applied

sciences
Article
A Study on the Control Performance of Electronic
Differential System for Four-Wheel Drive
Electric Vehicles
Dejun Yin 1 , Danfeng Shan 1 and Jia-Sheng Hu 2, *
1 School of Mechanical Engineering, Nanjing University of Science and Technology, Nanjing 210094, China;
yin@njust.edu.cn (D.Y.); shandanfeng@foxmail.com (D.S.)
2 Department of Greenergy, National University of Tainan, No. 33, Sec. 2, Shu-Lin St., Tainan 700, Taiwan
* Correspondence: jogson@ieee.org; Tel.: +886-6-260-5051

Academic Editor: Shoou-Jinn Chang

Received: 29 September 2016; Accepted: 9 January 2017; Published: 12 January 2017

Abstract: The electronic differential system (EDS) is an important issue for four-wheel drive electric
vehicles. This paper delineates an advanced EDS steering strategy and carries out a careful study of
its control performance by numerical simulations that comply with the requirements of ISO4238:2012.
The results demonstrate that the EDS feedback gain plays an important role to its control performance,
particularly to its steering characteristics. Moreover, the analysis and discussion disclose the
mechanism of the relationship between the feedback gain and the steering characteristics, which will
contribute to further research and EDS development.

Keywords: electronic differential system; ISO4138:2012; four-wheel drive electric vehicle

1. Introduction
Most automotive differentials use limited slip differential (LSD) to turn a car. Under normal
circumstances, LSD can follow the normal steering curvature at high speeds. However, if the vehicle
is driven at low speeds, it will deviate from the original trajectory due to the reduction in traction.
Cornering is a problem in LSD that can lead to vehicles not traveling in one direction and it, as shown
in Figure 1, can be categorized into three types: under-steering, neutral-steering, and over-steering.
Under everyday skidding scenarios, these driving styles are adjustable by the electronic differential
system (EDS) [1–7]. The EDS aims to distribute the torque command to the left and right wheels for
the required vehicle motion and orientation control. These two input commands are initiated so that
we can easily pilot the vehicle for moving forward and orientation control via the steering wheel and
pedal (i.e., two decoupling commands). Hence, different EDS settings represent different driving styles.
For example, in the under-steering EDS setting, the vehicle continues to travel in one direction despite
sharply turning the steering wheel. Conversely, in over-steering EDS, the vehicle rotates more than
requested by the driver, causing the rear of the vehicle to swerve outwards. Different EDS settings
respond to different steering experiences and energy consumptions differently. In order for vehicles to
travel in the original trajectory at any speed and not slip, we plan to employ a new EDS to improve the
disadvantages of LSD.
This paper presents EDS system analysis, modeling, and a simulation of a four-wheel drive
electric vehicle, which is equipped by four independent in-wheel motors on four propulsion wheels.
For example, in-wheel motor electric vehicles have independently equipped motors that drive each
wheel [8–10]. EDS is needed for each electric vehicle with decentralized direct drive. This study
proposes novel EDS control based on a feedback adjustment, which is investigated under the
ISO4138:2012 standard [11]. Under different feedback gain K, the steering characteristics can be
adjusted. Torque distribution can be treated as a central problem of large power vehicles. Because

Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 74; doi:10.3390/app7010074 www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci

Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 74 2 of 11
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 74 2 of 11

distance
the between
distance the transmission
between of the
the transmission ofleft
theand
leftright propulsion
and right wheels
propulsion is unequal,
wheels it makes
is unequal, torque
it makes
output inhomogeneous, resulting in a slight slip during acceleration. Basically, the designated
torque output inhomogeneous, resulting in a slight slip during acceleration. Basically, the designated
feedback gain K
feedback gain K can
can solve
solve the
the torque
torque and
andpower
powerdistribution
distributionofofspecific
specificcornering
corneringconditions,
conditions, a
mechanism which will be discussed in the following sections. Moreover, this study
a mechanism which will be discussed in the following sections. Moreover, this study presents its presents its
relevant theoretical
relevant theoretical foundations.
foundations.

