Comparison

Figure 15 shows the comparison of pressure tracking shown in the figure, open loop system has the biggest

errors for open loop, feed forward control only and tracking error as expected. The feed forward control

closed loop system. The figure shows results from alone brings the tracking error to a much smaller and

multiple cycles. Figure 15(a) and 15(b) show the error consistent levels. The closed loop control system

comparison for the rising and falling directions delivers the best performance, i.e. the smallest tracking

respectively. Open loop error has different levels, which errors.

represent the errors for different command levels. As

.

250

225

200

175

150

Error - KPa

125

100

75

50

CLOSED LOOP FF Only OPEN LOOP

25

-25

-50

yc 10

yc 11

2

yc 13

yc 14

15

yc 10

yc 11

yc 12

3

yc 14

15

0

yc 11

yc 12

3

yc 14

15

yc 1

yc 2

yc 3

yc 4

yc 5

yc 6

yc 7

C cle 8

9

yc 1

yc 2

yc 3

yc 4

yc 5

yc 6

yc 7

C ycl 8

C le 9

yc 1

yc 2

yc 3

yc 4

yc 5

yc 6

yc 7

y 8

C le 9

yc 1

yc 1

yc 1

yc 1

C le

C le

C le

C le

C le

C le

C le

C le

C le

C le

C le

C le

C le

C le

C le

C le

yc e

C le

C le

C le

C le

C le

C le

C le

C le

C cle

C le

C le

C le

C le

C le

le

C le

C le

C le

C le

le

C le

C le

C le

C le

le

yc

yc

yc

y

yc

yc

C

(a)

Solenoid 2 Error - Falling

250

225

200

175

150

Error - KPa

125

100

75

CLOSED LOOP FF Only

50

OPEN LOOP

25

0

-25

-50

yc 10

yc 11

2

yc 13

yc 14

15

yc 10

yc 11

yc 12

3

yc 14

15

0

yc 11

yc 12

3

yc 14

15

yc 1

yc 2

yc 3

yc 4

yc 5

yc 6

yc 7

C cle 8

9

yc 1

yc 2

yc 3

yc 4

yc 5

yc 6

yc 7

C ycl 8

C le 9

yc 1

yc 2

yc 3

yc 4

yc 5

yc 6

yc 7

y 8

C le 9

yc 1

yc 1

yc 1

yc 1

C le

C le

C le

C le

C le

C le

C le

C le

C le

C le

C le

yc e

C le

C le

C le

C le

C le

C cle

C le

C le

C le

C le

C le

C le

C le

C le

C le

C le

C le

C le

C le

le

C le

C le

C le

C le

le

C le

C e

C le

C le

le

yc

yc

yc

l

y

yc

yc

C

C

(b)

Figure 15: Tracking Error Comparison for Closed Loop, Feed Forward Control Only and Open Loop Systems

The closed loop pressure control system is installed in a commanded pressures closely. Figure 17 shows the

test vehicle. Figure 16 shows the closed loop pressure pressure tracking results during high throttle upshifts and

tracking during 1-2-3 low to medium throttle upshifts. As downshifts. As shown in the figure, the actual pressure

shown in the figure, both oncoming and offgoing clutch tracks the commanded pressure throughout the whole

solenoid pressures follow their corresponding range.

1->2 shift

2->3 shift

Figure 16: DPRS Vehicle Test Result: 1-2 and 2-3 Upshifts (Low-Medium Throttle)

Figure 17: Vehicle Test Result: Upshift (High Throttle) and Downshifts

CONCLUSION REFERENCES

A closed loop pressure control system is developed for 1. American Supplier Institute, “Robust Engineering”,

an automatic transmission. The control system design Workshop Manuals, 2001

employs both feed forward and feedback controls. The

dynamic feed forward learning algorithm runs real time CONTACT

and adjusts the solenoid P-I characteristics based on the

learning results. The closed loop algorithm and dynamic Quan Zheng is a Staff Research Engineer in Delphi

feed forward learning algorithm run seamlessly to Powertrain Systems. Quan can be reached at:

provide accurate tracking performance. quan.zheng@delphi.com.

