Real-time performance of DAE and ODE based estimators evaluated on a diesel engine

  • Erik Höckerdal
  • Erik Frisk
  • Lars ErikssonEmail author
Open Access
Research Paper


Computation and sampling time requirements for real-time implementation of observers is studied. A common procedure for state estimation and observer design is to have a system model in continuous time that is converted to sampled time with Euler forward method and then the observer is designed and implemented in sampled time in the real time system. When considering state estimation in real time control systems for production there are often limited computational resources. This becomes especially apparent when designing observers for stiff systems since the discretized implementation requires small step lengths to ensure stability. One way to reduce the computational burden, is to reduce the model stiffness by approximating the fast dynamics with instantaneous relations, transforming an ordinary differential equations (ODE) model into a differential algebraic equation (DAE) model. Performance and sampling frequency limitations for extended Kalman filter (EKF)’s based on both the original ODE model and the reduced DAE model are here analyzed and compared for an industrial system. Furthermore, the effect of using backward Euler instead of forward Euler when discretizing the continuous time model is also analyzed. The ideas are evaluated using measurement data from a diesel engine. The engine is equipped with throttle, exhaust gas recirculation (EGR), and variable geometry turbines (VGT) and the stiff model dynamics arise as a consequence of the throttle between two control volumes in the air intake system. The process of simplifying and modifying the stiff ODE model to a DAE model is also discussed. The analysis of the computational effort shows that even though the ODE, for each time-update, is less computationally demanding than the resulting DAE, an EKF based on the DAE model achieves better estimation performance than one based on the ODE with less computational effort. The main gain with the DAE based EKF is that it allows increased step lengths without degrading the estimation performance compared to the ODE based EKF.


estimation learning DAE ODE EKF observability real-time 


  1. 1.
    Lino P, Maione B, Amorese C. Modelling and predictive control of a new injection system for compressed natural gas engines. Control Eng Pract, 2008, 16: 1216–1230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    García-Nieto S, Martínez M, Blasco X, et al. Nonlinear predictive control based on local model networks for air management in diesel engines. Control Eng Pract, 2008, 16: 1399–1413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mandela R K, Rengaswamy R, Narasimhan S, et al. Recursive state estimation techniques for nonlinear differential algebraic systems. Chem Eng Sci, 2010, 65: 4548–4556CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Friedrich I, Liu C S, Oehlerking D. Coordinated EGR-rate model-based controls of turbocharged diesel engines via an intake throttle and an EGR valve. In: Proceedings of IEEE Vehicle Power and Propulsion Conference, Dearborn, 2009Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Reichhartinger M, Horn M. Application of higher order sliding-mode concepts to a throttle actuator for gasoline engines. IEEE Trans Ind Electron, 2009, 56: 3322–3329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chauvin J, Petit N, Rouchon P. Air Path Estimation on Diesel HCCI Engine. SAE Technical Paper 2006-01-1085. 2006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Müller M, Hendricks E, Sorenson S. Mean Value Modelling of Turbocharged Spark Ignition Engines. SAE Technical Paper 980784. 1998CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Eriksson L. Modeling and control of turbocharged SI and DI engines. Oil Gas Sci Technol Rev IFP, 2007, 62: 523–538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Höckerdal E, Eriksson L, Frisk E. Air mass-flow measurement and estimation in diesel engines equipped with GR and VGT. SAE Int J Passeng Cars Electron Electr Syst, 2008, 1: 393–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wahlström J, Eriksson L. Modeling of a Diesel Engine with Intake Throttle, VGT, and EGR. Linköping: Linköping University, 2010Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Höckerdal E, Frisk E, Eriksson L. Observer design and model augmentation for bias compensation with a truck engine application. Control Eng Pract, 2009, 17: 408–417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Höckerdal E, Frisk E, Eriksson L. EKF-based adaptation of look-up tables with an air mass-flow sensor application. Control Eng Pract, 2011, 19: 442–453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Brenan K E, Campbell S L, Petzold L R. Numerical solution of initial-value problems in differential-algebraic equations. Phys Rev D Part Fields, 1996, 85: 261–268zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Darouach M, Boutat-Baddas L. Observers for a class of nonlinear singular systems. IEEE Trans Autom Control, 2008, 53: 2627–2633MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Boutat D, Zheng G, Boutat-Baddas L, et al. Observers design for a class of nonlinear singular systems. In: Proceedings of the 51st Annual Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), Maui, 2012. 7407–7412Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bejarano F J, Perruquetti W, Floquet T, et al. Observation of nonlinear differential-algebraic systems with unknown inputs. IEEE Trans Autom Control, 2015, 60: 1957–1962MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Aslund J, Frisk E. An observer for non-linear differential-algebraic systems. Automica, 2006, 42: 959–965MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nikoukhah R. A new methodology for observer design and implementation. IEEE Trans Autom Control, 1998, 43: 229–234MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kidane N, Yamashita Y, Nishitani H. Observer based I/O-linearizing control of high index dae systems. In: Proceedings of American Control Conference, Denver, 2003. 3537–3542Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kalman R E. A new approach to linear filtering and prediction problems. J Basic Eng, 1960, 82: 35–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Jazwinski A H. Stochastic Processes and Filtering Theory. Cambridge: Academic Press, 1970zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Becerra V M, Roberts P D, Griffiths G W. Applying the extended Kalman filter to systems described by nonlinear differential-algebraic equations. Control Eng Pract, 2001, 9: 267–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kaprielian S R, Turi J. An observer for a nonlinear descriptor system. In: Proceedings of the 31st Conference on Decision and Control, Tucson, 1992. 975–976Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Heywood J B. Internal Combustion Engine Fundamentals. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1988Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kailath T, Sayed A H, Hassibi B. Linear Estimation. Upper Saddle River: Prentice-Hall, 2000zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Gerdin M, Schön T B, Glad T, et al. On parameter and state estimation for linear differential-algebraic equations. Automatica, 2007, 43: 416–425MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Yip E L, Sincovec R F. Solvability, controllability, and observability of continuous descriptor systems. IEEE Trans Autom Control, 1981, 26: 702–707MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Dai L. Singular Control Systems. New York: Springer, 1989CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Mehrmann V L, Stykel T. Descriptor Systems: a General Mathematical Framework for Modeling, Simulation and Control. Technical Report 292–2005, 2005zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Losse P, Mehrmann V L. Controllability and observability of second order descriptor systems. SIAM J Control Optim, 2008, 47: 1351–1379MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Lee E R, Markus L. Foundations of Optimal Control Theory. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1968zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kalman R E, Ho T C, Narendra K S. Controllability of linear dynamical systems. Control Linear Dyn Syst, 1963, 1: 189–213MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Economic Commission for Europe — Inland Transport Committee. Regulation No 49 of the Economic Commission for Europe of the United Nations (UN/ECE). Official Journal of the European Union, 2010.
  34. 34.
    Wahlström J, Eriksson L, Nielsen L. EGR-VGT control and tuning for pumping work minimization and emission control. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol, 2010, 18: 993–1003CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (, which permits use, duplication, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Scania CV ABSödertäljeSweden
  2. 2.Vehicular SystemsLinköping UniversityLinköpingSweden

Personalised recommendations