2011 IEEE International Conference on Control Applications (CCA)

Part of 2011 IEEE Multi-Conference on Systems and Control

Denver, CO, USA. September 28-30, 2011

Development of a Wheel Slip Actuator Controller for Electric Vehicles

using Energy Recuperation and Hydraulic Brake Control
Martin Ringdorfer, Martin Horn

Abstract— A new vehicle stability control approach for elec- λRL Fx,RL Wheel Fx,FL

tric vehicles is introduced. The proposed wheel slip controller Electric traction motor EM
Hydraulic brake
extends the functionality of state-of-the-art electric vehicle op- ESC Driver

eration strategies and closes the gap to driver assistance systems
and conventional vehicle dynamics control systems. Maximum
energy efficiency and driving safety can be guaranteed by
coordinated control of the electrical propulsion system and
the mechanical braking system. During safe vehicle operation,
the controller monitors the vehicle operation unit and in case
of a blocking or spinning wheel, it assures anti blocking
and anti slip functionalities by coordinating mechanical brake
interventions and single wheel traction motor control. The
proposed controller structure is outlined and first simulation
results are presented.
I. INTRODUCTION
Future trends in automotive industry lead towards
energy saving and increasing driving safety. There exist a
number of approaches to save energy, e.g. the aerodynamic
optimization of vehicle shapes or the usage of energy
saving tires. One of the most promising approaches for
environmental-friendly driving is the introduction of electric
vehicles (EV). State-of-the-art vehicle operation strategies,
also known as “energy managers”, are necessary to attain
the goal of saving energy. If the region of “linear driving
behaviour” is left, the “human control ability” has to be
adapted to the nonlinear driving behaviour. As this is
difficult for most drivers, the overall responsibility is left to
conventional vehicle dynamics controllers, like electronic
stability control (ESC) [4].
Although the operation strategies usually have a better
knowledge of the propulsion systems state compared to
the braking system, they are almost unused for reentering
the safe driving state. By overshooting the maximum tire
force, the tires operate in their unstable region which causes
loss of tire force potential (see Fig.3). If friction braking is
applied or if wheels start to skid, valuable kinetic energy, is
dissipated into friction or sliding losses.
The fact that energy is not fully recovered, combined
with the circumstance that electrical drives introduce new
dynamics into a vehicle’s behaviour, lead to the question
why vehicle dynamics control (VDC) functionalities are not
integrated into the operation strategy as well. This important
question is raised in the present paper. An integrated
Martin Ringdorfer is with the Institute for Smart System Tech-
nologies, Klagenfurt University, Klagenfurt am Wörthersee, AUSTRIA
and with Magna Powertrain AG & Co KG, Lannach, AUSTRIA
martin.ringdorfer@uni-klu.ac.at
Martin Horn is with the Institute for Smart System Technolo-
gies, Klagenfurt University, Klagenfurt am Wörthersee, AUSTRIA
martin.horn@uni-klu.ac.at
TBRK
Steering Brake Drive
Vehicle wheel pedal pedal
Operation
TEM Unit
EM
ESS
λRR Fx,RR Fx,FR
Fig. 1. Control flow
controller, which operates the single wheel braking system
and single wheel electric traction motors (EM) is further
presented.
In order to keep the controller tuning efforts low, a Linear
Quadratic Controller (LQR) has been chosen. The modeling
and validation of the required plant model is outlined in
section IV and section V. Section VI concludes the paper
and outlines future activities.
II. VEHICLE DYNAMICS CONTROL WITHIN
ELECTRIC VEHICLES
The operation of an electric vehicle mainly deals with
determining the state of charge of the electrical energy
storage system (ESS) and interpreting the driver’s inputs
for setting up a certain propulsion torque. These control
algorithms are established by using energy-manager func-
tionalities within the vehicle control unit. An example for
two traction machines on the rear axle is shown in Fig.1.
In most cases, the vehicle operation unit, located in an
electronic control unit (ECU), is able to provide the requested
amount of torque by adapting the drivetrain actuators ac-
cordingly. These control activities are usually realized by
feed forward control, with the goal of maximizing the range
of vehicle operation [3]. If the vehicle is operated e.g. on
slippery roads, the regions of stable vehicle behaviour are
bounded. Using only feed forward control can exceed these
limits easily. To keep the vehicle in stable regions anyway,
the control commands of the vehicle operation unit have to be
readjusted. State-of-the-art vehicle dynamics control systems
are taking over leadership for a short time in order to correct
the vehicle behaviour.
The aim of saving energy is replaced by lowering the kinetic
energy of the vehicle by means of friction brake interven-
tions. These interventions cause losses in comfort, moreover,
valuable kinetic energy is not exploited for charging the ESS.
The aim of the presented controller is to extend the func-

