IET Intelligent Transport Systems

Research Article

Robust fault-tolerant H output feedback ∞

ISSN 1751-956X
Received on 9th June 2020
Revised 28th September 2020
control of active suspension and dynamic Accepted on 13th October 2020
doi: 10.1049/iet-its.2020.0364
vibration absorber with finite-frequency www.ietdl.org

constraint
Yuanzhi Zhang1,2, Mingchun Liu2 , Caizhi Zhang1
1School of Automotive Engineering, The State Key Laboratory of Mechanical Transmissions, Chongqing Automotive Collaborative Innovation
Center, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400044, People's Republic of China
2School of Mechatronics Engineering, Nanchang University, Nanchang 330031, People's Republic of China

E-mail: liumingchun@ncu.edu.cn

Abstract: Currently, majorities of the robust H∞ control methods are designed for active suspensions, and seldom take the
active control of the in-wheel-motor (IWM) into consideration for IWM driven electric vehicles (EVs). In this study, a robust fault-
tolerant H∞ output feedback control strategy with finite-frequency constraint is proposed to synchronously control the active
suspension and dynamic vibration absorber (DVA) for IWM driven EVs. Firstly, a DVA-based electric wheel model is developed,
in which the IWM is designed as DVA. Furthermore, the spring-damper parameters of the DVA are matched by using particle
swarm optimisation (PSO). Then, the robust fault-tolerant H∞ output feedback control strategy is developed based on linear
matrix inequality, in which the finite-frequency constraint is designed in the resonance frequency range of sprung mass. Finally,
simulation results validate that the PSO can effectively optimise the spring-damper parameters of the DVA. The robust fault-
tolerant H∞ output feedback control with finite-frequency constraint can effectively improve the ride comfort and suppress the
vertical vibration caused by IWM compared with entire frequency constraint. Meanwhile, the fault-tolerant effectiveness of the
proposed method is demonstrated under the actuator faults concerning the actuator force noises and losses.

1 Introduction active suspension are not measurable. Currently, the robust H∞

In recent years, electric vehicles (EVs) have been generally applied
due to the high efficiency and clean energy [1]. Specially, in-
wheel-motor (IWM) has attracted tremendous attention because of
many benefits, such as precise torque generation, roomier space
layout, high motor response and energy efficiency [2, 3].
Therefore, it has been considered as a promising solution for better
handling performance of EVs. However, the IWM increases the
unsprung mass of each wheel, which can lead to increase the
frequency response around 10 Hz and significantly deteriorate the
ride comfort, suspension stroke and road holding of IWM driven
EVs [4, 5]. Meanwhile, the violent vibration of IWMs can result in
the wear of the motor bearing [6, 7]. To solve the aforementioned
problems, the IWM is designed as a dynamic vibration absorber
(DVA), and is suspended from extra springs and dampers [8, 9].
Therefore, it is flexibly connected to the sprung mass and unsprung
mass to offset the road vibration input. In [10, 11], the DVA can
suppress the vertical vibration caused by the IWM if the
parameters of the extra springs and dampers are properly matched.
Due to superiorities on dealing with model uncertainties,
external disturbance and actuator fault [12, 13], the robust H∞
control has been widely utilised to improve the ride comfort and
handling stability for active suspensions. It is known that the
transfer function of vertical acceleration for sprung mass has
invariant points at resonance frequency range [14], in which the
resonance frequency range of vehicle body is 1–2 Hz [15].
Therefore, the robust finite-frequency H∞ control strategy, based
on state feedback [10, 16] or output feedback [17, 18], is proposed
to control the active suspension in finite-frequency ranges. In
addition, the robust H∞ control strategy is generally designed in the
framework of linear matrix inequality (LMI) [19, 20]. In detail, the
robust H∞ state feedback control strategy is designed based on the
assumption that all the state variables including the vertical
velocity and displacements of the unsprung mass and sprung mass
can be measured [10, 16]. However, some state variables of the
output feedback control strategy can select measurable state
variables to control the active suspension [17, 18]. Therefore, the
robust H∞ output feedback control strategy is more feasible in
engineering.
In addition, the vertical vibration caused by the IWM can
influence the active suspension performance because of the
coupled suspension-IWM system of IWM driven EVs [4, 21].
Therefore, the robust H∞ control method can be also applied in the
control of the active suspension for improving the ride comfort and
suppressing the vertical vibration caused by the IWM for IWM
driven EVs [9–11]. For active suspensions, Shao et al. [9] proposed
a fault-tolerant fuzzy H∞ control, Wang et al. [10] proposed a
finite-frequency state feedback H∞ control and Shao et al. [11]
proposed an output feedback H∞ control. Meanwhile, the IWM is
designed as a DVA, which can effectively suppress the vertical
vibration acting on IWM bearings, and improve the ride comfort of
sprung mass. It is demonstrated that the robust H∞ control strategy
can suppress the vertical vibration of sprung mass effectively in the
concerned frequency range. However, majorities of the robust H∞
control methods are designed for active suspensions, and seldom
take the active control of the IWM into consideration.
Moreover, actuator faults can cause the instability of active
suspensions, and deteriorate the control performance [9, 22, 23].
Some fault-tolerant control methods are proposed to deal with
possible actuator faults for active suspensions [11, 24, 25]. For
active suspensions of IWM driven EVs, Shao et al. [11] proposed
an output feedback H∞ control strategy with time delay and
actuator faults, and Jing et al. [24] proposed a robust H∞ fault-
tolerant control strategy to reduce the effects caused by actuator
faults. For active suspensions of full-car, Wang et al. [25] proposed
a robust fault-tolerant H∞ control, which is designed based on
finite-frequency constraint. However, the fault-tolerant control
strategies are not developed for the robust H∞ control of both the
active suspension and DVA.

