This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on
Advanced Vehicle and Tire Technologies (AVTT)
IDETC/CIE 2008
August 36, 2008, New York City, New York, USA
DETC200849304
A NEW CONTROL ALGORITHM FOR VEHICLE STABILITY CONTROL
Seyed Hossein Tamaddoni
PhD Student
tamadoni@vt.edu
Saied Taheri
Associate Professor
staheri@vt.edu
Center for Vehicle Systems and Safety (CVeSS)
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
Blacksburg, VA USA
ABSTRACT
A new control algorithm and the adaptation laws required
for estimation of unknown vehicle parameters have been
developed for vehicle stability control (VSC). This algorithm is
based on the Lyapunov Direct Method. A vehicle model with
two degrees of freedom (DOF) was used to develop the control
algorithm. In developing the equations of motion for this simple
model, a new approach for introducing the needed stabilizing
forces and moments was developed. In addition, an eight DOF
model was developed for control algorithm evaluation. The
model includes lateral, longitudinal, yaw, and roll motions of
the body plus the rotational DOFs for all of the four wheels.
Also included in the model is a transient tire model taking into
account the tire lateral relaxation length. Using the validated 8
DOF simulation model, the new control algorithm was
evaluated and the results show the advantages of using such an
approach for enhancing vehicle stability during emergency
steering maneuvers.
INTRODUCTION
Despite the fact that the United States has one of the best
roadway systems in the world, congestion is increasing and
safety remains a serious problem. Congestion takes its toll in
lost productivity, costing the nation an estimated $40 billion
each year. Trucks and buses travel over 100 billion miles
annually and face the same congestion, delays, and inherent lost
productivity experienced by the daily commuter. Vehicle
crashes represent another $150 billion in financial burden to the
economy, and result in the loss of more than 40,000 lives
annually in the United States [1].
In recent years, electronic control systems have found their
way into automotive applications, resulting in significant
improvements in vehicle active safety. The active vehicle
control systems aim to improve the vehicle stability by
intervening when the vehicle is at the physical limit of its
performance. They assist the driver to keep control of the
vehicle and at the same time provide the needed flexibility for
the vehicle to adapt to road variations. Various types of active
control systems have been developed in the past to enhance the
stability and handling characteristics of the vehicle [2–7].
Active front steering (AFS), active rear steering, fourwheel
steering (4WS), active suspension, and vehicle stability control
(VSC) are some of the options widely explored. Electronic
control of vehicle dynamics has seen considerable effort in the
integration of individual active control systems.
It has been known that vehicle stability
(understeer/oversteer) is influenced by tire normal load
variations during cornering [8]. This behavior can be
compensated for by use of active or semiactive suspension
where the normal load variation on a tire can be controlled.
The adaptive control algorithm developed here is based on
the Lyapunov Direct Method. A simple 2 DOF model has been
used to develop the control algorithm. This methodology could
be extended to higher order systems of vehicle equations of
motion, linear or nonlinear.
To evaluate the control strategy developed here, a nonlinear
8 DOF vehicle model along with the Magic Formula tire model
2 Copyright © 2008 by ASME
were used. This is due to the fact that the control commands are
executed through utilization of antilock braking system.
Therefore, longitudinal vehicle motion and wheel dynamics had
to be modeled and included in the simulation program. The
eight degrees of freedom considered are body lateral,
longitudinal, roll and yaw, and rotational motion of each wheel.
