Proceedings of the 2009 IFAC Workshop on

Engine and Powertrain Control, Simulation and Modeling

IFP, Rueil-Malmaison, France, Nov 30 - Dec 2, 2009

Dynamic Modeling of a Piezoelectric

Actuated Fuel Injector
Chris A. Satkoski, Gregory M. Shaver, Ranjit More, Peter
Meckl, Douglas Memering
Energy Center, Herrick Labs, School of Mechanical Engineering,
Purdue University, W. Lafayette, IN (e-mail: casatkos@purdue.edu).

Abstract: As engine designers look for ways to improve eciency and reduce emissions,
piezoelectric actuated fuel injectors for common rail diesel engines have shown to have
improved response characteristics over solenoid actuated injectors and may allow for enhanced
control of combustion through multi-pulse proles or rate shaping. This paper summarizes the
development of a simulation model for a piezoelectric fuel injector and associated driver that
can be used for injector design and control system verication. The model injection rate, piezo
stack voltage, and piezo stack current are compared to experimental injection rig data for two
dierent rail pressures.

Keywords: Actuator Development; Combustion Control; Control Design; Controls; Engines;

Modeling; Piezoelectricity; Simulation

1. INTRODUCTION

Piezoelectric actuation of common rail type fuel injectors

for diesel engines oers an enhanced ability to control
injection over their solenoid counterparts. This can be
accomplished due to their faster response time and an
ability to generate larger forces. These characteristics can
lead to a greater control of the injection event through
multi-pulse proles or rate shaping. With improved control
of injection, engine designers will have better exibility in
managing eciency and emissions at all operating points
of an engine for both conventional and advanced mode
combustion strategies.
Previous studies have shown that piezoelectric injectors
can improve air entrainment (Fettes and Leipertz, 2001),
spray development, and boost injection velocity due to the
fact that the needle lift process is noticeably faster than a
solenoid actuated injector (Lee et al., 2006). Also, it has
been shown that with advanced actuator driver techniques,
such as pulse width modulation (PWM), better control of
the piezo stack can be obtained and dwell times between
pulses can be half that of a solenoid injector (Oh et al.,
2007).
This paper describes a dynamic simulation model of a pro-
totype piezoelectric fuel injector. Initial testing has shown
that pressure dynamics inside of the injector cause fueling
from an injection event to inuence a subsequent event,
resulting in minimum separation times being achieved. A
simulation model, such as the one outlined in this paper,
can be used to develop design strategies to mitigate pulse-
to-pulse interactions and optimize performance. Fig. 1. Operating Principle of a Prototype Piezoelectric
Fuel Injector (Note: specic design details suppressed
2. THE PIEZOELECTRIC FUEL INJECTOR due to condentiality)

The design of the injector used in this study incorporates the piezo stack into an upward needle lifting force and to
a hydromechanical mechanism that has two essential func- convert the short stroke of the piezo stack into a longer
tions - to convert the high downward expansion force of stroke for the needle.