IET Intell. Transp. Syst. 1

© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020

Fig. 1  EV and different electric wheel models
(a) EV, (b) Con-EW, (c) DVA-EW
Fig. 2  Active DVA-EW model
In this paper, in order to take the robust H∞ control of the IWM
into consideration in the active control design of active suspensions
for IWM driven EVs, a robust fault-tolerant H∞ output feedback
control strategy is proposed, in which the active suspension and
DVA are synchronously controlled with the finite-frequency
constraint. The proposed framework is described as follows. First,
a DVA-based electric wheel (DVA-EW) model is employed, and a
particle swarm optimisation (PSO) method is designed to match the
spring-damper parameters of the DVA. Then, the robust fault-
tolerant H∞ output feedback control strategy with finite-frequency
constraint is designed to improve the ride comfort and suppress the
vertical vibration caused by the IWM in the resonance frequency
range of sprung mass (1–2 Hz). Meanwhile, the suspension stroke
and road holding are maintained as well. The proposed method is
designed to guarantee the system performance in the actuator faults
concerning actuator force noises and losses. In detail, the DVA-EW
and PSO methods are designed in Section 2. The robust fault-
tolerant H∞ output feedback control strategy with finite-frequency
constraint is designed in Section 3. Section 4 presents the
effectiveness of the proposed strategy by simulation results. The
conclusions are briefly summarised in Section 5.
Notation: P s is the algebraic operation of P + PT. P⊥, P−1 and
T
P are the orthogonal complement, inverse and transpose of matrix
P, respectively. The symbol ∗ is the symmetric part. diag(⋯) is the
diagonal matrix.
2 System modelling
2.1 Model of EV, Con-EW and DVA-EW
For an EV, a motor is installed into vehicle chassis, such that the
motor is a part of sprung mass, as shown in Fig. 1a. For a
conventional electric wheel (Con-EW), rotor and stator of the IWM
are directly installed to the hub and shaft of vehicle wheels,
respectively, as shown in Fig. 1b. In order to suppress the vertical
vibration caused by the IWM, the IWM is designed as a DVA, and
attached to unsprung mass and sprung mass through spring-damper
systems, as shown in Fig. 1c.
In Figs. 1a–c, Ke1 and Ke2 are the stiffness of DVA springs; Ce1
and Ce2 are the damping of DVA dampers; ms, mu and me are the
mass of the vehicle chassis, wheel assembly and IWM,
respectively; Kt and Ks are the stiffness of the tire and active
suspension, respectively; Cs is the damping of the active
suspension; xs, xu, xe and xr are the vertical displacements of the
2 IET Intell. Transp. Syst.
sprung mass, unsprung mass, IWM and road disturbance,
respectively.
2.2 PSO design for spring-damper parameters of DVA
Generally, the four spring-damper parameters of the DVA Ke1, Ce1,
Ke2 and Ce2 affect four performance evaluation indexes, including
the ride comfort, vertical vibration caused by the IWM, suspension
stroke and road holding for the IWM driven EV. The four
performance evaluation indexes are evaluated by the sprung mass
acceleration (as = ẍs), dynamic force applied on IWM (Fe = me ẍe),
suspension deflection (df = xs − xu) and tire dynamic load
(Ft = Kt xu − xr ), respectively.
The spring-damper parameters of the DVA are determined by
using the PSO method, which is an effective method to deal with
optimisation problem with constrains. Considering the above four
evaluation indexes, the optimisation objective function is defined
as [26]
RMS as RMS Fe
Jpara Ke1, Ce1, Ke2, Ce2 = w1 + w2
RMS asCon − EW RMS FeCon − EW
RMS df RMS Ft
+w3 + w4
RMS dfCon − EW RMS FtCon − EW
(1)
where asCon − EW, FeCon − EW, dfCon − EW and FtCon − EW are the sprung
mass acceleration, dynamic force applied on IWM, suspension
deflection and tire dynamic load of the Con-EW, and as, Fe, df and
Ft are those of the DVA-EW, respectively. RMS(⋯) is the root
mean square (RMS) value. Meanwhile, w1, w2, w3 and w4 are the
weighting factors for the four evaluation indexes, and they are set
as 0.3, 0.4, 0.15 and 0.15, respectively.
In addition, the suspension deflection of the DVA-EW df and
the vertical displacement between the unsprung mass and IWM
(xe − xu) should be limited to ensure safe working spaces of the
active suspension and DVA. Meanwhile, tire dynamic load of the
DVA-EW Ft should be maintained to ensure proper road holding.
The relative damping coefficient of the sprung mass ξs and
unsprung mass ξu, and natural frequency of the sprung mass ωs and
unsprung mass ωu should be limited within reasonable ranges.
Therefore, the following constrains for spring-damper parameters
of the DVA are defined as [26]
RMS df ≤ 5 mm
RMS xe − xu ≤ 4 mm
max xe − xu ≤ 12 mm
RMS Ft ≤ ms + mu + me g/3
(2)
0.2 ≤ ξs ≤ 0.5
1 ≤ ωs ≤ 1.5
0.2 ≤ ξu ≤ 0.5
10 ≤ ωu ≤ 13
The PSO method is employed to minimise the optimisation
objective function (1) with constrains (2), such that the optimal
solution of spring-damper parameters of the DVA can be found.
The optimisation processes of PSO method can be found in [26].
2.3 Model of active DVA-EW
In order to further absorb the vertical vibration of both the IWM
and active suspension, two active actuator forces of the DVA u1 and
active suspension u2 are added to the active DVA-EW, respectively,
as shown in Fig. 2.
Focusing on improving the ride comfort and suppressing the
vertical vibration caused by the IWM, the following conditions
should be strictly satisfied:
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
(i) The sprung mass acceleration ẍs and IWM vertical acceleration
ẍe should be minimised.
C1 =
(ii) The suspension deflection df = xs − xu and tire dynamic load
Ft = Kt xu − xr cannot be more than the allowable maximum value
dfmax and static maximum value Ft − static = ms + mu + me g, Cs + Ce2 Ce2 Cs Ks + Ke2 Ke2
− − 0
respectively. ms ms ms ms ms
(iii) Moreover, xs − xu and xe − xu stand for the relative drifts Ce2 Ce1 + Ce2 Ce1 K e2 Ke1 + Ke2
between the sprung mass and unsprung mass, the IWM and − − 0
me me me me me
unsprung mass, respectively, which are easily measurable.
1 1
Therefore, the controlled output z1 and z2, measurement output y 0 0 0 0 0 0
dfmax ms
are defined as C2 = , D1 = ,
Kt 1
0 0 0 0 0 − 0
xs − xu Kt xu − xr T Ft − static me
z1 = ẍs ẍe T, z2 = ,
dfmax Ft − static
0 0
D2 =
y = xs − xu xe − xu . T 0 0