NOMENCLATURE
O Wheel angular velocity
o Tire side slip angle
o Applied steer angle at wheels
c Roll steer coefficient
¸
Camber angle
o
Roll angle around roll axis of vehicle
k Longitudinal slip
r
u
Inclination angle of roll axis w.r.t. horizontal plane
o Lateral tire relaxation length
t Camber roll coefficient
v
Additional steer angle as a result of compliance
and roll steer effects
a Horizontal distance between vehicle COG and
front axle
b
Horizontal distance between vehicle COG and rear
axle
C
o
Total roll stiffness
C
k
Tire longitudinal slip stiffness
C
o
Tire cornering stiffness
x
F
Longitudinal tire force
y
F
Lateral tire force
z
F
Vertical force on tire
h
Roll centre height w.r.t. ground
p
I
Wheel total mass moment of inertia about the
rotation axis
x
I
Roll moment of inertia (about vehicle xaxis)
xz
I
Rollyaw product of inertia
y
I
Pitch moment of inertia (about vehicle yaxis)
z
I
Yaw moment of inertia (about vehicle zaxis)
K
o
Total roll damping
brake
M
Brake moment on wheel
drive
M
Drive moment on wheel
z
M
Tire selfaligning moment (about vehicle zaxis)
m Total vehicle mass
m
o
Nonrolling part of total vehicle mass
r Yaw rate
e
r
Tire effective rolling radius
u Longitudinal velocity
v
U
Control force on lateral velocity
r
U
Control force on yaw rate
v Lateral velocity
d
x
Desired Values of states
x
Error between actual and estimated values of states
ˆ p
Estimated vehicle parameters
p
Error between actual and estimated values of
parameters
I Adaptation gain matrix
D
Control gain matrix
VEHICLE PLANE DYNAMICS
The equations of motion for vehicle model of Figure 1 are
derived in this section. Eight degrees of freedom are considered
for this model (longitudinal, lateral, yaw, and roll motion of the
vehicle center of gravity, and angular velocity of each wheel).
The number of degrees of freedom and the resulting set of
equations of motion are chosen to be applicable for further
study of the probable extensions of the proposed control
algorithm. Using Lagrange’s equations, the resultant equations
of motion are as follows:
2
, ,
2
,
2 2
, ,
2
( )
( )
( ) ( )
( )
u
v
z z r xz r
x
z r xz y z
mu mrv m h r m hr Q
mv mru m h m hr Q
I r I I m hu m rv Q
I m h m hv m hru
I I r m h I I r
C m gh Q
o o
o o
o o o o
o o o o
o o o
o o o
o o
o o
u o o o
o
u o
o
÷ ÷ ÷ =
+ + ÷ =
+ ÷ ÷ + =
+ + +
+ ÷ ÷ + ÷
+ ÷ =
(1)
where the generalized forces Q’s are given as
3 Copyright © 2008 by ASME
FIGURE 1 FULL VEHICLE MODEL [9]
( ) ( )
( ) ( )
( ) ( )
1 1 1 1
2 2 2 2
1 1 1 1
2 2 2 2
1 1 1 1
4
2 2 2 2
1
cos sin
cos
sin cos
sin cos
sin cos
sin cos
u x y
x y
v x y
x y
r x y
x y zn
n
Q F F
F F
Q F F
F F
Q aF aF
bF bF M
Q K
o o
o v o v
v v
o v o v
v v
o v o v
v v
o
=
= + ÷ +
+ ÷
= + + +
+ +
= + + +
÷ ÷ +
= ÷
¯
(2)
Since vehicle stability is considered to be a transient event,
a first order lateral force transient tire model is used. Equation
(3) defines the tire side slip angle differential equations.
i i
i i
i
v ar
front wheels
u
v br u
rear wheels
u
o v
o
o o
v
+ ¦
÷ + +
¦
¦
+ =
´
÷
¦
÷ +
¦
¹
(3)
In addition, roll steer and lateral force compliance steer
effects are included as shown in Equation (4).
i i i i i
c C
o
v o c o = +
(4)
As mentioned previously, the rotational degrees of freedom
for all four wheels are also modeled.
, , p i xi e i drive i brake
I F r M M O = ÷ + ÷
(5)
The lateral force and aligning moment of each tire are
calculated using the well known 94 version of Magic Formula
tire model. The longitudinal tire force is assumed to be a linear
function of longitudinal slip and is given by
xi i i
F C
k
k =
(6)
where longitudinal slip k is defined as
i ei
i
u r
u
k
÷ O
= ÷
(7)
MODEL VALIDATION
Using the equations of motion shown in the previous
section, a simulation model was developed in MATLAB©.
Figure 2 shows the simulation results plotted alongside the
available objective measurement data [10]. As can be seen from
the yaw rate graph, the simulation results follow those of the
experimental results well.
This simulation model is used for evaluation of the control
algorithm that will be discussed later in this paper.
FIGURE 2 TIME HISTORY OF YAW RATE FOR
2 AND 8 DOF MODELS
CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN
The method used in the paper requires the equations of
motion for the dynamic system under consideration to be of the
form:
Ax Bx C U + + = (8)
4 Copyright © 2008 by ASME
Therefore, a simple vehicle model with two degrees of freedom
(lateral velocity and yaw rate of the vehicle center of gravity) as
shown in Figure 3 was used. The equations are modified and
simplified for the purpose of developing the control algorithm.
v
U and
r
U have been introduced in the right hand side of the
equations to account for the counter force and moment inputs
required for improving vehicle stability.