Under-steering
Neutral-steering

Over-steering

Figure 1.
Figure 1. Steering
Steering responses
responses while
while taking
taking aa curve.
curve.

2. Modeling
2. Modeling of
of EDS
EDS
EDS was
EDS wascreated
created to solve
to solve the turning
the turning issue
issue for for four-wheel
four-wheel drivevehicles.
drive electric electric Many
vehicles. Many
successful
successful
studies havestudies haveproposed
since been since been proposed
[12–16]. Figure [12–16].
2 showsFigure
a basic2scenario
shows aofbasic scenario
a turning of aItturning
vehicle. shows
vehicle. It shows the kinematic model of the proposed system in a left turning maneuver,
the kinematic model of the proposed system in a left turning maneuver, where δ is the turning angle where δ is
the turning angle command, δ
command, δ1 and δ2 are the turning1 and δ
angle
2 are the turning angle of the front left and right wheels,
of the front left and right wheels, L is the wheelbase, D L is
is the
the rearwheelbase, is rotational
gauge, ωδ isD the the rear gauge, ωδturning,
speed of is the rotational speedofof
R is the radius turning,
turning, is the speed,
V isRvehicle radiusVof1,
turning,
V is vehicle
3 are theVtangential speed,
speed V1 , front
of the V3 are
andthe tangential
rear speed
left wheels, andofV2the
, V4front and
are the rear left speed
tangential wheels,ofand
the
front
V2 , Vand rear right wheels. Generally, the speed of both the front and rear wheels should be the same
4 are the tangential speed of the front and rear right wheels. Generally, the speed of both the
in order to keep the vehicle traveling in a straight track. However, if the vehicle makes a turn, the
front and rear wheels should be the same in order to keep the vehicle traveling in a straight track.
speed differential must be constructed by a mechanism that entails less wire slipping and scrapping.
However, if the vehicle makes a turn, the speed differential must be constructed by a mechanism that
Clearly, for a left turn scenario, if ω0 is the preferred rotating command, then V = ω0 R and
entails less wire slipping and scrapping. Clearly, for a left turn scenario, if ω0 is the preferred
rotating command, then V = ω0 R and
 
D
V1 = V 1 − (1)
 DR
=V1 V 1 −  (1)
 RD
V2 = V 1 + D  (2)
=V2 V 1 + R (2)
 RD!
R−
V3 = V  R − D2  (3)
 R2  (3)
V3 = V  
 R D !
R+ 2
V4 = V  D (4)
 R +R 2  (4)
V4 = V  
where the radius of the turning curvature can be found  R as
where the radius of the turning curvature can be found as
L
R= . (5)
tan
Lδ
R= . (5)
tan δ
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 74 3 of 11
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 74 3 of 11
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 74 3 of 11

R1
R1
R2
R2 L
L

D
D

O
O

R3
R3 R4
R4

R
R
Figure2.2.Kinematic
Figure Kinematicmodel
modelof
ofproposed
proposedsystem
systemin
inleft
leftturning
turningmaneuver.
maneuver.
Figure 2. Kinematic model of proposed system in left turning maneuver.
The aforementioned studies solve the EDS for speed control in a four-wheel drive vehicle.
The
The aforementioned
aforementioned studies
studies solve
solve the
the EDS
EDS forfor speed
speed control
control in
in aa four-wheel
four-wheel drive
drive vehicle.
vehicle.
However, usually the vehicle is operated by users under a pedal command (acceleration command)
However, usually the vehicle is operated by users under a pedal command (acceleration command)
However, usually the vehicle is operated by users under a pedal command (acceleration command) for
for torque distribution. Consequently, the aforementioned approaches are not so straightforward.
for torque
torque distribution.
distribution. Consequently,
Consequently, the aforementioned
the aforementioned approaches
approaches are notare not so straightforward.
so straightforward. Figure 3
Figure 3 shows the scheme of the proposed EDS. Figure 4 illustrates its corresponding control block
Figure
shows 3the
shows
schemethe of
scheme of the proposed
the proposed EDS. FigureEDS.4 Figure 4 illustrates
illustrates its corresponding
its corresponding control
control block block
diagram.
diagram. Clearly, the actual vehicle speed is set as follows considering cost-effectiveness:
diagram. Clearly, the actual vehicle speed is set as follows considering cost-effectiveness:
Clearly, the actual vehicle speed is set as follows considering cost-effectiveness:
V3 + V4
V =V
V33 ++VV (6)
V
V= = 24 4 (6)(6)
22

