Estimation of Road Load Parameters Via On-Road Vehicle Testing G

Slide 1
Estimation of Road Load Parameters via On-road

g
Vehicle Testing
Dr. Rahul Ahlawata, Dr. Jürgen Bredenbeckb & Mr. Tatsuo Ichigec
a A&D Technology, Michigan, USA b A&D Europe GmbH, Griesheim, Germany
c A&D Company, Tokyo, Japan
Tire Technology Expo 2013
February 5-7,
5-7 Cologne,
Cologne Germany
Proprietary and Confidential, A&D Technology, Inc. www.aanddtech.com

Slide 2
Energy
gy Loss in Vehicles
Standby Accessories
17%(4%) 2%(2%)
Aerodynamic Drag
3%(11%)
Fuel Tank Rolling Resistance
100%(100%)
( ) 4%(7%)
Braking
6%(2%)
Engine Loss Drivetrain Loss
62%(69%) 6%(5%)
Losses of fuel energy in a vehicle in city usage (highway usage)
[U.S. National Academy of Science, 2006]

Slide 3
Energy
gy Loss in Vehicles
Standby Accessories
17%(4%) 2%(2%)
Aerodynamic Drag
3%(11%)
Fuel Tank Rolling Resistance
100%(100%)
( ) 4%(7%)
Braking
6%(2%)
Engine Loss Drivetrain Loss
Vehicle
Vehicle Road Load
62%(69%)
Road Load
6%(5%)
Road Grade
Road Grade
Road load is define as the “…force

Road load is define as the …force or torque which opposes the movement of
or torque which opposes the movement of
a vehicle…”
[ISO 10521‐1, 2006]
Slide 4
Significance of Road Load Determination

EEnergy
Vehicle platooning [1,2] Roll‐over prevention [3] management [4,5]
[SARTRE project test, Sweden]
Offline modeling & [Toyota]
control development [6]
Engine certification [7]
Engine certification [7]
[Mathworks]

Slide 5
Objective
j
Estimate the road load parameters of a vehicle
 Focus
Focus on rolling resistance & aerodynamic drag
on rolling resistance & aerodynamic drag
 Use on‐road testing of a production vehicle
 Use a novel force measurement method & compare results
p
with traditional method(s)

Slide 6
Outline
1. Introduction
2. Road load fundamentals
3. Instrumentation &
sample data
4. Coast down method
5. Force measurement
method
6. Summary
Slide 7
Rolling Resistance
For a free rolling tire under no slip:
Mg: Vertical load on the tire due to sprung & unsprung mass
vx: Tire longitudinal velocity
: Tire longitudinal velocity ω: Tire angular speed
ω: Tire angular speed Rz: Ground reaction force
: Ground reaction force
Rx: Rolling resistance force Mrr: Rolling resistance moment r: Loaded tire radius
vx vx vx
Mg ω Mg ω Mg ω
Mrr
Rx Rx
Tire normal force a
distribution is asymmetric.
The resultant normal force
The resultant normal force Rz Rz
acts towards the leading a∙Rz = Mrr= r∙ Rx Rolling resistance
edge.
Proprietary and Confidential, A&D Technology, Inc. www.aanddtech.com force
Slide 8
Aerodynamic
y Dragg
[BMW]
Density of air
Frontal area of the vehicle
Coefficient of aerodynamic drag
Relative velocity of the vehicle wrt
l i l i f h hi l the wind
h i d
Slide 9
Total Road Load

The most commonly used form of road load equation is:
Predominantly
P d i tl Includes
l d I l d i fl
Includes influence
includes the aerodynamic drag of road grade
effect of rolling
effect of rolling
resistance Includes dependence
of rolling resistance on
velocity & drivetrain
losses
• ‘b’ term is not always included
• A number of other formulations exist [8], including
• Influence of rotational inertias
• Correction factors
• Additional dependencies
Slide 10
Road Load Measurement Methods