Assuming small angles and considering lateral tire force as
a linear function of side slip angle, the equations of motion can
be developed as follows:
2 2
0
0
f r r f
z r f r f
f f
v
f f r
C C bC aC
mu
m v v
u u
I r r bC aC b C a C
u u
C
U
aC U
o o o o
o o o o
o
o
o
o
+ ÷
÷ ÷ +
   
÷
 
÷ +
\ . \ .
÷
÷ =
(9)
Considering
  ,
T
x v r = the equations are now converted
into the standard state variable form shown in equation (8)
where the matrices A, B, C, and U can be easily derived from
equation (9).
FIGURE 3 SIMPLIFIED TWO DOF VEHICLE MODEL
To derive the control algorithm and the adaptation laws, we
consider the following candidate Lyapunov function:
( )
1
( , )
2
T T T
V x t x Ax p p x Bx dt = + I +
í
(10)
where
d
x x x = ÷ . Choosing adaptation gain matrix I to be a
positive diagonal matrix, we know that the above candidate
function is always positive. ( , ) V x t
can be found by
differentiating ( , ) V x t with respect to time as shown in
equation (11).
1
( , )
2
T T T T T
V x t x Ax x Ax p p p p x Bx = + + I + I +
(11)
For diagonal matrices A and I , we have
T T
x Ax x Ax =
T T
p p p p I = I
(12)
Therefore,
1
( , ) 2 2
2
T T T
T T T
V x t x Ax p p x Bx
x Ax p p x Bx
= + I +
= + I +
(13)
Now using the definition of the error vector for state
variable x and the equation of motion (8)
d
d
Ax Ax Ax
Bx C U Ax
= ÷
= ÷ ÷ + ÷
(14)
and substituting in equation (13)
( )
( )
( )
( , )
T T T
d
T T
d
T T
d d
V x t x Bx C U Ax p p x Bx
x Bx Bx C U Ax p p
x Bx C U Ax p p
= ÷ ÷ + ÷ + I +
= ÷ + ÷ + ÷ + I
= ÷ ÷ + ÷ + I
(15)
Now we define the control law as follows
d d
U Ax Bx C Dx = + + ÷
(16)
where D is control gain matrix.
Substituting equation (16) into equation (15) and defining
new terms we get
5 Copyright © 2008 by ASME
( )
( , )
T T
d d
V x t x Ax Bx C Dx p p = + + ÷ + I
(17)
and
ˆ ˆ ˆ
, , A A A B B B C C C = ÷ = ÷ = ÷
where ^ indicates the estimated value and ~ is used for the error.
We define
d d
Hp Ax Bx C = + +
(18)
And substituting into equation (17) we get
( ) ( , )
T T
V x t x Hp Dx p p = ÷ + I
(19)
Or,
( )
( , )
T T T
V x t x Dx p p H x = ÷ + I +
(20)
Asymptotic stability is insured if V(x,t)
is negative
definite. In order to have a negative definite V(x,t)
, we set the
second term in equation (20) equal to zero; therefore,
( )
0
T T
p p H x I + =
(21)
Equation (21) holds if the terms in the bracket are set to
zero.
1 T
p H x
÷
= ÷I
(22)
where matrix H is defined in equation (18).
Equation (21) is used to arrive at the adaptation laws.
Properly choosing D to be a positive definite matrix, the
remaining part of equation (20) becomes
( , ) 0
T
V x t x Dx = ÷ <
(23)
SIMULATION RESULTS
The control algorithm and the adaptation laws found using
equations (16), (18), and (22) were implemented in the
simulation model discussed previously. Several severe steering
and braking maneuvers were used to show the effect of the
control algorithm developed. The vehicle for simulation is a
sedan and the parameters are derived from [10].
As was shown in the previous section, the controller requires
desired values of yaw rate and lateral velocity. Since the current
paper deals with yaw control, desired lateral velocity was
assumed to be the same as lateral velocity. The desired yaw rate
was derived from the linear model and is given as:
( )
2
1
d
char
u
r
u
a b
V
o
=
 
+ +

\ .