K
K
EDS
EDS
PID
PID

Figure 3. Proposed electronic differential system (EDS).

Figure 3. Proposed electronic differential system (EDS).
Figure 3. Proposed electronic differential system (EDS).
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 74 4 of 11
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 74 4 of 11
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 74 4 of 11

V
V ωi
δ * ωi*+* −ωi
δ EDS
* ωi + −
EDS KK

11
V* * 1 ++
T 1 1 +V + 1 +   1 11  1 
* *
T
PID EV 0 00 0
ωiωi  2 22  2 
PID EV V V
s s −− 11
1
VV 1

Figure 4. Control block diagram of the proposed system.

Figure
Figure 4.4.Control
Controlblock
blockdiagram
diagram of
of the
the proposed
proposed system.
system.
For acquiring the vehicle speed in practice without expensive sensors, studies [17,18] provide
For acquiring the shows
vehicle speed in practicephilosophy.
K gain without expensive sensors, studies [17,18]
into provide
Forsolutions.
acquiring Figure
the 5vehicle the
speed in adjusting
practice without expensive sensors, Kstudies
Basically, sufficient gain falls
[17,18] anprovide
solutions. Figure
acceptable 5 shows
region as the K gain adjusting philosophy. Basically, sufficient K gain falls into an
solutions. Figure 5 shows the K gain adjusting philosophy. Basically, sufficient K gain falls into
acceptable region as
< K < K max . (7)
* *
an acceptable region as K min
∗ K * < K < K∗* . (7) (7)
Kminmin< K < Kmax max .
Note that the vehicle pretends to over-steer if the K gain is larger than K max . Hence, the steering
*

angle
Note will
that become
the sensitive
vehicle and cause
pretends the turning
totoover-steer
over-steer radius
ifif the to getis
K gain
the K issmaller.
larger Finally,
than Kthe
largerthan ∗* speed difference
Note that the vehicle pretends gain max . .Hence,
max Hence, thethesteering
steering
between the left and right wheels increases. Conversely, if the K gain is smaller than K *
, the
angle
angle willwill become
become sensitive
sensitive andcause
and causethe theturning
turning radius
radius to getget smaller.
smaller.Finally,
Finally,the thespeed
speeddifference
min difference
steering
leftangle will
rightbecome insensitive and cause the turning
if theifradius to decrease. Consequently,
∗ , the the
between
between the the left
andand right wheels
wheels increases.
increases. Conversely,
Conversely, KthegainK is
gain is smaller
smaller than Kthan
min K min , the
*
steering
speed difference between the left and right wheels also decreases.
angle
steering angle will become insensitive and cause the turning radius to decrease. Consequently,speed
will become insensitive and cause the turning radius to decrease. Consequently, the the
speed difference
difference between between the right
the left and left and right also
wheels wheels also decreases.
decreases.

Figure 5. Philsophy of K gain adjusting.