One contribution of this work is to apply Robust Jeremy Kraenzlein is an Electrical System Engineer in

Optimization techniques to optimize controller hardware Delphi Electronics and Safety. Jeremy can be reached

and calibration selections. The optimized design is at: Jeremy.J.Kraenzlein@delphi.com.

confirmed by L18 robust experiment carried out on spin

dynamometer. Finally, the optimized design is tested in Eunjoo Hopkins is a Staff Research Engineer in Delphi

vehicle. Powertrain Systems. Eunjoo can be reached at:

eunjoo.c.hopkins@delphi.com.

This paper presented the complete design process of

the closed loop pressure control system. Future Robert (Bob) Moses is a GM Technical Fellow and

development includes the fine tuning of the designed engineering group manager for the Advanced Power

system and making it production ready. Transfer group of General Motors Powertrain. Bob can

be reached at: robert.l.moses@gm.com.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Bret Olson is a Transmission Controls Engineer for the

The authors wish to acknowledge the support of our Advanced Power Transfer group of General Motors

management and our many project team members. In Powertrain. Bret can be reached at bret.olson@gm.com.

particular, we would like to thank Lee Nunn and Wade

Roller for build support of test dynamometer and vehicle.

We would also like to thank Randall Dlugoss from

General Motors for vehicle implementation support.

- Chap 15 Marlin 2002Cargado porAudrey Patrick Kalla
- PID Controller Implementation Using Arduino _ Microcontrollers LabCargado porMuhammad Rizwan
- Basic Concepts of Control SystemCargado porSarthak Bansal
- Fbs Loopsyn 16Nov16Cargado porsanjay
- Self-Adaptive Control SystemsCargado porsdnv529
- chap7-130810220946-phpapp01Cargado porHafeezAbdullah
- control systemCargado porIgho Silva
- Ziegler-Nichols Closed-Loop Tuning Method _ Control Notes.pdfCargado porDragan
- Control de EscorajeCargado porIcaro.Redwarrior
- Linear Feedback Controller for D-statcom in Dpg FaultCargado porsandeep_jec
- Anti WindupCargado porPhilip Cardona
- Dvantages and Disadvantages of System With FeedbackCargado porMariel Mae A. Maculbe
- Chapter 15Cargado porJoy Prokash Roy
- Advanced control theory presentationCargado porJustin Jose P
- 8 Cascade and FfCargado porruhul_mukut
- 4.1-Fundamental_type of controller.pdfCargado pormohdaizadahmad
- anti pid windupCargado porgirijashankar
- CL7201-Process Dynamics and ControlCargado porPushpa Raj
- Feedforward Feedback Control System IEEECargado porJIGNASHA
- P&ID-Seminar.pptxCargado poralejandro inostroza
- UntitledCargado portomalforex
- ControlOfCraneUCIIIMadridCargado porNabontana Yeo
- Lab Report 6Cargado porjaskaran singh chauhan
- Eeiol 2006jan02 Ems Eda TaCargado porRazman Ramedan
- MGT162-C7.pptCargado porjoebloggs1888
- 0060Cargado porAleksandar Micic
- Tuning Process Controllers Starts in ManualCargado porsteve davies
- ijesv1n4_2Cargado pormadanesher
- Panagopoulos Et Al-2000-International Journal of Robust and Nonlinear ControlCargado porSoumyadeep Bose
- Ijirt101940 PaperCargado porArtyom Freeman