978-3-902661-58-6/09/$20.00 2009 IFAC 235 10.3182/20091130-3-FR-4008.0048

2009 IFAC E-CoSM (E-CoSM'09)
Nov 30 - Dec 2, 2009, IFP, Rueil-Malmaison, France.
2.1 General Operating Principle
As shown in Fig. 1, when the piezo stack expands, the
bottom link is forced down into the needle lower volume,
raising the pressure, and forcing the needle upward.
Upon upward motion of the needle, uid is pressurized
in the chamber above the needle, called the needle upper
volume. Fluid is forced out of the needle upper volume into
the body volume through spring-loaded check valve above
the needle with an orice in the center causing smooth,
upward motion of the needle. Upon retraction of the piezo
stack, the bottom link is forced upwards by the needle
lower volume pressure. Upward bottom link movement
lowers the pressure in the needle lower volume, closing
the needle. At certain rail pressures, the check valve can
be forced open by the body pressure above it, allowing the
needle upper volume pressure to rapidly increase, quickly
closing the needle.
The actuator used in this injector is a 130 disc, 1000V
piezoelectric stack. All of the discs are enclosed between
electrodes and are wired in parallel to a single 1000V
driver. This multi-disc, parallel actuator conguration is
common for piezoelectric actuators, as it allows maximum
deection for a given amount of piezoelectric ceramic.
Thinner discs can be used with a smaller voltage, but are
not used currently in this application due to the high loads.
The whole stack is encased in a protective housing.
3. MODELING
The lower body includes all of the hydromechanical in-
teraction from the bottom link to the injection of fuel. The
upper body includes the electro-mechanical interaction
from the voltage driver to the piezo stack, down to the
bottom link. The upper and lower bodies are linked by
the displacement of the piezo stack and the interaction
force in between the bottom and top link. The coordinate
systems for the injector can be seen in Fig. 1.
3.1 Lower Body Modeling
The injector control volumes are modeled using a coupled
continuity and state equation for the operating liquid
(Merritt, 1967). Temperature eects on properties are
assumed negligible.
dV0 V0 dP
in out = + (1) needle, Rneed , which changes with needle lift such that the
dt dt
where in is the volumetric ow into the control volume,
out is the volumetric ow out of the control volume, V0 is
the mean volume, is the bulk modulus of liquid, and P
is the pressure. In the case of the needle lower volume, we
can assume that there are no ows in or out during needle
opening and closing events. Then equation (1) becomes
dPlv dVlv
Clv = (2)
dt dt
where the subscript lv refers to the needle lower volume
and Clv = Vlv is the liquid capacitance. dVdtlv is a function
of our states and is described by
V lv = Albot y + Anbot x.
(3)
236
where Albot is the bottom link ledge area (critical for
displacing liquid in the needle lower volume) and Anbot is
the needle bottom area.
The needle upper volume is much like the needle lower
volume, except it has a ow term.
dPuv dVuv
Cuv = cvf (4)
dt dt
where cvf is the check valve ow of liquid out of the needle
upper volume, Cuv = Vuv is the needle upper volume liquid
capacitance, and uv refers to the needle upper volume.
dVuv
dt is also a function of our states and is described by
V uv = Antop (y x).
(5)
where Antop is the area of the needle top. Flows are
modeled with a standard orice equation:

2
= Cd A0 P (6)
where is the ow, Cd is the coecient of discharge, A0 is
the orice area, and is the liquid density. Terms in this
equation can be grouped to t the form of a ow resistance
relationship:

R = P where R = (7)
2Cd 2 A0 2
such that the check valve ow can be given as:

cvf = Puv Pbv /Rcv (8)
where Pbv is the pressure of the body volume and Rcv
is the resistance of the check valve. It is important to
note that the check valve has a dierent resistance when
open and closed. The resistance is actually a function
of its displacement relative to the plunger. It can be
most accurately captured by a more complex parallel
disc ow equation. For simplicity, this model will use an
approximate constant ow resistance when open, and a
dierent constant when closed.
After the needle opens, fuel will ow down the body, past
the needle into the sac volume, which is the small volume
enclosed between the bottom of the injector needle and
the inlet to the spray holes, and then through the spray
holes out of the injector. Two restrictions impede free
ow from the body. One is the restriction of the spray
holes themselves, Rsh . The other is the resistance past the
total restriction for uid out of the injector is given by the
following expression:
Rtotal (x) = Rsh + Rneed (x) (9)
The ow out of the injector can be fully described by
iof = Pbv Pcyl /Rtotal (x)

(10)
where iof is the ow out of the injector and Pcyl is the
pressure of the combustion chamber.
Rail-to-body ow can be described by:

rtb = Prail Pbv /Rrail (11)
where Prail is the rail pressure, and Rrail is the sum of the
restrictions between the rail and the body of the injector.
2009 IFAC E-CoSM (E-CoSM'09)
Nov 30 - Dec 2, 2009, IFP, Rueil-Malmaison, France.
Fig. 2. Injector Needle Free Body Diagram
An equation can be written for the body, assuming no
relevant change in volume:
dPbv
Cbv = rtb + cvf iof (12)
dt
where Cbv is the eective liquid capacitance for the body
of the injector.
The forces on the needle, seen in the free body diagram
of Fig. 2, can be used to write an equation of motion,
assuming rigid behavior and neglecting friction:
Fntip + Flv Fuv1 Fs1 = mneed x
The force terms are dened as follows:
Flv = Anbot Plv
Fuv1 = Antop Puv
Fs1 = P Ls1 + ks1 (x z)
where mneed is the mass of the needle, ks1 is the spring
stiness of the needle upper volume spring, and P Ls1
is the springs preload. Fntip represents the intermediate
pressure between the body and the spray holes:
2