3. Simulation Setup
In order to evaluate the performance of the proposed approach, this study applied CarSim
Figure 5. Philsophy of K gain adjusting.
software (8.03, Mechanical Simulation, Ann Arbor,
Figure 5. Philsophy of MI, USA)
K gain with Simulink (R2013b, MathWorks,
adjusting.
Natick, MA, USA) to carry out the simulation. Table 1 shows the specifications of the test vehicle.
3. Simulation Setup
3. Simulation Setup
Table 1. Vehicle specification.
In order to evaluate the performance of the proposed approach, this study applied CarSim
software (8.03, Mechanical Simulation,Sprung
In order to evaluate the performance AnnofArbor, MI, USA)
the proposed
Mass with
kg Simulink
approach,
1527 (R2013b,
this study MathWorks,
applied CarSim
Natick,(8.03,
software MA, USA) to carrySimulation,
Mechanical Unsprung
out the simulation.
Ann Arbor,mass MI,
Table 1 shows
USA) 182
thekg
specifications
with Simulink of the test MathWorks,
(R2013b, vehicle.
Natick, MA, USA) to carry out the simulation. D
WidthTable 1 shows1535mm
the specifications of the test vehicle.
Height of center of gravity 540 mm
Table 1. Vehicle specification.
Wheelbase L 2690 mm
Unloaded Vehicle
Table 1. wheel specification.
radius 394 mmkg
Sprung Mass 1527
Unsprung mass 182 kg
Sprung Mass 1527 kg
Width D 1535mm
Unsprung
Height massof gravity
of center 182mm
540 kg
Width D 1535 mm
Wheelbase L 2690 mm
Height of center of gravity 540 mm
Unloaded
Wheelbase wheel
L radius 394 mm
2690 mm
Unloaded wheel radius 394 mm
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 74 5 of 11

Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 74 5 of 11

To probe the EDS performance, ISO4138:2012 suggests three methods: (1) constant radius;
To probe
(2) constant the EDS performance,
steering-wheel angle; and (3) ISO4138:2012 suggests
constant speed. Inthree methods:
this paper, the(1) constant
radius of theradius;
circular
(2) constant steering-wheel angle; and (3) constant speed. In this paper, the radius of the
orbit is set to 30 m, lateral acceleration is 0.3 g, the coefficient of friction of the road is 0.8, and the circular orbit
is set to 30
simulation m, lateral
steering acceleration
angle is 0.3 is
(front wheel) g, 0.16
the coefficient
rad. Hence,of friction of theisroad
the vehicle is 0.8,
steered and the
under simulation
a constant speed
steering angle (front wheel) is 0.16 rad. Hence, the vehicle is steered
of 33.8 km/h. Figure 6a shows the command of the front steering-wheel angle. Figure 6b under a constant speed of
illustrates
33.8 km/h. Figure 6a shows the command of the front steering-wheel angle. Figure 6b illustrates the
the desired circular orbit from neutral steering. The proportional–integral–derivative controller (PID
desired circular orbit from neutral steering. The proportional–integral–derivative controller (PID
controller) gains for velocity controller are set as 250, 15, 10, respectively.
controller) gains for velocity controller are set as 250, 15, 10, respectively.