1. Individual component measurements
[Terrametrix]
[Nissan]
[Volvo]
[M t k]
[Maptek]
Rolling resistance: Tire Aerodynamic drag:
testing Wind tunnel testing Grade: Road profiling
Pros: High repeatability, aids in parametric evaluation
Cons: Higher cost, may not represent real driving conditions
Slide 11

2. Coast‐down method [8,10] 3. Torque measurement [9]
[VTI Sweden]
[VTI Sweden] [Timken]
[9]
Pros: Less instrumentation Pros: Drivetrain losses are excluded
Cons: Time consuming tests include
Cons: Time consuming tests, include Cons: Difficult to install on
Cons: Difficult to install on
drivetrain losses production vehicle
Slide 12

4. Complete vehicle measurement system
[A&D]
[A&D]

Slide 13
On-road Vehicle Testing
Stop
Test Vehicle: FWD Mini Cooper S
Test Vehicle: FWD Mini Cooper S S
Start
Test Track: Proving ground in Tochigi, Japan
Slide 14
Instrumentation
Anemometer
Measures wind velocity & direction
6‐Component Wheel Force Transducer
(Fx, Fy, Fz, Mx, My, Mz)
o Distributed force bridges with model based decomposition to get
orthogonal force components
o Very low cross sensitivity, interference & temperature sensitivity and
high sampling rate
o 0.1% resolution (6N or 1.8Nm) www.aanddtech.com
Proprietary and Confidential, A&D Technology, Inc.
Slide 15
Instrumentation
Anemometer
Measures wind velocity & direction
6‐Component Wheel Force Transducer
p
(Fx, Fy, Fz, Mx, My, Mz)
I fl
Influence of drivetrain losses is included in this measurement
fd i i l i i l d d i hi
Influence of a and b terms is included in this measurement (ignoring bearing
friction and wheel well aerodynamic losses) www.aanddtech.com
Slide 16
Vehicle Instrumentation II
Laser Doppler Sensor
Measures vehicle velocity & slip
angle
GPS Sensor & In‐vehicle Network
Measures vehicle longitude,
latitude, altitude, and ECU CAN
communication
Inertial Sensor
Inertial Sensor
Measures vehicle roll,
pitch and yaw
Wheel Position Sensor
Measures 6 degrees of freedom of the tire
Measures 6 degrees of freedom of the tire
Digital Signal Processing
& A i iti
& Acquisition
100Hz sampling
(max 100kHz)
Slide 17
Sample Data
FL
FR
RL
RR

Slide 18
Sample Data
Acceleration Coast‐down Acceleration Braking
FL
FR
RL
RR

Slide 19
Sample Data
Acceleration Coast‐down Acceleration Braking
Contribution of a and b terms
FL
FR
RL
RR

Slide 20
Outline
1. Introduction
sample data
method
6. Summary
Slide 21
Coast-down Tests
Procedure:
• Conduct tests on a flat road with low wind conditions
• Accelerate the vehicle and put the transmission in N
Accelerate the vehicle and put the transmission in N
• Begin coast down in a straight line
• Record vehicle velocity and vehicle velocity relative to wind as a function
of time
f i
35
30
25
20
Velocity (m/s))
Coast‐down
15
10
-5
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Proprietary and Confidential, A&D Technology, Inc. Time (sec) www.aanddtech.com
Slide 22
Coast-down Tests
Procedure:
of time
f i
Flat road assumption
6
Road grade (deg)
4
2
Road grade (deg)
-2
-4
-6
20 Technology,
Proprietary and Confidential, A&D 40 60
Inc. 80 100 120 140 160 180
www.aanddtech.com 200
Time (sec)
Slide 23
Coast-down Tests
Procedure:
of time
f i
• Use linear regression to obtain coefficients a, b & c
Use linear regression to obtain coefficients a, b & c
• Use minimization of
• Verify by Simulated Annealing
• SAE J1263 J2263 and ISO 10521 1 contain more detailed procedures
SAE J1263, J2263 and ISO 10521‐1 contain more detailed procedures

