Fuel Pump speed control

Fuel Pump speed control

Author
Discussion

Steve_D

Original Poster:

13,749 posts

258 months

Monday 24th January 2011
quotequote all
Coming along nicely...glad I asked now.

Steve

andygtt

8,345 posts

264 months

Tuesday 25th January 2011
quotequote all
looking very good indeed

anonymous-user

54 months

Thursday 27th January 2011
quotequote all
How useful would an entirely automatic and calibration free(see note) fuel pump control system be?

If you placed a fuel flow sensor in the return line from the pressure regulator, such as:

http://www.flowmeters.co.uk/pdf/turbine_meters/900...

Then the system could be entirely closed loop and self calibrating, it would just aim to always maintain a small amount of return flow (as measured by the flow meter). As the engine used more fuel, the return flow would reduce, and the system would automaticaly add extra pump speed to return to the targeted amount of return flow.

Luckily the PCB i have designed can easily interface with a hall effect flow sensor !


(Note: the only calibration might be some fine tuning of the PID values to get perfect control of flow rate, but i most cases a pesimistic system that always kept a certain minimum flow (i.e. you don't care in the short term if you get a little more return flow) would probably be possible with a std set of control terms)

stevieturbo

17,268 posts

247 months

Thursday 27th January 2011
quotequote all
Sounds like a reasonable plan. It would require the fitment of an FPR again though.

Might also simplify plumbing for people who for example wanted to use a small diameter existing breather line for a return or something.
or in general, it would mean return line wouldnt need to be big at all.

anonymous-user

54 months

Thursday 27th January 2011
quotequote all
I had kinda thought that most people would want to retain the FPR and return line, and only a few would go to the effort of a proper returnless system. The flow metered return would make the system pretty much "standalone" from the engine or engine ems etc.

Steve_D

Original Poster:

13,749 posts

258 months

Thursday 27th January 2011
quotequote all
I'm liking that idea.
It will mean very little modification of an existing install.
I assume you are happy that it could respond fast enough to a mashed throttle?

Steve

anonymous-user

54 months

Thursday 27th January 2011
quotequote all
I will have to do some testing to confirm (and calibrate) the response of the system (set the overal gain of the control loop) but i doubt there will be an issue. However, it probably will be a "different" response to the existing system, that probably currently has a fairly large pressure spike on "stab" tip ins (FPR slams shut as MAP jumps up to atmospheric when WOT) and all the fluid flowing through the pre-regulator system stops, and transfers it's dynamic head to the static pressure.
As a result i would expect to check the engines transient fuelling with a different fuel delivery system fitted of any kind. It's just possible that at low rpms, a full stab-in from trailing throttle might require a slight adjustment to the transient fuelling gains in your ems system.


eliot

11,436 posts

254 months

Friday 28th January 2011
quotequote all
Interesting project...

anonymous-user

54 months

Friday 28th January 2011
quotequote all
Running a few numbers through Matlab, (with some admittidly guestimated values for things like pump rotor inertia) suggests that a control loop of 500hz (easily achieved, normally run at 1kHz) and with a typical system volume (haven't yet included "springyness of the fuel delivery hose, but this is probably fairly small with aeroquip etc), the longest response and settling time is in the order of 80 to 120ms, with some harmonics of the pressure surge taking 250-400ms to damp out (but these are small).

Ultimately i will build an instrumented pressure test rig and confirm the results.


( i bet that if you stuck a fast response pressure sensor into a typical fuel system you would be shocked by how much dynamic and pressure wave stuff is going on. Luckily these effects tend to average themselves out, and off course the injectors flow rate varriation is SQRT2 better anyway)

The Excession

11,669 posts

250 months

Saturday 29th January 2011
quotequote all
Max_Torque said:
Running a few numbers through Matlab, (with some admittidly guestimated values for things like pump rotor inertia) suggests that a control loop of 500hz (easily achieved, normally run at 1kHz) and with a typical system volume (haven't yet included "springyness of the fuel delivery hose, but this is probably fairly small with aeroquip etc), the longest response and settling time is in the order of 80 to 120ms, with some harmonics of the pressure surge taking 250-400ms to damp out (but these are small).

Ultimately i will build an instrumented pressure test rig and confirm the results.


( i bet that if you stuck a fast response pressure sensor into a typical fuel system you would be shocked by how much dynamic and pressure wave stuff is going on. Luckily these effects tend to average themselves out, and off course the injectors flow rate varriation is SQRT2 better anyway)
Fantastic stuff, I've really enjoyed reading this thread. I did some work with the WRC looking at GPS data that was run at around 10Hz. I've also looked at other systems running to around 50Hz, it's fantastic to see people talking in the 500Hz range.

A1!