978-1-4577-1063-6/11/$26.00 ©2011 IEEE 313

 TABLE I 6000

Q UARTER V EHICLE PARAMETERS 5000

longitudinal tire Fx [N]

4000
Identifier Description Unit
3000
TEM traction motor drive torque Nm
TEM,ref traction motor drive reference torque Nm 2000
TEM,max maximum available traction motor torque Nm
1000 Fx,1 @ Fz,1=const
TBRK brake torque Nm
Fx,2 @ Fz,2=2*Fz,1
Treq intended drive torque Nm 0
Tref wheel slip controller torque Nm 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25
wheel slip λ [−]
0.3 0.35 0.4
Fx longitudinal tire force N
m vehicle mass kg
Fig. 3. Longitudinal tire force characteristic
rt dynamic tire radius m
cλ longitudinal tire stiffness −
ω angular tire velocity rad/s
Jx moment of inertia kgm2 time (the cycle time of the control algorithm) the vehicle
µ surface friction coefficient − velocity remains constant, yields
g gravitational acceleration m/s2
λ wheel slip − (ω̇rt − v̇) v (ωrt − v) v̇ v̇=0 λ̇v
p hydraulic brake pressure bar λ̇ = − ⇒ ω̇ = . (3)
f brake system constant N/bar v2 v2 rt
v longitudinal vehicle velocity m/s In case of constant load force, it follows from Fig. 3, that
Tp time constant for brake torque s
the tire force Fx can be represented as
mg
Fx = cλ (λ, µ)λ . (4)
4
tionality of the energy manager by introducing single wheel
By considering only forward driving, the wheel torque can
control on the rear axle of an EV. As shown in Fig. 1 this
be calculated as
provides the opportunity to adapt the longitudinal tire forces
Fx for each wheel independently. Twhl = TEM − TBRK (5)
III. VEHICLE MODEL for ω > 0. The transfer function Gλ (s) relating λ and Twhl
The development of a wheel slip controller requires the can be calculated by using (1), (3), (4) and (5), i.e.
knowledge of the physical behaviour of the system to be L (λ) 1
Gλ (s) = = , (6)
controlled [1]. The abbreviations which are used for model- L (Twhl ) sJx rt + cλ mg
v
4 rt
ing the drivetrain and the wheel system are summarized in
table I. where L (λ) and L (Twhl ) denote the Laplace-transforms
of λ and Twhl .
A. Wheel System
B. Mechanical Brake System
The most elementary representation of a vehicle is the
quarter vehicle model (see Fig. 2), which assumes that a For the mechanical brake system, it is necessary to find
mass m a relation between the hydraulic brake pressure p (which
4 is acting on one wheel. For reasons of simplicity, it
is assumed that the spring-damper assembly (see Fig. 2) is is usually measured in a vehicle) and the corresponding
neglected and the vertical tire stiffness is very large. brake torque TBRK . As stated in [2] this relation is mainly
constrained by mechanical and geometrical dependencies
m which can be summarized by the proportional factor f .
4 As it is confirmed by measurements (see Fig. 4), the step
response of the brake pressure p can be regarded as the step
rt, cλ
TEM response of a PT1-transfer function (the venting behaviour
is neglected). Hence the transfer function for the mechanical
Jx µ brake system follows as
TBRK ω

Fx
Fig. 2. Quarter vehicle model
Using the principle of angular momentum yields
Jx ω̇ = TEM − TBRK sgn(ω) − Fx rt .
The wheel slip λ is defined as
ωrt − v
λ= . (2)
v been used for modelling and controlling the traction drive.
For controlling λ it is necessary to compute the time-
derivative of λ. Assuming, that for a very short period of
L (TBRK ) 1
GBRK (s) = =f . (7)
L (p) sTp + 1
C. Electric Traction Drive
The electric traction drive consists of a permanent mag-
(1) netized synchronous machine (PMSM) and a drive gear. Es-
pecially for PMSM traction applications in electric vehicles,
an important task is to exploit maximum torque within the
whole speed region. Therefore the methods stated in [5] have
The step response of the traction motor TEM , which is
utilized for further research activities, is presented in Fig 4.