Slide 24
Coast-down Test Results

1200
Measured road load force
Regression estimates
1000
Coefficient of • Front tires: Bridgestone
800
determination, R2=0.9087 Sneaker
600 • Rear tires: Bridgestone
Force (N)
400 Sneaker
200
• Estimated Values:
Data‐sets augmented a = 194.87, b = 3.87, c = 0.37
0
-200
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Time (sec)
35
(33m/s, 118km/hr, 73mph) Measured velocity
95% C fid
95% Confidence bounds
b d: 30
Calculated velocity
a: 184 – 204 25
m/s)
Velocity (m
20
b: 2.7 – 5
15
c: 0.35 – 0.39
10
5
(7.5m/s, 27km/hr, 16mph)
Proprietary and Confidential, A&D Technology, Inc. 0 10 20 30 40
www.aanddtech.com 50 60 70 80 90
Time (sec)
Slide 25
Coast-down Test Results

1200
Measured road load force
Regression estimates
1000
• Front tires: Bridgestone
Coefficient of
Coefficient of
800
2 Blizzak
determination, R =0.9280 • Rear tires: Bridgestone
600
Force (N)
400
Sneaker
F
• Estimated Values:
200
Data‐sets augmented a = 191.69, b = 2.54, c = 0.41
0
-200
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Time (sec) 35
Measured velocity
95% C fid
95% Confidence bounds
b d: 30
Calculated velocity
a: 183 – 200 25
m/s)
Velocity (m
20
b: 1.5 – 3.5
15
c: 0.39 – 0.43
10
5
Proprietary and Confidential, A&D Technology, Inc. 0 10 20 30 40
www.aanddtech.com 50 60 70 80
Time (sec)
Slide 26
Validation Procedure
During coast‐down:
Generalized equation under all conditions (including coast‐down):
Tire traction/braking
force
Wheel force
Wheel force
sensor
measurements
Slide 27
Validation Procedure
35
30
25
20
m/s)
Velocity (m
15
Parameter
10
5
identification
0
-5
Parameter Validation
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Time (sec)
Estimates are poor outside the coast‐down region
Slide 28
Residual Analysis
y
Analyze cross‐correlation coefficient of residuals:
An example:
0.1 1.2
elation coefficient
Norrmalized cross correlation coefficient

1
0.05
0.8
Normalized cross corre
06
0.6
0
0.4
-0.05 0.2
-0.1 -0.2
-1000 -800 -600 -400 -200 0 200 400 600 800 1000 -1000 -800 -600 -400 -200 0 200 400 600 800 1000
Time Time

Slide 29
Residual Analysis
y
Analyze cross‐correlation coefficient of residuals:
0.6 0.5
0.5
Residuals & steering angle Residuals & accelerator
n coefficient
n coefficient
0.4
(Residuals & Acc pedal position)

g angle)
0.4
pedal position
p p
malzed cross-correlation
malized cross-correlation
(Residuals & Steering
0.3 0.3
0.2
0.2
0.1
Norm
01
0.1
Norm
-0.1 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Time (sec) Time (sec)

Slide 30
Limitations of Coast-down Tests

Procedure:
1. A long straight flat track is needed
• SAE procedures requires a minimum speed band of 70 to 15 mph
2. Results include drivetrain losses and may not be suitable for some
applications
pp
3. Results are not consistent for all driving conditions, especially outside the
coast‐down region
• Residuals are correlated with accelerator pedal position, steering
Residuals are correlated with accelerator pedal position, steering
angle,…
4. Predictor basis is not orthogonal giving rise to the mathematical
complications due to multicollinearity
complications due to multicollinearity
• Estimates of a, b, c might be biased or have high variance

Slide 31
Outline
1. Introduction
sample data
method
th d
6. Summary
Slide 32
Identification usingg Force Method
Use regression to identify c c = 0.5371
35 ID ID
30
25
20
Velocity (m/s)
15
10
0
Validation
-5
5
0 50 100 150 200 250
Time (sec)

Slide 33
Validation Test
R2 2 = 0.9926
0 9926
95% confidence limit for c: 0.53‐
Proprietary and Confidential, A&D Technology, Inc. www.aanddtech.com 0.55
Slide 34
Comparison of Coast-down & Force Method
• Front tires: Bridgestone Blizzak
Proprietary and Rear tires: Bridgestone Sneaker
• Confidential, A&D Technology, Inc. www.aanddtech.com
Slide 35