Pbv (Rneed (x) wiof ) Antip if x > 0
Fntip =
Pcyl Asac + Pbv (Antip Asac ) + Fseatreaction if x=0
where Asac is the area of the needle tip exposed to the
sac volume upon closing, Antip is the area of the needle
tip, and Fseatreaction is the reaction force from the needle
seat. Notice that when the needle is open, the equation is
representative of the pressure drop across the needle due
to the ow out of the injector. This can be seen graphically
in Fig. 3.
Using the free body diagram in Fig. 2, the check valve
motion can similarly be characterized by the following
equation of motion:
Fuv2 + Fs1 Fcvs Fcvtop = mcv z
where mcv is the mass of the check valve, Fcvs is the
reaction force from the check valve seat and Fuv2 is
the pressure force from the needle upper volume below
the check valve. The force Fcvtop is the pressure force
from the body pressure above the check valve. This force
is somewhat straightforward when the valve is closed,
but becomes noticeably more complex when the valve
is open. One observation is that the check valve sees
body pressure at the center of the valve and needle upper
volume pressure around the edge. An integral across the
Fig. 3. Injector Needle Flow Resistance
top surface of the valve or a momentum balance would
give an approximation of the force, however a simpler
modeling approach is to assume a certain eective area
will see full body pressure and certain eective area will
be at full needle upper volume pressure. The forces can
then be approximated as follows:
Fuv2 = Acvbot Puv (19)

Achannel Pbv if z = y
(13) Fcvtop = (20)
Acvtop Pbv + (1 )Acvtop Puv if z = y
where Achannel is the small area on top of the check valve
(14)
exposed to body pressure when the valve is closed, Acvtop
(15) is the area of the top of the check valve, is a constant
(16) between 0 and 1, and Acvbot is the area of the bottom of
the check valve. It is important to note that as long as
Fcvs > 0, then there is contact between the check valve
and its seat, and z = y. However, once contact is lost, the
EOM changes to be independent of the reaction force.
Fuv2 + Fs1 Fcvtop = mcv z (21)
(17) During most of the simulation, logic is used to calculate the
reaction force between the check valve and its seat to verify
that it remains positive. If Fcvs 0, then the model states
of z and z are calculated independently. Once Fcvs 0
and z y, then again z = y and z = y until contact is
lost again.
The states of the lower body can currently be dened as
x, x,
z, z,
Puv , Plv , and Pbv .
3.2 Upper Body Modeling
The upper body of the injector includes the piezo stack and
the linkage between the bottom link and the piezo stack
(18)
and associated driver. The driver used in experimentation
is the Kinetic Ceramics Model PDI-10 Piezoelectric Ac-
tuator Driver. It utilizes a TTL signal to trigger 1000V
pulses to the actuator. The driver circuit can be modeled
as a supply voltage, Vin , in series with a resistance, R, an
inductor, L, and current, I, such that:
Vin = LI + RI + Vs (22)
Piezoelectric materials show an electric polarization when
they are strained. These materials also show a converse
eect, where they strain in response to an applied electric
237
2009 IFAC E-CoSM (E-CoSM'09)
Nov 30 - Dec 2, 2009, IFP, Rueil-Malmaison, France.