The state vector x, fault-tolerant controlled input uf and

disturbance input w are defined as 0 0 0 1 0 0
C3 =
0 0 0 0 1 0
x = ẋs ẋe ẋ u xs − xu xe − xu xr − xu T,
Then, the robust fault-tolerant H∞ output feedback control strategy
T with finite-frequency constraint is designed to synchronously
uf = u1 u2 ,
determine the active actuator force u1 and u2, such that the system
w = ẋr . (3) satisfies

sup G jω ∞ < γ (4)

The state-space equation of the active DVA-EW can be descripted ω1 ≤ ω ≤ ω2
by
where G jω is the transfer function of the system (3). γ > 0 is a
ẋ = Ax + Buf + Gw positive scalar. Meanwhile, ω1 and ω2 are the lower and upper
z1 = C1 x + D1 uf bounds of the finite-frequency constraint, respectively, in which the
(3) finite-frequency constraint is designed in the resonance frequency
z2 = C2 x + D2uf
range of sprung mass (1–2 Hz). Therefore, ω1 and ω2 are 1 and 2 
y = C3 x Hz, respectively. Moreover, the controlled output z2 should be
limited, as follows:
where (see equation below),
z2 i ≤ 1, i = 1, 2 (5)
T
1 1
0 − 0 0 0
me mu
B= , G 3 Robust fault-tolerant H∞ output feedback
1 1
0 − 0 0 0 control with finite-frequency constraint
ms mu
3.1 Lemmas introduction
T The essential lemmas of the robust fault-tolerant H∞ output
= 0 0 0 0 0 1
feedback control with finite-frequency constraint are introduced as
follows:
 
Lemma 1: (Generalised Kalman-Yakubovic-Popov (KYP)
lemma): For a linear system Ā, B̄, C̄, D̄ , the following two
inequalities are equivalent [27].

(i) The finite-frequency inequality

T
G jω G jω
Π < 0, ω1 ≤ ω ≤ ω2 . (6)
I I

Cs + Ce2 Ce2 Cs K s + K e2 K e2
− − 0
ms ms ms ms ms
Ce2 Ce1 + Ce2 Ce1 K e2 Ke1 + Ke2
− − 0
me me me me me
A= Cs Ce1 Cs + Ce1 Ks K e1 Kt
−
mu mu mu mu mu mu
1 0 −1 0 0 0
0 1 −1 0 0 0
0 0 −1 0 0 0
IET Intell. Transp. Syst. 3
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
where G jω is the transfer function of the linear system value M̄ fi, respectively. The fault-tolerant matrix includes three
Ā, B̄, C̄, D̄ . different actuator conditions, and are listed as follows:
(ii) There exists symmetric matrices Π, P, Q > 0, and
(i) M fi = M̄ fi = 0, i = 1, 2, mean that the corresponding actuators
T are completely failed.
Γ P, Q, C̄, D̄ C̄, D̄
<0 (7) (ii) 0 < M fi ≤ M̄ fi < 1, i = 1, 2, mean that the corresponding
∗ −I
actuators exist partial faults.
where (iii) M fi = M̄ fi = 1, i = 1, 2, mean that the corresponding actuators
have no faults.
T −Q P + jωcQ Ā
Ā B̄ B̄
Γ P, Q, C̄, D̄ = + In this paper, M fi and M̄ fi are designed by 0.2 and 1, respectively,
I 0 P − jωcQ −ω1ω2Q I 0 which means that the actuators possibly have 0–80% faults.
0 C̄Π12 Therefore, the fault matrix Mf can be obtained by a polytope M
T with four vertices
∗ D̄ Π12 + Π22
s
4 4
with M ≜ Mf Mf = ∑ α jMfj; ∑ α j = 1, α j ≥ 0 (14)
Π11 Π12 T T
j=1 j=1
Π= , D̄ Π12 = D̄ Π12 + ΠT12 D̄ and ωc = ω1 + ω2 /2.
∗ Π22 s
0.2 0 1 0
where the constant matrices Mf1 = , Mf2 = ,
  0 0.2 0 0.2
Lemma 2: (Projection lemma): Given real matrices Ω, Λ1 and 0.2 0 1 0
Mf3 = and Mf4 = .
Λ2, there exists a matrix F such that Ω + Λ1FΛ2 + Λ1FΛ2 T < 0, if 0 1 0 1
the two conditions hold [28]: Substituting (12) into the system (3), the system (3) with robust
fault-tolerant H∞ output feedback control is obtained as
T T
Λ1⊥Ω Λ1⊥ < 0, Λ2⊥Ω Λ⊥2 <0 (8) ¯
ẋ = Ax + B̄w
  ¯
Lemma 3: (Reciprocal projection lemma): Given real matrices z1 = Cx + D̄w (15)
P, S and W, and a positive definite matrix Ψ, the inequality z2 = C2 x
P + S + ST < 0 is equivalent [28]
where Ā = A + B jK f C3, B̄ = G, C̄ = C1 + D1jK f C3, D̄ = 0,
T T
P+Ψ− W s S +W j
B =
j
BM f and D1 = j j
j = 1, ⋯, 4. In (15), the transfer
D1 M f ,
<0 (9)
∗ −Ψ function of the system (15) can be obtained as
 