Front Wheel Steering Angle

0.20

0.15
Steering Angle(rad)

0.10

0.05

0.00
0 5 10 15 20 25
Time(s)
(a)
Basic Vehicle Trajectory

60

50
Y Coordinate (m)

40

30

20

10

-30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30

X Coordinate (m)
(b)
Figure 6. Simulation setup. (a) Command of front steering-wheel angle; (b) Desired neutral
Figure 6. Simulation setup. (a) Command of front steering-wheel angle; (b) Desired neutral
steering circle.
steering circle.
4. Simulations and Discussion
4. Simulations and Discussion
In this section, the simulation results of the proposed approach are given. Figure 7 shows the
evaluation of the proposed
In this section, EDS in Figure
the simulation results3 of
with different K approach
thea proposed gain. Note arethatgiven.
US stands for under-
Figure 7 shows
the steering, OS represents
evaluation over-steering,
of the proposed EDS inand NS is neutral-steering.
Figure 3 with a different Evidently,
K gain.under
Note K =that
200,US
the stands
system for
can achieve neutral-steering,
under-steering, which ensures safe
OS represents over-steering, and operation. Figure 8 showsEvidently,
NS is neutral-steering. all of the performance
under K = 200,
the indexes
systemwhich concernneutral-steering,
can achieve the evaluation of Figure
which7.ensures
Figure 8asafe
shows that OS is Figure
operation. nimbler8and US isall
shows more
of the
sluggish. OS
performance is suitable
indexes whichfor a racecar,
concern and NS is of
the evaluation fit Figure
for everyday
7. Figure drivers. Figure
8a shows 8b–d
that OS are the
is nimbler
andlongitudinal
US is more acceleration,
sluggish. OSlateral acceleration,
is suitable and yawand
for a racecar, rateNS
of the test,
is fit forrespectively. To sum Figure
everyday drivers. up, OS is
8b–d
are the longitudinal acceleration, lateral acceleration, and yaw rate of the test, respectively. Tothree
nimble, NS is normal, and US is sluggish. Figure 9 shows the adjusted torque from EDS in these sum up,
scenarios. Note that, in the case of K = 500, the vehicle falls into a state of continuous OS. At 10 s, the
OS is nimble, NS is normal, and US is sluggish. Figure 9 shows the adjusted torque from EDS in these
three scenarios. Note that, in the case of K = 500, the vehicle falls into a state of continuous OS. At 10 s,
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 74 6 of 11
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 74 6 of 11
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 74 6 of 11

vehicle becomes
the vehicle unstable
becomes as the
unstable torque
as the of of
torque thethe
rear left
rear leftwheel
wheelincreases
increasesand
andthe
thetorque
torque of
of rear
rear right
right
vehicle becomes unstable as the torque of the rear left wheel increases and the torque of rear right
wheel decreases.
wheel decreases.
wheel decreases.

US
US
NS
NS
OS
OS

Figure
Figure 7.
7. EDS
EDS test
test under
under different K gain.
different K gain.
Figure 7. EDS test under different K gain.

NS US
NS US OS
OS

(a)
(a)
Vehicle Longitudinal Acceleration
0.50
Vehicle Longitudinal Acceleration
0.50
0.25
0.25
0.00
ax(m/s2)

0.00
ax(m/s2)

-0.25 K=50
-0.25 K=50
K=200
K=200
-0.50 K=500
-0.50 K=500
-0.75
-0.75
-1.00
-1.00
0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 12.5 15.0
0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 12.5 15.0
Time(s)
Time(s)
(b)
(b)

Figure 8. Cont.
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 74 7 of 11
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 74 7 of 11

Vehicle Lateral Acceleration

7

Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 674 7 of 11

5
Vehicle Lateral Acceleration
7
ay(m/s2)
4
6
3
5
2 K=50
ay(m/s2)

4 K=200
1 K=500
3
0 K=50
2
0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0
K=200 12.5 15.0
1 Time(s)
K=500
(c)
0
0.6
0.0 2.5 5.0 Vehicle
7.5 Yaw Rate
10.0 12.5 15.0
Time(s)
(c)
0.5
0.6
Vehicle Yaw Rate
Yaw Rate(rad/s)

0.4
0.5
Yaw Rate(rad/s)

0.3
0.4
K=50
0.2
0.3 K=200
0.1
K=50K=500
0.2
K=200
0.0
0.1 K=500
0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 12.5 15.0
0.0 Time(s)
0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 12.5 15.0
(d)
Time(s)
Figure 8. System performance. (d) X coordinate; (b) Longitudinal acceleration; (c) Lateral
(a) Position
Figure 8. System performance. (a) Position of Xof
coordinate; (b) Longitudinal acceleration; (c) Lateral
acceleration;
Figure 8. (d)
acceleration; (d) performance.
System
Yaw Yaw
rate.rate. (a) Position of X coordinate; (b) Longitudinal acceleration; (c) Lateral
acceleration; (d) Yaw rate.
EDS Torque of Front Left Wheel
200 EDS Torque of Front Left Wheel
200 K=50
100 K=50 K=200
100
K=200
0 K=500
Torque(Nm)