314
 TABLE II
S YSTEM IDENTIFIERS

traction motor drive torque TEM [Nm]

hydraulic brake pressure p [bar]
600
40

400
Identifier Description
x system state vector
20
A dynamic matrix
200
p b input vector
pPT1 c output vector
TEM
0 0
u control input
0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6
t [s] y system output
J performance index function
Fig. 4. Brake pressure step response and motor torque step response Q positive definite weighting matrix for system states
r positive weighting constant for control input
Driver k feedback vector
input P positive definite matrix
n system order
reference Treq energy TEM,ref traction
machine
TEM Twhl wheel system λ k1 proportional gain (brake actuator controller)
calculation manager Gλ(s)
controller k2 feedback gain (brake actuator controller)
λref
k3 control error gain (traction motor controller)
TBRK
wheel slip brake k4 feedback gain (traction motor controller)
controller R(s) Tref controller
GActuator (s) ki integrator gain (wheel slip controller)
kp proportional gain (wheel slip controller)

Fig. 5. Control loop

cannot be met due to road conditions (µ-low), an VDC

IV. CONTROLLER CONCEPTS intervention is triggered by the wheel slip contoller. Instead
It can be seen that the chosen wheel system and actuator of setting Tref = 0, it is calculated with the controller R(s)
assembly represents a system, in which both actuators (trac- described in section IV-E.
tion motor and mechanical brake) control the wheel torque To get a better understanding of the procedure of combined
Twhl . In conventional EVs, the control of both actuators braking the overall control system is divided into
is partitioned into two ECUs (see Fig. 1). As long as the • actuator control (subordinated control) and
ESC is just monitoring the vehicle motion, both controllers • wheel slip control.
are operating in so-called “friendly coexistence” where the
A. Actuator Control
energy manager applies TEM . In case of instable driving
situations, the ESC cause brake interventions. It is taking The design of an actuator controller requires to account for
over leadership, and the collaboration is degregated to a the physical constraints present in automotive applications
master-slave relationship, where the full advantages of trac- and the potentials of the actuators. The drivetrain actuator
tion motor drives are not exploited at all. For avoiding mutual abilities that can be influenced during vehicle operation are:
influence, it is useful to reduce the amount of recuperative • recuperation torque / hydraulic brake torque
braking torque. These actions lead to the conflict that the • actuator response time
basic idea of saving energy is temporarily of minor interest Additionally, it is of great interest for automotive manufac-
and that an additional communication effort arises. turers to be innovative, as well as competitive. This makes
The proposed controller overcomes these conflicts by cov- it necessary to utilize cost efficient components wherever
ering recuperative braking and considering safety issues possible. By bringing this circumstance into line with the
simultaneously. This can be achieved by integrating VDC control of propulsion actuators it can be stated that:
functionalities into the energy manager algorithms. Thus al- • computational power has to be minimized
gorithms for recuperative braking and for VDC interventions • changing of the actuator behaviour should be simple
are located within the vehicle operation unit. • the workload of each actuator needs to be adaptive
For realizing both issues, a control structure as shown in Fig.
These arguments suggest the application of a state feed-
5 is proposed.
back control concept as proposed e.g. in [6]. A linear, time
Before explaining the controller design in more detail, the
invariant model of the plant forms the basis for this control
idea for the proposed control loop structure is outlined.
approach. With reference to table II, this model can be
1) Driving without VDC intervention: In case of a stable
represented as
driving situation, the driver’s inputs are used for calculating
a reference propulsion torque Treq . This torque is forwarded ẋ = Ax + bu
to the energy manager. The energy manager adapts the motor y = cT x. (8)
torque according to the propulsion system state and the ESS
state. The wheel slip controller torque Tref is zero. Assuming that the torque Twhl is provided by one actuator,
2) Driving with VDC intervention: In case of a decelera- it is a simple task to design a wheel slip controller R(s).
tion maneuver, the energy manager applies a negative traction Developing a two-actuator concept, with the possibility of
motor torque. If the driver’s deceleration torque requests influencing the amount of each actuator torque is a nontrivial