−1
Lemma 4: (Schur complement). There exists a symmetric matrix G jω = C̄ sI − Ā B̄ + D̄ (16)
S, the following three inequalities are equivalent [29]:
The gain matrix Kf is calculated by using the robust fault-tolerant
S<0
H∞ output feedback control with finite-frequency constraint. It can
T −1
S11 < 0, S22 − S12 S11 S12 < 0 (10) guarantee that the system (15) is asymptotically stable, and the
T −1 transfer function (16) can satisfy the finite-frequency inequality (4)
S22 < 0, S11 − S S S < 0
12 22 12
under the constrain inequality (5).
Based on Lemmas 1, 2, 3 and 4, the robust fault-tolerant H∞
S11 S12
where S = . output feedback control with finite-frequency constraint is
S21 S22 designed as follows:
 
3.2 Control strategy design Theorem 1: The fault-tolerant control is designed firstly. If there
The desired actuator force u including two actuator forces of the exist Q = QT > 0 and Msf , such that the inequality (17) is satisfied
DVA u1 and active suspension u2 is considered as as [30]:
T
u = Kf y = Kf C3 x (11) AQ + QAT + B j Msf + B j Msf <0 (17)

where K f is the gain matrix. However, unavoidable faults in j

actuators can deteriorate the dynamic performance of the DVA and
active suspension. Therefore, the real actuator force u f considering
the actuator faults can be expressed as
uf = Mf u = Mf Kf C3 x
where Mf is the fault matrix, which is the actuator faults of the
DVA and active suspension, and is written as
Mf = diag Mf 1, Mf 2
where Mf 1 and Mf 2 are the possible faults in the actuators of the
DVA and active suspension, respectively. Mfi, i = 1, 2, are assumed
to be bounded by their minimum value M fi and their maximum
where B j = BM f , j = 1, ⋯, 4. The fault-tolerant gain matrix Ksf
can be obtained as
Ksf = Msf Q−1 (18)
(12) Proof 1: Based on the aforementioned lemmas, Theorem 1 can
be proved and found in [30]. □
 
Theorem 2: Given positive scalars γ and ρ, there exists the
robust fault-tolerant H∞ output feedback controlled input (12) with
(13) finite-frequency inequality (4) to ensure the asymptotically stability
for the system (15). Meanwhile, the controlled input (12) must
ensure the finite-frequency inequality (4) with the disturbance
w ≤ wmax = ρ/ γ 2, and the constrain inequality (5) is satisfied.
There exists a general matrix F, and symmetric matrices P, P1 > 0,
Q > 0, which are satisfied as

4 IET Intell. Transp. Syst.

© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
 T −Q̄ P̄ + jωcQ̄ − F̄ 0 0
FT Ā + Ā F < 0 (19)
T
P̄ − jωcQ̄ − F̄ −ω1ω2Q̄ + Λ3 G Λ4
−Q P + jωcQ − F 0 0 <0 (27)
2
T ∗ ∗ −γI 0
P − jωcQ − FT −ω1ω2Q + FT Ā FTB̄ C̄
s
< 0 (20) ∗ ∗ ∗ −I
2 T
∗ ∗ −γI D̄
−I ρ C2 iF̄
∗ ∗ ∗ −I < 0, i = 1, 2 (28)
∗ −P̄1
−I ρ C2 i
< 0, i = 1, 2 (21) ^
∗ −P1 where Λ3 = AF̄ + B jK f + B jKsf F̄ ,
s
  T ^T T
Λ4 = F̄ C1T + K f D1jT + F̄ KsfT D1jT.
Proof 2: Based on the aforementioned lemmas, Theorem 2 can
be proved. Similar proof of (19) can be found in [31] and be By solving the LMI problems (26)–(28), the gain matrix K f C3 is
proved by Lemmas 3 and 4. Equations (20) and (21) can be found obtained as
in [16], and be proved by Lemmas 1, 2 and 4. □ ^ −1
However, the term of FT Ā in inequalities (19) and (20) is K f C3 = K f F̄ + Ksf (29)
equivalent to FT A + B jKf C3 , such that the matrix F is coupled
 