eld. These properties result from unit cell distortions Notice that there are three springs acting on the mass,
of the crystal structure which causes a net polarization. as well as body pressure, and an additional pressure force
Piezoelectrics also exhibit dielectric properties like any from the needle lower volume.
insulator. The polarization dynamics that occur in a piezo-
electric material are complex, involving multiple modes The reaction force with the check valve is assumed negli-
of polarization and domain wall oscillation that can lead gibly small and the other reaction forces are calculated as
to non-linear eects including hysteresis. Also, all of the follows:
properties that describe these dielectric phenomenons are Fs2 = P Ls2 k2 y (29)
frequency dependent (Moulson and Herbert, 1990). How-
Fs3 = P Ls3 k3 y (30)
ever, in many cases linear, quasi-static, constant property,
and frequency independent piezoelectricity relations can Fs4 = P Ls4 + k4 y (31)
be assumed (Standards Committee of the IEEE Ultrason- Fbv = Alink Pbv (32)
ics, Ferroelectrics, and Frequency Control Society, 1988).
Flv2 = Apbot (Plv Pbv ) (33)
D = dX + X E and e = sE X + dE (23)
Fdamp = by (34)
where D is the charge density (also called electric displace-
ment) of the material (charge/area), d is the piezoelectric where P Lsj signies a spring preload for the j th numbered
coecient, X is the material stress, X is the permittivity spring, ksj is a spring stiness for the j th numbered spring,
of the material at constant stress, E is the electric eld, e Fbv is the body force pressure on the top link, Flv2 is
is the material strain, and sE is the material compliance the dierential pressure force across the bottom link, and
under constant electric eld. Manipulation of these equa- Atlink is the area of the top link that is sealed from body
tions gives the eld and strain as a function of the stress pressure. Fdamp is the damping force such that b is the
and the charge density: eective dampening coecient of the upper body including
1 the stack.
E = gX + X D and e = sD X + gD (24)
 From these equations, we can develop an equation of
motion for the upper body.
where g = 1
X
d.
Fs2 + Fs3 + Flv2 + Fbv Fdamp Fs4 Fpiezo = mub y (35)
The complete, three-dimensional equations for a piezoelec-
tric material are specied in tensor form to account for Or
all directions, but can be simplied for piezoelectric discs Fpiezo = Fs2 + Fs3 + Flv2 + Fbv Fdamp Fs4 mub y (36)
which are polarized in a single direction and experience
uniaxial stress. To correlate these equations to the axis of where mub is the total mass of the upper body components.
interest, they can be rewritten in the following form:
D3 = d33 X3 + 33 X E3 (25) The piezo stack is encased in a protective spring housing
and the force from this component can be dened as
e3 = s33 E X3 + d33 E3 (26) follows:
1 Fhousing = P Lhousing khousing y (37)
E3 = g33 X3 + D3 (27)
33 X
Because the housing force and the reaction force with the
e3 = s33 D X3 + g33 D3 (28) upper body are the only two signicant external forces on
the stack, the stress in the stack can fully be described.
Fig. 4 shows a free body diagram of the mass relevant to
the upper body of the injector. For simplication, the top The constitutive equations are considered valid here for
and bottom links will be lumped as a single mass, mub . a single piezoelectric element. In the case of an actuator
This assumes that no disconnection occurs between the stack, there are N identical elements, each of area Adisc
pieces, and that they remain in contact during operation. and thickness t and it is assumed the stress in all discs is
the same.
With that assumption, the constitutive equation for strain
(equation (28)) can be transformed to represent the stack
motion, y.
(Fhousing + Fpiezo )
y = s33 D tN g33 tN D (38)
Adisc

Where Fhousing + Fpiezo are in equations (36) and (37).

The signs used in the above equation reect the coordi-
nate system for this injector. As this is uniaxial motion,
references to D, E will no longer carry the tensor subscript.
The free charge density can be related to the current
in the electric circuit by the equations N AIdisc = D and
Fig. 4. Injector Upper Body Free Body Diagram I
= D.
N Adisc

238
2009 IFAC E-CoSM (E-CoSM'09)
Nov 30 - Dec 2, 2009, IFP, Rueil-Malmaison, France.

Plugging these into equation (22):

Vin = LAdisc N D + RAdisc N D + Vs (39)

Vs can be derived from equation (27), knowing that a good

approximation of the voltage potential across a disc is the
electric eld multiplied by the distance.
(Fhousing + Fpiezo ) t
Vs = g33 t + D (40)
Adisc 33 X Fig. 5. Bosch Type Flow Measurement Rig
Note that this equation assumes that all of the discs are
experiencing equal stress and charge density. The rig is capable of measuring injection rate, piezo stack
At this point in the analysis, all of the equations necessary voltage, and injector current. The comparisons of those
to describe the upper body have been enumerated. The quantities with model results can be seen in Fig. 6, Fig. 7,
two highest derivatives are y and D, and equations (29) and Fig. 8, respectively.
through (40) can be coupled to give the driving dierential
equations for the upper body.
(P Ltot +Apbot (Plv Pbv )+Alink Pbv )
y = mub
b Adisc kef f Adisc g
y ( D + )y D (41)
mub s33 tN mub mub s33 D mub
This equation was simplied by lumping the preloads and
stinesses into eective terms. Similarly, a dierential
equation can be derived for charge density:
2
=
D Vin
R
( LN Agdiscd s33 D + d
LN Adisc LD 33 X LN Adisc
)D
g
y (42)
LN Adisc s33 D
2

With these two dierential equations the upper body Fig. 6. Comparison of Injector Flow Rate
D, and D
states can be dened as y, y,