0 K=500
Torque(Nm)

-100
-100

-200
-200

-300
-300

-400
-400
-500
-500
0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 12.5 15.0
0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 12.5 15.0
Time(s)
Time(s)
(a)
(a)
Figure 9. Cont.
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 74 8 of 11
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 74 8 of 11

EDS Torque of Front Right Wheel

500
K=50
400
K=200
300 K500

Torque(Nm)
200

100

-100

-200
0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 12.5 15.0
Time(s)
(b)
EDS Torque of Rear Left Wheel
0

-20

-40
Torque(Nm)

-60

-80

-100

-120
K=50
K=200
-140 K=500
-160
0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 12.5 15.0
Time(s)
(c)
EDS Torque of Rear Right Wheel
100

80
K=50
Torque(Nm)

K=200
60
K=500
40

20

0
0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 12.5 15.0
Time(s)
(d)

Figure 9. Adjusting torque from EDS. (a) Front left wheel; (b) Front right wheel; (c) Rear left wheel;
Figure 9. Adjusting torque from EDS. (a) Front left wheel; (b) Front right wheel; (c) Rear left wheel;
(d) Rear right wheel.
(d) Rear right wheel.
Note that from the simulation results, if the K gain is larger than K max
*
, the vehicle will respond
∗
by obvious
Note OS. This
that from is because over-steering
the simulation results, if theis based
K gainonisalarger
large speed
than K difference
max , the between
vehicle willthe left and by
respond
right
obvious wheels.
OS. ThisThus, the torque
is because difference will
over-steering increase,
is based onwhich
a large leads to andifference
speed incensement of yaw moment
between the left and
and the side
right wheels. Thus, slip
theangle.
torqueIt isdifference
known that theincrease,
will larger the side slip
which leadsangle,
to anthe bigger the lateral
incensement of yawforce.
moment
However, if the lateral force exceeds its maximum value due to the saturation
and the side slip angle. It is known that the larger the side slip angle, the bigger the lateral of the tire’s physicalforce.
conditions, the traction force will decay quickly according to the magic formula of tires. Clearly,
However, if the lateral force exceeds its maximum value due to the saturation of the tire’s physical
because of the loss of traction force, the vehicle slides over the motion surface. Then, the vehicle
conditions, the traction force will decay quickly according to the magic formula of tires. Clearly,
motion becomes uncontrollable and thus spins. Figure 10 illustrates the analysis diagram of the gain
because of thepolicy.
adjusting loss ofUnder
traction
this force, the adaptively
discovery, vehicle slides overthe
adjusting theKmotion
gain cansurface. Then, the
easily fine-tune vehicle
motion
motion becomes
behaviors of auncontrollable
vehicle based on and thus spins.
different steering Figure
modes.10For
illustrates
example,the manyanalysis diagram
racecars have sportof and
the gain
adjusting policy. Under this discovery, adaptively adjusting the K gain can easily fine-tune motion
behaviors of a vehicle based on different steering modes. For example, many racecars have sport and
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 74 9 of 11
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 74 9 of 11

urbanurban driving
driving modes modes for users
for users to choose.
to choose. Of course,
Of course, different
different steering
steering modes
modes willwill
alsoalso result
result in
in various
various fuel
fuel economy economy responses.
responses.

Figure 10. Analysis diagram of the gain adjusting polocy.