- Wingle Engine ServicemanualCargado porJoch Caso Alvariño
- AW40 DIAG.pdfCargado porcherokewag
- Kia Air Conditioning DiagnosisCargado porIslam Actros
- Air Conditioning Diagnosis Service and Repair V2Cargado porbrizmar07
- Официальное руководство по ремонту АКПП ZF 4HP20Cargado poricechieff
- 6HP26 ZF Transmissions With MechatronicsCargado porSalman Eid
- GM-6L50-80-90Cargado porTony Holmes
- GEARS MAGAZINE JANUARY FEBRUARY.pdfCargado porcherokewag
- 288737376-ZF8HP-Rebuild.pdfCargado porRalph Wamae
- FORD MEGAZINE.pdfCargado porcherokewag
- LUBE GUARDCargado pordavid
- GREAT-WALL-STEED-BROCHURE.pdfCargado porcherokewag
- On Target (2019 - Vol. 1) Diagnostic FordCargado porcherokewag
- TD201404 ABRIL.pdfCargado porcherokewag
- 2009_ JANUA FEBRU.pdfCargado porcherokewag
- Gears May 2017Cargado porRodger Bland
- JANUARY FEBRUARI BUYERS GUIDE.pdfCargado porcherokewag
- AcrónimosCargado porAngel Corro Lemm
- Guia de PreparacionCargado porLalo Barajas Garcia
- 2006 ATRA Seminar ManualCargado porcherokewag
- ATRA Seminar Manual 2006.pdfCargado porWissem Ratel
- THE RULES OF PARALLEL CIRCUITSCargado porcherokewag
- 1997_07_Motor_Mastering_Complex_WiringCargado porAmar Boodoosingh
- 50-42LE ATSGCargado porcherokewag
- Vista Explodida 09GCargado porJulie Brown
- How Automatic Transmissions WorksCargado porKommula Narayana Swamy
- Automatic TransmissionCargado porIgorruzic7

- Eurotherm 2132i Manual PDFCargado porJoe
- Identification and Optimization of Pi Parameters Based on Genetic Algorithm for Non Linear System Using MatlabCargado porjagateesan
- Ddec IV Can Bus j1587 j1922 j1939Cargado portyler
- surge control iCargado porihllhm
- 2Cargado porGalahad666
- DCS Control Workshop 2002Cargado pornaeemfaysal
- prezentare_termoregulator_toho-ttm-j4.pdfCargado porverde24
- DCS1Cargado porrenudid
- M1191Cargado porRichard Jia
- NI Tutorial 14624 EnCargado porsksiddique
- VFD TutorialCargado porDaniel Taiti Kimathi
- Air Pressure Process Control Lab ManualCargado porFaris Putera
- Lecture 9-Process Control& SimulationCargado porLionel Yde
- 1-4 Steam Temperature LeafletCargado porsdiaman
- TUTOCargado porCirilo Armando Solano Pineda
- Danfoss 131B0312 Programming Guide.pdfCargado porAnonymous oEoCVNhu7H
- Norman S. Nise EstabilidadCargado porLuffy Trafalgar
- Altivar 71Cargado porNitu Nicolae
- Incheon Regas.pdfCargado pordhanta_1412
- ChlorinatorCargado porSreenubabu Kandru
- Closed Loop Speed Control of a BLDC Motor Drive Using Adaptive Fuzzy Tuned PI ControllerCargado porAnonymous 7VPPkWS8O
- LEXE7567-02 Island Mode.pdfCargado porvoivod6
- CPB30004 Process Dynamics and Control Experiment 2: Liquid flow ratio process control lab reportCargado porSiti Hajar Mohamed
- Project PaperCargado porShastel Paramsooksingh
- Teaching PID and Fuzzy Controllers with LabViewCargado porAnand Raj
- LabVIEW Lab ManualCargado porBhawani Singh
- Centum VP 6 ENG Project_GlobalCargado porNikhilesh Muraleedharan
- Damping Subsynchronous Resonance Oscillations Using a Dynamic Switched FilterCargado porSai Pawan Nandigama
- Telstra 007 Doc CurrentCargado porsparky224666
- 10-1 PUMP CALIBRATION 390MJ ~ 950MJ.PDFCargado porGREGWEILER