3.3 Model Summary

The non-linear equations described for the lower body and

linear equations listed for the upper body are used to
simulate the injection rate in MATLAB. The inputs to the
model are rail pressure and the commanded voltage input
prole to the driver. Numerical computation is done using
a basic Euler iteration method. The simulation time is 3.5
ms and the time step utilized is 1 s. Again, the states of
the entire model are: x, x,
z, z,
Puv , Plv , Pbv , y, y,
D, and

D. A complete listing of the dierential equations can be
seen in equations (43) through (49).

4. EXPERIMENTAL SETUP Fig. 7. Comparison of Piezo Stack Voltage

The injector is fed from a common rail and high pressure
fuel pump. A Kinetic Ceramics PDI-10 driver actuates
the stack with a TTL signal from a PC. The ow is
measured by a Bosch type measurement device seen in
Fig. 5. Rate shape data is collected on a 12-bit ultra high-
speed data acquisition system (UHSDA) collected at a
sampling frequency of 1 MHz.

5. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The model was compared to the injection rig data at two

rail pressures where the second is twice the rst. The
input to the model and experimental injector was a square
voltage wave of 1000 volts for an on-time of 2.505 ms.

239
2009 IFAC E-CoSM (E-CoSM'09)
Nov 30 - Dec 2, 2009, IFP, Rueil-Malmaison, France.

Albot Anbot
Plv = y x (43)
Clv Clv
= (Puv Pbv )1/2 Antop Antop
Puv y + x (44)
Rcv Cuv Cuv Cuv
(Prail Pbv )1/2 (Puv Pbv )1/2 (Pbv Pcyl )1/2
Pbv = + (45)
Rrail Cbv Rcv Cbv Rtotal (x)Cbv
Fntip Anbot Antop P Ls1 ks1 ks1
x
= + Plv Puv x+ z (46)
mneed mneed mneed mneed mneed mneed

Pbv (Rneed (x) wiof )2 Antip if x > 0
where Fntip =
ntip Asac ) + Fseatreaction if x=0
P A + P (A
cyl sac bv

Acvbot P Ls1 ks1 ks1

z = Puv + + x z Fcvtop (47)
mcv mcv mcv mcv
Achannel Pbv if z = y

where Fcvtop =
Acvtop Pbv + (1 )Acvtop Puv if z = y
(P Ltot + Apbot (Plv Pbv ) + Alink Pbv ) b Adisc kef f Adisc gN
y = y ( D + )y D (48)
mub mub s33 tN mub mul s33 D mub
= Vin R g2 d d g
D D ( + )D y (49)
LN Adisc L LN Adisc s33 D 33 X LN Adisc LN 2 Adisc s33 D

Fig. 8. Comparison of Piezo Current American National Standard: IEEE Standard on Piezo-
electricity. The Institute of Electrical and Electronics
The model captures the start of injection, end of injection, Engineers, Inc., New York.
steady-state injection rate, and ramp rates with reasonable
accuracy. Driver and piezoelectric dynamics such as the
stack voltage prole and current are predicted well by the
model.

6. CONCLUSION

A simulation model of a piezoelectric injector has been

shown to accurately predict the injection rate, piezo stack
voltage, and piezo stack current of the prototype injector
at two dierent rail pressures. Simplied driver circuits,
linear piezo response, and rigid body assumptions were
utilized. Future work will explore model simplication for
synthesis of ow rate estimation and closed-loop injection
rate control strategies.

REFERENCES
Fettes, C. and Leipertz, A. (2001). Potentials of a piezo-
driven passenger car common rail system to meet future
emission legislations - an evaluation by means of in-
cylinder analysis of injection and combustion. SAE
2001-01-3499.
Lee, J., Min, K., Kang, K., and Bae, C. (2006). Hy-
draulic simulation and experimentatal analysis of needle
response and controlled injection rate shape characteris-
tics in a piezo-driven diesel injector. SAE 2006-01-1119.
Merritt, H.E. (1967). Hydraulic Control Systems. John
Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York.
Moulson, A. and Herbert, J. (1990). Electroceramics.
Chapman and Hall, New York.
Oh, B., Oh, S., Lee, K., and Sunwoo, M. (2007). Devel-
opment of an injector driver for piezo actuated common
rail injectors. SAE 2007-01-3537.
Standards Committee of the IEEE Ultrasonics, Ferro-
electrics, and Frequency Control Society (1988). An

240