Figure 10. Analysis diagram of the gain adjusting polocy.
In addition, the performance deteriorations from the larger K gain can also be found in the
analysis
In of control
addition, theory. From the
the performance simulations, the
deteriorations proposed
from approach
the larger shows
K gain canits performance
also be foundon in the
EDS. However, it also sketches some limitations which should be noted. Figure 11 shows
analysis of control theory. From the simulations, the proposed approach shows its performance on EDS. the
rearranged
However, it alsocontrol block
sketches diagram
some of the proposed
limitations EDS. From
which should this figure,
be noted. one 11
Figure canshows
obtain the
the transfer
rearranged
function as
control block diagram of the proposed EDS. From this figure, one can obtain the transfer function as
ωie G (s) K (s)
= . (8)
ωie V * 1 + G ( s) K ( s )G+(KG
s)K((s )s)− KM T G ( s )
∗
= (8)
V 1 + G (s)K (s) + KG (s) − KMT G (s)
From
Appl. Sci. 2017,Equation
7, 74 (8), one can observe an interesting fact that adequate K gain can improve the
10 EDS
of 11
performance. However, too large of a K gain will lead to an unstable scenario. The analysis concludes
the same results discovered from the simulations. Consequently, by using the proposed EDS, the
corresponding gain K should be carefully selected. K

+
T* V* + ωi −
1 + PID: K v (s) EV: G(s) ωie
s
− +
V

ωi*
EDS: M T
δ*
Figure 11. Control block diagram of proposed scheme.
Figure 11. Control block diagram of proposed scheme.
5. Conclusions
This paper has established an EDS control strategy for four-wheel drive electric vehicles.
Numerous steady steering simulation tests that comply with the requirements of ISO4238:2012 were
carried out to study the characteristics of EDS. The simulation results demonstrated that given a
larger feedback gain, the actual wheel speed can better track the reference wheel speed from the EDS.
However, in this case, the vehicle shows an obvious over-steering tendency. On the contrary, the
wheel speed cannot track the reference wheel speed well with a small feedback gain. In order to find
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 74 10 of 11

From Equation (8), one can observe an interesting fact that adequate K gain can improve the
EDS performance. However, too large of a K gain will lead to an unstable scenario. The analysis
concludes the same results discovered from the simulations. Consequently, by using the proposed
EDS, the corresponding gain K should be carefully selected.

5. Conclusions
This paper has established an EDS control strategy for four-wheel drive electric vehicles.
Numerous steady steering simulation tests that comply with the requirements of ISO4238:2012 were
carried out to study the characteristics of EDS. The simulation results demonstrated that given a larger
feedback gain, the actual wheel speed can better track the reference wheel speed from the EDS.
However, in this case, the vehicle shows an obvious over-steering tendency. On the contrary, the wheel
speed cannot track the reference wheel speed well with a small feedback gain. In order to find the
mechanism of the specific phenomenon above, this paper made a deep discussion and analysis from
the aspects of vehicle dynamics and nonlinear tire property. As a conclusion, for the vehicle system
with EDS control, there should be an adjustable feedback gain, rather than a fixed one, to deliver
good steering characteristics. This feedback mechanism will contribute to the future research and
development on EDS, especially to improvement in the vehicle steering characteristics.