Please carry on posting your thoughts and developments I'm sure there's a heap of other lurkers watching this thread.

anonymous-user

54 months

Wednesday 2nd February 2011
quotequote all
The Excession said:
Fantastic stuff, I've really enjoyed reading this thread. I did some work with the WRC looking at GPS data that was run at around 10Hz. I've also looked at other systems running to around 50Hz, it's fantastic to see people talking in the 500Hz range.

A1!
To keep the costs down i am only going to use an 8bit microcontroller, but even these run at 20MHz these days, and as long as you keep away from floats or doubles (stick to integer numbers) and try to reduce any divide / multiply routines to Bitwise manipulation, then you can easily run 1kHz PID loops without issue.

Power per ££ has gone through the roof recently thanks to the proliferation of mobil devices, and it can be cheaper to use a 32bit uC than an 8 bit'er (although generally a free tool chain for the software development outweighs the parts cost at low volumes.

andygtt

8,345 posts

264 months

Wednesday 9th February 2011
quotequote all
All this technical detail are going way over my head but all sounding good.

I get my engine back in a month and so hope to map it in 5-6 weeks... any chance these will be available by then?

anonymous-user

54 months

Wednesday 9th February 2011
quotequote all
The electrical schematic is complete, the first pcb layout is done:





I need to idiot check the component placements and footprints, and double check the pin-outs and routing, then i will get a few manufactured (first batch is expensive (due to the tooling costs), so they need to be right first time or it gets really expensive!)

If you would like to offer your car / fuel system as a trial run then i'm sure we could come to some sort of arrangement ;-) (what EMS system are you running with? the std MBE?)

andygtt

8,345 posts

264 months

Wednesday 9th February 2011
quotequote all
Sounds excellent Im all for that.. and it would be a good test as Im initially going to map the car on the std MBE ecu so wont have any outputs to send to the pump... and later going across to the Motec were I will have a table output to send to the pump.

So we can test both routes smile

anonymous-user

54 months

Friday 11th February 2011
quotequote all
I have just sent the PCB data off for manufacture, so should have some bare PCB's in my hands in 10 days or so ;-)

Need to build a "stress test" fuel rig really so i can run the controller against a realistic loading scenario.

stevieturbo

17,268 posts

247 months

Friday 11th February 2011
quotequote all
Given the power ratings etc involved.

I guess if you wanted, you could run 3 x pumps directly off the two outputs ? It's unlikely ever to exceed the combined 40A rating ?

What have you decided upon for the primary control for the pumps ? or is it still wide open ?

Given I only use a single filter before my 044's due to tank design. I cant help but think this would be a good idea. The over voltage would also offer scope for a bit more ooomph if it was actually required.

anonymous-user

54 months

Friday 11th February 2011
quotequote all
I have a half finished 2.5kW power supply sitting waiting (50A at 50V or 100A at 25V) to be completed, so if i get this done i will use it with a couple of 044's and a lift pump to try out some control strategies. At the moment, for most people, i think the "returnflow control" might be the best option. Will order a fuel flow turbine and have a play and see what works best.

Stress testing at the full 800 odd watts will probably have to be into a water cooled load resistor
, which will enable me to sort the temperature detrate functions etc

The way i have designed the pcb, it's pretty flexable, so can do all sorts of strats with just a code re-write ;-)

stevieturbo

17,268 posts

247 months

Saturday 12th February 2011
quotequote all
Max_Torque said:
I have a half finished 2.5kW power supply sitting waiting (50A at 50V or 100A at 25V) to be completed, so if i get this done i will use it with a couple of 044's and a lift pump to try out some control strategies. At the moment, for most people, i think the "returnflow control" might be the best option. Will order a fuel flow turbine and have a play and see what works best.

Stress testing at the full 800 odd watts will probably have to be into a water cooled load resistor
, which will enable me to sort the temperature detrate functions etc

The way i have designed the pcb, it's pretty flexable, so can do all sorts of strats with just a code re-write ;-)
other query was overload protection.

Will this be built in, or via external fuses ? Obviously no relays involved now ?

anonymous-user

54 months

Saturday 12th February 2011
quotequote all
Because there is closed loop current control on all 3 channels, it will not be possible to "Overload" the controller as such, a dead short on the ouput of the controller will be limited to 20A max (transiently, i.e for less than approx 10ms, overload currents of upto 60A per channel will be tollerated before the device shuts down the offending channel).

However, it's probably sensible to protect the wiring to the controller in an automotive environment so i think it will be a good idea to fit a 60A fuse or circuit breaker in the main power feed cable.

stevieturbo

17,268 posts

247 months

Wednesday 16th February 2011
quotequote all
Might have a friend interested in one of these.....and strangely, myself too.