315
task. It can be shown that it is required to distinguish between C. Traction Drive Control
TEM and TBRK (as in (5)). The basic idea of “sharing” For introducing recuperative braking, it is required to
the overall workload, can be realized with a control loop include the traction motor into VDC, too. Here a second
structure as shown in Fig. 5. LQR controller is utilized.
As already stated, a balance between friction braking Due to the unknown nonlinearities of the system (mainly
and electrical braking should be achieved, and the transient caused by the tire force characteristics), the application of
response should track a desired path. For this reasons and for integrating behaviour is proposed. The EM system results in
the intuitive way of tuning the controller, the use of optimal       
control techniques is recommended [7], where the applica- ẋ a − bk4 −bk3 x 0
= + T . (14)
tion engineer has the possibility to tune parameters, which ė −c 0 e 1 EM,ref
are directly related to the system’s dynamics. Theoretically, Using the results of section IV-A, the proportional gain k3
the starting point for control is initial state x0 , which should and the feedback gain k4 can be calculated. It is necessary
be transferred to the operating point x = 0. This is achieved to select weigthing factors for x, e and uEM appropriately.
by using the feedback control law This leads to the control law
Z t
u = −kT x. (9) uEM = −k4 x + k3 (TEM,ref − TEM )dτ. (15)
0
For means of influencing the actuator workloads, a D. Actuator Transfer Function
quadratic cost function
Z ∞ The transfer function of the controlled actuator assembly is
denoted by GActuator (s). It consists of the transfer functions
xT Qx + ru2 dt ⇒ min


J(x, u) = (10)
0 of the controlled actuators
is proposed. Preferably Q is chosen as a diagonal matrix. L (TEM ) L (TBRK )
GEM (s) = , GB (s) = (16)
The overall task is to minimize the value of J(x, u). This L (TEM,ref ) L (Tref )
can be realized by the application of the feedback law (9) and can be computed as
with
L (Twhl )
1 GActuator (s) =
k = bT P. (11) L (Tref )
r = GB (s) + [1 − GB (s)] GEM (s). (17)
The positive definite matrix P is calculated by solving the
Paying attention to economic interests, the tuning of the
matrix Riccati differential equation
weigthing parameters (for p, uBRK , x, e and uEM ) is simple.
1
AT P + PA − PB bT P + Q = −Ṗ. (12) E. Wheel Slip Control
r
For the design of the wheel slip controller R(s) in Fig. 5,
The task left for the application engineer is the appropriate
a classical frequency domain approach has been used.
selection of Q and r for reaching the desired tracking.
In order to guarantee a vanishing steady state error for
For the applied actuator assembly the system is divided λref , a PI-controller is used. As Gλ (s) is a function of the
into one first order system (brake system) and one second vehicle velocity v, a gain-scheduled PI-controller (18), as
order system (traction drive). Both controllers are explained shown in [5], is proposed, i.e.
subsequently.
L (Tref ) skp (v) + ki (v)
R(s) = = . (18)
B. Brake Actuator Control L (λref − λ) s
Now the LQR approach is applied to the hydraulic brake V. SIMULATION RESULTS
system. It is beneficial to choose the hydraulic brake pressure A. Simulation Results for ABS Braking
p as a state variable.
To show the operation modes of the proposed controller,
Using the algorithms stated in section IV-A, the control
an EV as shown in Fig. 1 is chosen. As a typical example for
input uBRK results in
vehicle dynamics control, a deceleration maneuvre on µ =
uBRK = −k2 p + k1 Tref . (13) 0.5 is selected. The EV is driving with constant speed until
the driver presses the brake pedal. According to the pedal
According to the choice of the weigthing factors, the step position, the torque reference module in Fig. 5 calculates
response of p changes. Applying only this controller to the the requested deceleration torque Treq . Due to the limited
wheel system, the traction force control is realized without road surface friction, the vehicle dynamics controller causes
motor support. Thus it is also applicable to conventional an ABS intervention. The intervention starts, if
vehicles. Additionally, it is a safety backup solution in case |λ| ≥ |λref | (19)
of traction motor failure.
is true.