with the output feedback gain Kf , which results in non-convex
Proof 4: A new variable S is defined as S = Kf C3 − Ksf .
condition of inequalities (19) and (20). Therefore, Theorem 3 is ^
introduced for the robust fault-tolerant H∞ output feedback control Substituting (25) into S = Kf C3 − Ksf , and defining K f = SF̄, the
design with finite-frequency constraint. following equation is defined as
  ^
Theorem 3: If there exists a general matrix F̄, and symmetric K̄ f = K f + Ksf F̄ (30)
matrices P̄, P̄1 > 0, Q̄ > 0, which are satisfied as
Substituting (30) into (22) and (23), the inequalities (22) and (23)
Λ1 < 0 (22) are equivalent to inequalities (26) and (27), respectively. □
However, (29) cannot directly solve the gain matrix Kf , thus a
−Q̄ P̄ + jωcQ̄ − F̄ 0 0 new variable substitution method is used to deal with the output
T
feedback problem by Theorem 5 [18, 32].
P̄ − jωcQ̄ − F̄ −ω1ω2Q̄ + Λ1 G Λ2  
<0 (23)
∗ ∗ −γI 2
0 Theorem 5: If there exists general matrices F̄, KR, FN > 0, and
∗ ∗ ∗ −I symmetric matrices P̄, P̄1 > 0, Q̄ > 0, FR > 0, which are satisfied
as
−I ρ C2 iF̄
< 0, i = 1, 2 (24) Λ5 < 0 (31)
∗ −P̄1
−Q̄ P̄ + jωcQ̄ − F̄ 0 0
T T T
where Λ1 = AF̄ + B jK̄ f s, Λ2 = F̄ C1T + K̄ f D1jT, Q̄ = F−1 QF−1, T
P̄ − jωcQ̄ − F̄ −ω1ω2Q̄ + Λ5 G Λ6
T T <0 (32)
P̄ = F−1 PF−1, P̄1 = F−1 P1F−1, K̄ f = Kf C3F−1, F̄ = F−1. 2
∗ ∗ −γI 0
By solving the LMI problems (22)–(24), the gain matrix Kf C3 is
obtained as ∗ ∗ ∗ −I

−1 −I Λ7
Kf C3 = K̄ f F̄ (25) <0 (33)
∗ −P̄1
 
Proof 3: H1 = F−1, H2 = diag F−1, F−1, I, I and where (see equation below)
−1
H3 = diag I, F are defined to solve the non-convex problem of
Λ6 = NFNT NTC1T + RFRT RTC1T + RKRT D1jT + NFNT NTKsfT D1jT
inequalities (19) and (20). The three congruence transformations
+ RFRT RTKsfT D1jT
are executed to (19), (20) and (21), respectively, by H1T, H2T and H3T
on the left, and H1, H2 and H3 on the right. Then, inequality (19),
(20) and (21) is equivalent to inequality (22), (23) and (24), Λ7 = ρ C2 i NFN NT + ρ C2 i RFR RT, i = 1, 2.
respectively. □ By solving the numerically tractable LMI problems (31)–(33),
Once the fault-tolerant gain matrix Ksf and finite-frequency H∞ the gain matrix Kf is obtain as
output feedback gain matrix Kf C3 is obtained, the gain matrix Kf C3
is further determined by Theorem 4. Kf = KRFR−1 (34)
 
Theorem 4: If there exists a general matrix F̄, and symmetric  
matrices P̄, P̄1 > 0, Q̄ > 0, which are satisfied as Proof 5: Firstly, the following variables are defined as:
^
Λ3 < 0 (26) K f = KR RT
F̄ = NFN NT + RFR RT (35)
R = C3† + NL1

Λ5 = ANFN NT + ARFR RT + B jKs f NFN NT + B jKsf RFR RT + B jKR RT s

IET Intell. Transp. Syst. 5

© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
where N is the matrix whose columns are a basis of Ker(C3). C3† is Table 1 Basic parameters of EV, Con-EW and DVA-EW
the Moore–Penrose pseudoinverse of C3. L1 is an arbitrary matrix, Parameters Notation Units Value
which is a zero matrix in this paper. Substituting (35) into (26)– sprung mass ms kg 292
(28), the inequalities (26)–(28) are equivalent to inequalities (31)– unsprung mass mu kg 45
(33), respectively. □
electric motor mass me kg 40
Note that the inequality (32) has a complex variable jωcQ̄.
suspension stiffness Ks N·m−1 17,000
Inspired by Gahinet et al. [33], the inequality S1 + jS2 < 0 is
S1 S2 suspension damping Cs N·s·m−1 1317
equivalent to < 0, thus the LMI problem in (32) can be
−S2 S1 vertical stiffness of tire Kt N·m−1 241,600
solved.

4 Simulation results analysis

4.1 Optimisation results for spring-damper parameters of the
DVA
In this section, we carry out simulations on five different cases of
quarter-vehicle models to demonstrate the effectiveness of the
proposed method. The basic parameters of the quarter-vehicle
models are given in Table 1.
The three different models of the EV, Con-EW and DVA-EW
carried out simulations to validate the PSO effectiveness. The basic
parameters are listed in Table 1, and the optimised spring-damper
parameters of the DVA by using the PSO are as follows:
Ke1 = 580 N ⋅ m−1, Ke2 = 8600 N ⋅ m−1, Ce1 = 528 N ⋅ s ⋅ m−1,
−1
Ce2 = 68 N ⋅ s ⋅ m .
The frequency responses results of as, Fe, df and Ft are selected
as the indicators and are shown in Fig. 3. From Fig. 3, the Con-EW
can significantly deteriorate the vertical performance of both the
four evaluation factors compared with the EV. Meanwhile, the
resonance frequency of unsprung mass in the EV is around 10 Hz,
and that in the Con-EW is around 8 Hz. The decreased resonance
frequency of unsprung mass is not beneficial for improving the ride
comfort and suppressing the resonance vibration between the
unsprung mass and sprung mass. Therefore, the performance of the
Con-EW is poor compared with the EV, which is due to the
increased unsprung mass of each wheel.
As shown in Fig. 3, the resonance frequency of unsprung mass
for the DVA-EW is increased to 10 Hz. Meanwhile, the frequency
responses of the DVA-EW in both the four evaluation factors are
greatly decreased around 10 Hz compared with those of the Con-
EW. Therefore, the DVA-EW can improve the ride comfort and
road holding, and reduce the vertical vibration caused by the IWM
and suspension stroke. Meanwhile, the performance of the DVA-
EW is close to that of the EV in Fig. 3.