Acknowledgments: This work was mainly supported by the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) of
Taiwan, under projects MOST 104-2221-E-024-008 and MOST 105-2218-E-006-008. Part of this work was supported
by “the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities” of China, under projects No. 30915011305 and
No. 30915118802.
Author Contributions: Dejun Yin and Danfeng Shan initiated and discussed the research problem; Jia-Sheng Hu
conceived and developed the methods; Dejun Yin and Danfeng Shan performed the simulations; Jia-Sheng Hu
analyzed the data; Dejun Yin and Jia-Sheng Hu prepared and wrote the paper.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Tabbache, B.; Kheloui, A.; Benbouzid, M.E.H. An adaptive electric differential for electric vehicles motion
stabilization. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 2011, 60, 104–110. [CrossRef]
2. Zhao, Y.E.; Zhang, J.W. Modelling and simulation of electronic differential system for an electric vehicle with
two-motor-wheel drive. Int. J. Veh. Syst. Model. Test. 2009, 4, 117–131. [CrossRef]
3. Hartani, K.; Bourahla, M.; Miloud, Y.; Sekkour, M. Direct torque control of an electronic differential for
electric vehicle with separate wheel drives. J. Autom. Syst. Eng. 2008, 2, 22–38.
4. Tsai, M.C.; Hu, J.S. Pilot control of an auto-balancing two-wheeled cart. Adv. Robot. 2007, 21, 817–827.
[CrossRef]
5. Hu, J.-S.; Lin, X.-C.; Yin, D.; Hu, F.-R. Dynamic motion stabilization for front-wheel drive in-wheel motor
electric vehicles. Adv. Mech. Eng. 2015, 7, 1–11. [CrossRef]
6. Nasri, A.; Gasbaoui, B.; Fayssal, B.M. Sliding mode control for four wheels electric vehicle drive.
Procedia Technol. 2016, 22, 518–526. [CrossRef]
7. Ren, T.-J.; Chen, T.-C.; Chen, C.-J. Motion control for a two-wheeled vehicle using a self-tuning PID controller.
Control Eng. Pract. 2008, 16, 365–375. [CrossRef]
8. Shimizu, H.; Harada, J.; Bland, C.; Kawakami, K.; Chan, L. Advanced concepts in electric vehicle design.
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 1997, 44, 14–18. [CrossRef]
9. Hori, Y. Future vehicle driven by electricity and control-research on four-wheel-motored “UOT electric
march II”. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2004, 51, 954–962. [CrossRef]
10. Hu, J.S.; Huang, Y.R.; Hu, F.R. Development of traction control for front-wheel drive in-wheel motor electric
vehicles. Int. J. Electr. Hybrid Veh. 2012, 4, 344–358. [CrossRef]
11. ISO 4138:2012. In Passenger Cars—Steady-State Circular Driving Behaviour—Open-Loop Test Methods; International
Organization for Standardization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2012.
Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 74 11 of 11

12. Kahveci, H.; Okumus, H.I.; Ekici, M. An electronic differential system using fuzzy logic speed controlled
in-wheel brushless DC motors. In Proceedings of the 2013 Fourth International Conference on Power
Engineering, Energy and Electrical Drives, Istanbul, Turkey, 13–17 May 2013.
13. Gair, S.; Cruden, A.; McDonald, J.; Hredzak, B. Electronic differential with sliding mode controller for a direct
wheel drive electric vehicle. In Proceedings of the 2004 IEEE International Conference on Mechatronics,
Istanbul, Turkey, 3–5 June 2004.
14. Yıldırım, M.; Öksüztepe, E.; Tanyeri, B.; Kürüm, H. Design of electronic differential system for an electric
vehicle with in-wheel motor. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE Power and Energy Conference at Illinois
(PECI), Urbana, IL, USA, 19–20 February 2016.
15. Zhou, Y.; Li, S.; Zhou, X.; Fang, Z. The control strategy of electronic differential for EV with four
in-wheel motors. In Proceedings of the 2010 Chinese Control and Decision Conference, Xuzhou, China,
26–28 May 2010.
16. Hajihosseinlu, A.; Filizadeh, S.; Bistyak, G.; Dirks, E. Electronic differential design for a vehicle with four
independently controlled in-wheel motors. In Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE International on Electric Vehicle
Conference (IEVC), Florence, Italy, 17–19 December 2014.
17. Zhao, L.; Liu, Z. Vehicle velocity and roll angle estimation with road and friction adaptation for four-wheel
independent drive electric vehicle. Math. Probl. Eng. 2014, 2014. [CrossRef]
18. Alipour, H.; Sabahi, M.; Sharifian, M.B.B. Lateral stabilization of a four wheel independent drive electric
vehicle on slippery roads. Mechatronics 2015, 30, 275–285. [CrossRef]

© 2017 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC-BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).