316
 Simulation A Simulation B
To see the advantages of the VDC control using combined
recuperative and mechanical braking, the maneuver is shown 60 60

with two different controller settings. For a better comparison 50 50

of the results, the angular tire velocity ω is calculated as

[km/h]

[km/h]
40 40
vwhl = ωrt . (20)

whl

whl
30 30

v/v

v/v
Simulation A: Conventional braking
20 20
In simulation “A” the traction motor braking torque TEM
and the hydraulic brake torque TBRK are applied. When the 10
v
10
v
whl whl
wheel slip is controlled, the hydraulic brake TBRK is kept v v
0 0
constant and only the recuperation torque from the traction 10 11 12
t [s]
13 14 10 11 12
t [s]
13 14

motor is used to control λ.

Simulation B: Combined recuperative/hydraulical braking Fig. 6. Wheel velocities (ABS)
Simulation “B” demonstrates, how the vehicle decelerates
Simulation A Simulation B
when recuperative braking torque and hydraulic brake 0.05 0.05
λ λ
torque are controlled during ESC intervention. 0 λ
ref
0 λ
ref

−0.05 −0.05
When the energy manager applies the recuperation torque
TEM , the tire velocity vwhl decreases (see Fig. 6). Unless −0.1 −0.1

[−]

[−]
ref

ref
−0.15 −0.15

λ/λ

λ/λ
|Treq | ≤ |TEM,max| (21)
−0.2 −0.2

is satisfied, only the traction motor drive is used. TEM and −0.25 −0.25

Treq are shown in Fig. 8. If condition −0.3 −0.3

|Treq | > |TEM,max | 7−→ Twhl = Twhl (TEM , TBRK ) (22) 10 11 12 13 14 10 11 12 13 14

t [s] t [s]

is met, the hydraulic brake torque TBRK is applied addition-

Fig. 7. Wheel slip (ABS)
ally. TBRK is illustrated in Fig. 9.
In case of (19), the wheel slip controller R(s) takes over Simulation A Simulation B
leadership. In case “A”, the algorithms according to 100 100

0 0
Tref = T (λ, λref )
(ref −100 −100
TEM = TEM (Tref )
=
[Nm]

[Nm]

Twhl (23) −200 −200

ṪBRK = 0
EM

EM
/T

/T

−300 −300
are applied. As long as (19) is valid, λ is only controlled by
req

req
T

−400 −400
TEM . The ESS will not be charged significantly, until the
T T
wheel slip controller drops leadership. Then the maximum −500 req
TEM,max
−500 req
TEM,max
possible recuperation torque TEM is applied again by the −600 TEM −600 TEM
energy manager. 10 11 12 13 14 10 11 12 13 14
t [s] t [s]
In case “B”, the following algorithms
Fig. 8. Motor recuperation torque (ABS)
Tref = Tref (λ, λref )
(
TEM = TEM (Tref − TBRK ) Simulation A Simulation B
Twhl = (24) 100
T
100
T
TBRK = TBRK (Tref ) BRK BRK
0 0

are used. −100 −100

TEM and TBRK are adapted to reach λref as fast as
−200 −200
[Nm]

[Nm]

possible. Due to the response of the brake actuator (see

BRK

BRK

−300 −300
right hand side of Fig. 9), TEM is reduced immediately.
T

This reduction causes that λ stops increasing. When TBRK −400 −400

changes, λ tracks λref . It is possible to increase the recuper- −500 −500

ation torque TEM again to a certain level, so that the ESS
−600 −600
is charged sufficiently. λ is controlled with the additional
10 11 12 13 14 10 11 12 13 14
benefit of maximizing the amount of recovered energy. t [s] t [s]

Simulations have shown, that the amount of recovered

Fig. 9. Hydraulic brake torque (ABS)
energy can be increased to about 40% in certain situations.