4.2 Results of finite-frequency responses

In this section, the robust fault-tolerant H∞ output feedback control
with entire frequency constraint is designed to compare the finite-
frequency performance of the proposed control method under the
random road, in which the random road is the C-Grade, and the
vehicle speed is 70 km/h. In addition, the DVA-EW, active DVA-
EW with controls I and II are given in Table 2. The gain matrices
of entire frequency Ke and finite-frequency Kf are obtained as

−0.158 0.352
Ke = 104 × , K f = 104 ×
0.173 −0.216
−0.508 1.616 (36)
0.579 −0.454

The time responses of DVA-EW, active DVA-EW with controls I

and II under rand road are shown in Fig. 4. It demonstrates that as
of the active DVA-EW with control II is smaller than that of the
other two cases. The RMS values of as, Fe, df and Ft in the DVA- Fig. 3  Frequency responses of EV, Con-EW and DVA-EW
EW, active DVA-EW with controls I and II are listed in Table 3. as (a) Sprung mass acceleration, (b) Dynamic force applied on IWM, (c) Suspension
of active DVA-EW with controls I and II is reduced by 3.45 and deflection, (d) Tire dynamic load
13.79%, respectively, compared with DVA-EW. The results
demonstrate that the robust fault-tolerant H∞ output feedback Meanwhile, the other three evaluation factors of Fe, df and Ft can
control with finite-frequency constraint can significantly improve be guaranteed as well.
the better ride comfort compared with entire frequency constraint.

6 IET Intell. Transp. Syst.

© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
Table 2 Three control cases of DVA-EW, active DVA-EW Table 3 RMS comparison of DVA-EW, active DVA-EW with
with controls I and II controls I and II under rand road
Model marked Active suspension and DVA control Model marked as, m ⋅ s−2/Decrement, % Fe, N df , mm Ft, N
DVA-EW no control DVA-EW 0.58/— 50.66 4.38 386.71
active DVA-EW with robust fault-tolerant H∞ output feedback control I 0.56/3.45 50.86 4.42 386.81
control I control with entire frequency constraint control II 0.50/13.79 50.84 4.10 393.18
active DVA-EW with robust fault-tolerant H∞ output feedback
control II control with finite-frequency constraint

Fig. 5  Actuator forces of active suspension and DVA under rand road
(a) Actuator forces of active suspension, (b) Actuator forces of DVA

suspension and DVA. In addition, as and Fe of the active DVA-EW

with control II are significantly reduced compared with the active
DVA-EW with control I in the resonance frequency range of
sprung mass (1–2 Hz), which indicates the control II has better
performance for the range of finite-frequency constraint. Therefore,
it is observed that the control II can improve the ride comfort, and
suppress the vertical vibration caused by IWM in the resonance
frequency range of sprung mass (1–2 Hz).
In addition, Figs. 6c and d show that the active controls I and II
can guarantee acceptable suspension stroke and road holding.

4.3 Results of actuator faults

The bumpy road is conducted to demonstrate the effectiveness of
robust fault-tolerant H∞ output feedback control with finite-
frequency constraint when actuator faults including actuator force
noises and losses occur. The bumpy road [34] is given as

Hπvx 2πvx L
sin t, 0≤t≤
L L vx
wt = (37)
L
0, 0≤t≤
vx

where vx is the vehicle speed, which is equivalent to 30 km/h; L

Fig. 4  Time responses of DVA-EW, active DVA-EW with controls I and II
under rand road
(a) Sprung mass acceleration, (b) Dynamic force applied on IWM, (c) Suspension
deflection, (d) Tire dynamic load
The actuator forces of controls I and II applied on the active
suspension and DVA are shown in Figs. 5a and b, respectively.
The frequency responses of as and Fe are shown in Figs. 6a and
b, respectively. as and Fe of the active DVA-EW with controls I and
II are smaller compared with the DVA-EW. It can explain that the
active controls I and II can synchronously control the active
IET Intell. Transp. Syst.
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
and H are the length and height of the bump road, respectively, L = 
5 m and H = 0.06 m.
The actuator fault of actuator force noises within the range of
[−20%, 20%] is added to the actuator forces of the active
suspension u2 and DVA u1, and shown in Fig. 7. Therefore, the
actuator forces of controls I and II applied on the active suspension
u2 and DVA u1 are time varying with noises, and shown in Figs. 8a
and b, respectively.
The time responses of the DVA-EW, active DVA-EW with
controls I and II under bumpy road with actuator force noises are
7