Slide 36

Slide 37
Cross-correlation of Residuals
0.5
New residuals
0.4
Residuals & steering angle Coastdown residuals
Normalzed cross-correlation coeffiicient

(Residuals & Steering angle))
0.3
0.2
0.1
-0.1
01
N
0.6 -0.2
0.5
Residuals & accelerator
0 50 New residuals
100
Coastdown Time (sec)
residuals
150 200 250
ent
pedal position
d l iti
orrelation coefficie
c pedal position)
0.4
0.3
02
0.2
(Residuals & Acc
Normalized cross-co
0.1
-0.1
-0.2
0 50
100 150 200 250
www.aanddtech.com
Time (sec)
Slide 38
Traction & Braking Scenarios

Assumptions: m: Mass of tire wheel assembly
• Small inclination and side‐slip angles J: Polar moment of inertia of tire‐wheel
vx • No vertical displacement of the tire
Mg assembly about the center of wheel hub
y
• No slip T: Applied torque at wheel hub
ω Fa: Tire‐road friction force
Z Mrr
T
X
Let WFS measurements be represented as Fx, Fz and My
r Then, From laser Doppler sensor
Fa From encoder
Rz
Rz
Fa
Proprietary and Confidential, A&D Technology, Inc. Determined before the experiment

www.aanddtech.com
Slide 39
Calculation of ‘a’ from Force Method

6 constant speed tests for each speed, 18 tests total
RL Tire
RL Tire
Assuming that wheel well aerodynamic losses are negligible at low
g y g g
speeds, calculate
a = 271
Note: Measured value of rolling resistance is much higher than what
standardized tests predict [11]
Slide 40
Calculation of ‘b’ from Force Method
Mean RRF=85.4381 N
σRRF= 1.7629 N Mean RRF=84.5861 N
σRRF= 1.9318 N
= 1 9318 N
Mean RRF=84.8949 N
σRRF= 2.2992 N
Very slight reduction in rolling resistance as speed increases
b ≈ 0
Slide 41
Summaryy
Coast‐down Method Force Method
aa = 191.69, b = 2.54, c = 0.41
= 191 69 b = 2 54 c = 0 41 aa = 271, b = 0, c = 0.5371
271 b 0 c 0 5371
• R2 = 0.9280 • R2 = 0.9926
• Estimate variance is higher
g • Estimation based on physics;
p y ;
• Estimation only over coast‐down; variance is very low
road load is under‐estimated for • Estimation can be carried out
non coast down conditions
non‐coast‐down conditions d i
during all conditions
ll diti
• Residuals are correlated with • Correlation is significantly
driver inputs reduced
• Changing the tire changes ‘c’ • Changing the tires preserves ‘c’
substantially very closely
• Influence of drivetrain losses is
Influence of drivetrain losses is • Influence of drivetrain losses is
Influence of drivetrain losses is
included NOT included
• Less instrumentation is needed • More instrumentation required
• Less distortion of vehicle • Vehicle aerodynamics are
aerodynamic modified to a greater extent
Slide 42
Acknowledgements
g
• On-road
O dddata
t acquisition
i iti team:
t
– Takayasu Sasaki
– Yuuki Sakurai
– Masaaki Banno
– Hiroki Yamaguchi
• Kenji Sato
Sato, A&D Technology,
Technology Ann Arbor
• Dr. Michael Smith, A&D Technology, Ann Arbor