317
 250 250
T Tref
ref
T TBRK
BRK
200 200
T TEM
EM

[Nm]
T

[Nm]
whl Twhl
150 150
whl

whl
/T

/T
100 100
ref

ref
T

T
50 50

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0
t [s] 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
t [s]

Fig. 10. Weighting parameter variations (EM comfort response) Fig. 12. Weighting parameter variations (no EM participation)
250
T
ref
T
200 BRK
T
easily by choosing different weighting parameter settings.
EM
[Nm]

T
150
whl
VI. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK
whl
/T

100 A. Conclusions
ref
T

50
0
0 0.2 0.4
t [s]
0.6 0.8
Fig. 11. Weighting parameter variations (EM emergency response)
B. Controller Parameter Variations
One important requirement for the design of the controller
is the intuitive adjustment of the actuator’s dynamic be-
haviour. Therefore the step response is analyzed. A step in
Tref might occur if too much deceleration torque is applied
to the wheel. In this case, the wheel slip controller has to
apply a positive torque Tref . Three situations are chosen as
an example to present the controllers performance.
1) Comfort braking scenario: Fig. 10 shows a step re-
sponse, where both actuators are used to control λ. Due to
the PT1-behaviour of TBRK , it is required to apply TEM
for reaching Tref immediately. Brake actuator and traction
drive are less stressed and the same level of recuperation as
before the step request is reached. This kind of controller
parameterization is required if a comfort braking maneuver
is performed.
2) Emergency braking scenario: The case of an emer-
gency braking maneuver, requires that Twhl tracks Tref
exactly. The drive comfort is of minor interest and the applied
traction drive torque gradient ṪEM is large (see Fig. 11). The
resulting wheel torque Twhl tracks Tref very well. After
reaching Tref , it is assured that the traction drive restarts
recuperation as in the comfort braking scenario.
3) EM malfunction braking scenario: As already men-
tioned, a safety backup solution is integrated into the control
concept as well. The case of a traction motor malfunction, or
the case of a fully charged ESS, requires that only the brake
actuator is used for wheel slip control. Fig. 12 shows the
controller performance if only the brake actuator is utilized
to setup Tref .
By comparing the results of the different step responses,
it can be seen that the presented controller structure is able
to realize various functionalities. They can be implemented
This paper describes the design of an combined wheel
slip controller for an electric vehicle. For reasons of energy
1 recuperation and preserving a safe vehicle driving state,
the combined application of two actuators is proposed. An
optimal control scheme applied to a hydraulic brake system
and a single wheel traction motor assembly is introduced.
For understanding the physical behaviour of the wheel sys-
tem, the mathematical model of the wheel system and the
actuators is derived. Due to the intuitive usage of weighting
factors, an LQR approach is proposed for controlling a
hydraulic brake system and a traction drive assembly. Finally,
simulation results demonstrate the efficiency of the approach.
B. Future Work
The next steps in this research project is the setup of a
testbench, in which the mechanical components and the con-
trol scheme are tested under realistic conditions. Additional
emphasis is put on integrating VDC functionalities, such as
torque vectoring, where the benefits of traction drives can
be exploited for slip control during acceleration. As can be
seen from simulations, the daisy chain approach allows to
vary the dynamic response of the actuator assembly. This
offers the opportunity of providing functionalities for future
vehicle control systems such as electric brake boosters or
torque vectoring.
VII. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of the
“Austrian Research Promotion Agency (FFG)” and “Magna
Projecthouse Europe”.
R EFERENCES
[1] Isermann, R. (Hrsg)., “Fahrdynamik-Regelung”, Friedrich Vieweg &
Sohn Verlag, 1.Auflage, 2006.
[2] Mitschke, M. et al., “Dynamik der Kraftfahrzeuge”, Springer-Verlag
Berlin, 4.Auflage, 2004.
[3] Qiang, J. et al., “Battery Management System for Electric Vehicle
Application”, IEEE, 2006.
[4] Reinold, P. et al., “An Advanced Electric Vehicle for Development
and Test of New Vehicle-Dynamics Control Strategies”, Proc. of AAC
2010, 2010.
[5] Ringdorfer, M. et al., “Vehicle Dynamics Controller Concept for
Electric Vehicles”, Proc. of AVEC10, 2010.
[6] Sastry, S., “Nonlinear Systems”, Springer-Verlag Berlin, 1999.
[7] Zhou, K., “Essentials of robust control”, Prentice Hall, 3.Edition, 1999.

318