Fig. 6  Frequency responses of DVA-EW, active DVA-EW with controls I
and II
(a) Sprung mass acceleration, (b) Dynamic force applied on IWM, (c) Suspension
deflection, (d) Tire dynamic load
Fig. 7  Actuator force noises of active suspension and DVA
shown in Fig. 9. As shown in Fig. 9, the four evaluation factors
including as, Fe, df and Ft of the active DVA-EW with controls I
and II are greatly reduced compared with those of the DVA-EW,
8 IET Intell. Transp. Syst.
Fig. 8  Actuator forces of active suspension and DVA under bumpy road
with noises
(a) Actuator forces of active suspension, (b) Actuator forces of DVA
which indicates that the active control of the active suspension and
DVA can improve the ride comfort and road holding, and reduce
the vertical vibration caused by the IWM and suspension stroke.
Furthermore, the active DVA-EW with control II on the active
suspension and DVA significantly has better performance of the
four evaluation factors compared with the control I.
Meanwhile, the RMS values of as, Fe, df and Ft for the DVA-
EW, active DVA-EW with controls I and II under bumpy road are
listed in Table 4. as of active DVA-EW with controls I and II is
reduced by 5.36 and 46.43%, respectively, compared with DVA-
EW. Meanwhile, Fe of active DVA-EW with controls I and II is
reduced by 9.08 and 21.68%, respectively, compared with DVA-
EW. It is obvious that the active DVA-EW with control II can
achieve better performance of the ride comfort and vertical
vibration caused by the IWM compared with active DVA-EW with
control I. In addition, df and Ft are guaranteed as well.
Figs. 10–12 show the time responses of the DVA-EW, active
DVA-EW with controls I and II under bumpy road with actuator
force losses, which is 20, 50 and 80%, respectively. From these
diagrams, the active DVA-EW with controls I and II can achieve
better performance of the four evaluation factors compared with
DVA-EW. It demonstrates the active control effectiveness of the
active suspensive and DVA with actuator force losses. Moreover,
with an increase in the actuator force losses, active DVA-EW with
control II can achieve the better performance of the four evaluation
factors compared with control I.
The RMS values of as, Fe, df and Ft for the DVA-EW, active
DVA-EW with controls I and II under bumpy road with different
actuator force losses are shown in Table 5. as of the active DVA-
EW with control II can be reduced 36.61, 22.32 and 8.93%,
respectively, compared with that of the DVA-EW with different
actuator force losses. Meanwhile, Fe of the active DVA-EW with
control II can be reduced 24.96, 23.15 and 11.67%, respectively.
However, as of the active DVA-EW with control I can be only
reduced 4.46, 2.68 and 0.89%, respectively, compared with that of
the DVA-EW with different actuator force losses. Fe of the active
DVA-EW with control I can be reduced 8.04, 5.67 and 2.48%,
respectively. In addition, df and Ft are guaranteed as well. The
results show that the active suspension and DVA performance of
the active DVA-EW with controls I and II are impaired when the
actuator force losses occur, but they have the better performance
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
 Fig. 10  Time responses of DVA-EW, active DVA-EW with controls I and II
under bumpy road with 20% actuator force loss
Fig. 9  Time responses of DVA-EW, active DVA-EW with controls I and II (a) Sprung mass acceleration, (b) Dynamic force applied on IWM, (c) Suspension
under bumpy road with actuator force noises deflection, (d) Tire dynamic load
(a) Sprung mass acceleration, (b) Dynamic force applied on IWM, (c) Suspension
deflection, (d) Tire dynamic load performance of the active suspension and IWM in spite of actuator
force losses.
Table 4 RMS comparison of DVA-EW, active DVA-EW with
controls I and II under bumpy road with actuator force noises 5 Conclusion
Model as, m ⋅ s−2/ Fe, N/ df , mm Ft, N
marked In this paper, the robust fault-tolerant H∞ output feedback control
Decrement, % Decrement, %
with finite-frequency constraint is investigated to optimise the
DVA-EW 1.12/— 37.54/- 14.43 366.23 vertical performance of IWM driven EVs by synchronously
control I 1.06/5.36 34.13/9.08 14.80 345.35 controlling the active suspension and DVA. First, a DVA-EW is
control II 0.60/46.43 29.40/21.68 13.70 207.55 modelled, in which the IWM is designed as the DVA. Then, the
spring-damper parameters of the DVA are optimally matched by
using the PSO method. In addition, a robust fault-tolerant H∞
compared with DVA-EW. Meanwhile, the active DVA-EW with output feedback control with finite-frequency constraint is
control II can achieve better performance compared with control I, proposed to synchronously control the active suspension and DVA
which validates that the control II can achieve the better based on LMI method. The simulation results demonstrate that the
IET Intell. Transp. Syst. 9
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
Fig. 11  Time responses of DVA-EW, active DVA-EW with controls I and II Fig. 12  Time responses of DVA-EW, active DVA-EW with controls I and II
under bumpy road with 50% actuator force loss under bumpy road with 80% actuator force loss
(a) Sprung mass acceleration, (b) Dynamic force applied on IWM, (c) Suspension (a) Sprung mass acceleration, (b) Dynamic force applied on IWM, (c) Suspension
deflection, (d) Tire dynamic load deflection, (d) Tire dynamic load

Table 5 RMS comparison of DVA-EW, active DVA-EW with controls I and II under bumpy road with different actuator force
losses
Model marked as, m ⋅ s−2 Fe, N df , mm Ft, N
Decrement, % Decrement, %
DVA-EW 1.12/— 37.54/— 14.43 366.23
20% actuator force loss control I/control II 1.07/0.71 34.52/28.17 14.71/14.02 349.63/234.24
4.46/36.61 8.04/24.96
50% actuator force loss control I/control II 1.09/0.87 35.41/28.85 14.59/14.27 355.96/281.36
2.68/22.32 5.67/23.15
80% actuator force loss control I/control II 1.11/1.02 36.61/33.16 14.49/14.39 362.16/331.93
0.89/8.93 2.48/11.67