(24)
All simulation runs were done at a constant vehicle speed of 80
Km/h and step steering input of 80 degrees. In addition, the
control parameters used are defined below:
( )
( )
57.3
10 9,10 9
10 6,10 6
0
ˆ , ( 0)
0
char
f
r
V
diag e e
D diag e e
C
p p t
C
o
o
=
I =
=
= = =
The results are shown in Figures 48. Figure 4 indicates
that yaw rate is trying to follow the desired yaw rate for 80
degrees step steering input.
FIGURE 4 TIME HISTORIES OF DESIRED AND ACTUAL
YAW RATE FOR A STEP STEERING INPUT
Figure 5 shows the estimated values of cornering stiffness using
the adaptation algorithm. It can be seen that the controller is
capable of estimating the needed cornering stiffness for
6 Copyright © 2008 by ASME
stabilizing the vehicle. The actual values for front and rear axles
are approximately 120’000 (N) and 84’000 (N), respectively.
FIGURE 5 TIME HISTORIES OF ADAPTATION OF FRONT
AND REAR CORNERING STIFFNESSES: (DASHED)
ESTIMATED, (STRAIGHT) ACTUAL VALUE
Figure 6 shows the control inputs required for keeping the
vehicle stable in each case. These are the actual force and
moment (the units for
v
U and
r
U are (N) and (N/m),
respectively) that must be generated by the tires through the
application of braking (ABS) or steering (active steering). It
must be mentioned that this level of control activity has been
seen on the vehicle stability controllers in the market today
which use the anti lock braking capability to generate the
required moment.
Figure 7 shows the time histories of vehicle lateral velocity for
controlled and uncontrolled cases. This shows the stabilizing
effect of the controller which results in a correction of vehicle
attitude from approximately 2.5 degrees of vehicle sideslip
angle to approximately +1.5 degrees of vehicle sideslip angle.
FIGURE 6 CONTROL FORCE REQUIRED FOR STABILIZING
THE VEHICLE
FIGURE 7TIME HISTORIES OF VEHICLE LATERAL
VELOCITY IN CONTROLLED AND UNCONTROLLED
CONDITIONS
CONCLUSIONS
A new control algorithm was designed using the Lyapunov
Direct Method. The control algorithm and the adaptation laws
were used with an eight DOF vehicle model. The results
obtained for step steering inputs indicated the potential for this
controller to be used in conjunction with an ABS to generate the
brake forces required for stabilizing a vehicle during emergency
maneuvers.
7 Copyright © 2008 by ASME
REFERENCES
[1] “National Intelligent Transportation Systems Program, Five
Year Horizon”, US Department of Transportation, August
2000.
[2] Naito, G., Inoue, H., and Matsumoto, S., “Improvements in
Active Safety Through Braking and Traction Control”,
SAE technical paper 945151, 1994.
[3] Nagai, M., Hirano, Y., and Yamanaka, S., “Integrated
Control of Active Rear Wheel Steering and Direct Yaw
Moment Control”, Vehicle System Dynamics, 1997, 27,
357–370.
[4] Koibuchi, K., Yamamoto, M., Fukada, Y., and Inagaki, S.,
“Vehicle Stability Control in Limit Cornering by Active
Brake”, SAE technical paper 960487, 1996.
[5] Zeyada, Y., Karnopp, D., ElArabi, M., and ElBehiry, E.,
“A Combined Active Steering Differential Braking Yaw
Rate Control Strategy for Emergency Maneuvers”, SAE
technical paper 980230, 1998.
[6] Hac, A. and Bodie, M., “Improvements of Vehicle Handling
Through Integrated Control of Chassis System”, Intl. J.
Vehicle Design, 29 (1/2), 2002: 23–50.
[7] Mastinu, G., Babbel, E., Lugner, P., and Margolis, D. L.,
“Integrated Controls of Lateral Vehicle Dynamics”, Vehicle
System Dynamics, 23, 1994: 358–377.
[8] Blank, M. and Margolis, D., “The Effect of Normal Force
Variation on the Lateral Dynamics of Automobiles”, SAE
technical paper 960484, 1996.
[9] Pacejka, H.B., “Tire and Vehicle Dynamics”, 2
nd
Edition,
2005.
[10] Data acquired from NHTSA by Center for Vehicle Systems
and Safety (CVeSS) at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State
University.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.