Slide 43
References
1. D.Yanakiev & I.Kanellakopoulos, “Speed Tracking and Vehicle Follower Control Design for
Heavy-Duty Vehicles”, Vehicle System Dynamics, Vol. 25, No. 4, 1996
2. D.Yanakiev & I.Kanellakopoulos, “Nonlinear
Nonlinear spacing policies for automated heavy-duty
heavy duty
vehicles”, IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, Vol. 47, No. 4
3. Bae, Ryu & Gerdes, “Road grade vehicle parameter estimation for longitudinal control using
GPS”, 2001 IEEE Intelligent Transportation Systems
4. C. Musardo, G. Rizzoni & B.P. Staccia, “A-ECMS: An Adaptive Algorithm for Hybrid Electric
Vehicle Energy Management” 2005 European Control Conference
5. Hong Yang & Joel Maguire, “Predictive Energy Management Control Scheme for a Hybrid
Powertrain System”
System , US Patent 2011/0066308 A1
6. www.Carsim.com
7. J Fredriksson, E Gelso, M Åsbogard, M Hygrell, O Sponton, NG Vagstedt, “On emission
certification of heavy-duty hybrid electric vehicles using hardware-in-the-loop simulation”,
Chalmers University of Technology, 2011
8. Karlsson, Hammarström, Sörensen & Eriksson, “Road surface influence on rolling resistance
- Coastdown measurements for a car and an HGV”, VTI, 2011
9
9. JŻ b
J.Żebrowski,ki “Traction
“T ti efficiency
ffi i off a wheeled
h l d tractor
t t in i construction
t ti operations”,
ti ” Automation
A t ti
in Construction, Vol. 19, No. 2, 2010
10. Sandburg & Ejsmont, “Noise emission, friction and rolling resistance of car tires – Summary
p
of an experimental study”,
y , National conference on noise control engineering,
g g, Dec 3-5,, 2000,,
Newport beach, California
11. S.K. Clark, “A handbook for the rolling resistance of pneumatic tires”, 1979
Slide 44
More Information
Email: Visit our booth:

Visit our booth:

Estimation of Road Load Parameters Via On-Road Vehicle Testing G

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Estimation of Road Load Parameters Via On-Road Vehicle Testing G

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Slide 1

Estimation of Road Load Parameters via On-road

Proprietary and Confidential, A&D Technology, Inc. www.aanddtech.com

Proprietary and Confidential, A&D Technology, Inc. www.aanddtech.com

Road load is define as the “…force

Significance of Road Load Determination

Proprietary and Confidential, A&D Technology, Inc. www.aanddtech.com

Proprietary and Confidential, A&D Technology, Inc. www.aanddtech.com

2. Road load fundamentals

4. Coast down method

Total Road Load

Road Load Measurement Methods

Road Load Measurement Methods

Road Load Measurement Methods

Proprietary and Confidential, A&D Technology, Inc. www.aanddtech.com

On-road Vehicle Testing

Proprietary and Confidential, A&D Technology, Inc. www.aanddtech.com

Proprietary and Confidential, A&D Technology, Inc. www.aanddtech.com

Proprietary and Confidential, A&D Technology, Inc. www.aanddtech.com

2. Road load fundamentals

4. Coast down method

Proprietary and Confidential, A&D Technology, Inc. www.aanddtech.com

Coast-down Test Results

Coast-down Test Results

Norrmalized cross correlation coefficient

Proprietary and Confidential, A&D Technology, Inc. www.aanddtech.com

(Residuals & Acc pedal position)

Proprietary and Confidential, A&D Technology, Inc. www.aanddtech.com

Limitations of Coast-down Tests

Proprietary and Confidential, A&D Technology, Inc. www.aanddtech.com

2. Road load fundamentals

4. Coast down method

Identification usingg Force Method

Proprietary and Confidential, A&D Technology, Inc. www.aanddtech.com

Comparison of Coast-down & Force Method

Comparison of Coast-down & Force Method

Proprietary and Confidential, A&D Technology, Inc. www.aanddtech.com

Comparison of Coast-down & Force Method

Proprietary and Confidential, A&D Technology, Inc. www.aanddtech.com

Normalzed cross-correlation coeffiicient

Traction & Braking Scenarios

Proprietary and Confidential, A&D Technology, Inc. Determined before the experiment

Calculation of ‘a’ from Force Method

Calculation of ‘b’ from Force Method

Proprietary and Confidential, A&D Technology, Inc. www.aanddtech.com

Email: Visit our booth:

Proprietary and Confidential, A&D Technology, Inc. www.aanddtech.com

You might also like