10 IET Intell. Transp. Syst.

© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
DVA-EW effectively achieve the better performance including the
ride comfort, vertical vibration caused by the IWM, suspension
stroke and road holding compared with Con-EW. The proposed
control method can achieve the better ride comfort, and suppress
the vertical vibration caused by the IWM within the resonance
frequency range of sprung mass compared with entire frequency
constraint. Meanwhile, the proposed control method can also
guarantee the safe suspension stroke and road holding. Moreover,
the proposed control method can reveal better performance
compared with the entire frequency constraint and DVA-EW, when
actuator faults concerning the actuator force noises and losses
occur.
6 Acknowledgments
This work is supported by the National Nature Science Foundation
of China (no. 52062036), the Nature Science Foundation of Jiangxi
Province, China (no. 20171BAB216028) and the Science Project
Foundation of the Education Department of Jiangxi Province,
China (no. GJJ150152).
7 References
[1] Cheng, S., Li, L., Chen, X., et al.: ‘Model-predictive-control-based path
tracking controller of autonomous vehicle considering parametric
uncertainties and velocity-varying’, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., 2020, pp. 1–1
[2] Wang, Y., Wang, Z., Zhang, L., et al.: ‘Lateral stability enhancement based on
a novel sliding mode prediction control for a four-wheel-independently
actuated electric vehicle’, IET Intell. Transp. Syst., 2019, 13, (1), pp. 124–133
[3] Chen, J., Shuai, Z., Zhang, H., et al.: ‘Path following control of autonomous
four-wheel-independent-drive electric vehicles via second-order sliding mode
and nonlinear disturbance observer techniques’, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron.,
2020, pp. 1–1
[4] Liu, M., Gu, F., Zhang, Y.: ‘Ride comfort optimization of in-wheel-motor
electric vehicles with in-wheel vibration absorbers’, Energies, 2017, 10, (10),
p. 1647
[5] Shao, X., Naghdy, F., Du, H., et al.: ‘Coupling effect between road excitation
and an in-wheel switched reluctance motor on vehicle ride comfort and active
suspension control’, J. Sound Vib., 2019, 443, pp. 683–702
[6] Li, Z., Zheng, L., Gao, W., et al.: ‘Electromechanical coupling mechanism
and control strategy for in-wheel-motor-driven electric vehicles’, IEEE Trans.
Ind. Electron., 2019, 66, (6), pp. 4524–4533
[7] Li, Z., Zheng, L., Ren, Y., et al.: ‘Multi-objective optimization of active
suspension system in electric vehicle with in-wheel-motor against the
negative electromechanical coupling effects’, Mech. Syst. Signal Process.,
2019, 116, pp. 545–565
[8] Qin, Y., He, C., Shao, X., et al.: ‘Vibration mitigation for in-wheel switched
reluctance motor driven electric vehicle with dynamic vibration absorbing
structures’, J. Sound Vib., 2018, 419, pp. 249–267
[9] Shao, X., Naghdy, F., Du, H.: ‘Reliable fuzzy H∞ control for active
suspension of in-wheel motor driven electric vehicles with dynamic
damping’, Mech. Syst. Signal Process., 2017, 87, pp. 365–383
[10] Wang, R., Jing, H., Yan, F., et al.: ‘Optimization and finite-frequency H∞
control of active suspensions in in-wheel motor driven electric ground
vehicles’, J. Franklin Inst., 2015, 352, (2), pp. 468–484
[11] Shao, X., Naghdy, F., Du, H., et al.: ‘Output feedback H∞ control for active
suspension of in-wheel motor driven electric vehicle with control faults and
input delay’, ISA Trans.., 2019, 92, pp. 94–108
[12] Karim Afshar, K., Javadi, A., Jahed-Motlagh, M.R.: ‘Robust H∞ control of an
active suspension system with actuator time delay by predictor feedback’, IET
Control Theory Appl., 2018, 12, (7), pp. 1012–1023
IET Intell. Transp. Syst.
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
[13] Zhang, H., Huang, X., Wang, J., et al.: ‘Robust energy-to-peak sideslip angle
estimation with applications to ground vehicles’, Mechatronics. (Oxf), 2015,
30, pp. 338–347
[14] Karnopp, D.: ‘How significant are transfer function relations and invariant
points for a quarter car suspension model?’, Veh. Syst. Dyn., 2009, 47, (4), pp.
457–464
[15] Lee, H.-S., Choi, S.-B.: ‘Control and response characteristics of a magneto-
rheological fluid damper for passenger vehicles’, J. Intell. Mater. Syst. Struct.,
2000, 11, (1), pp. 80–87
[16] Sun, W., Gao, H., Kaynak, O.: ‘Finite frequency H∞ control for vehicle active
suspension systems’, IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol., 2011, 19, (2), pp.
416–422
[17] Choi, H.D., Ahn, C.K., Lim, M.T., et al.: ‘Dynamic output-feedback H∞
control for active half-vehicle suspension systems with time-varying input
delay’, Int. J. Control Autom. Syst., 2016, 14, (1), pp. 59–68
[18] Wang, G., Chen, C., Yu, S.: ‘Robust non-Fragile finite-frequency H∞ static
output-feedback control for active suspension systems’, Mech. Syst. Signal
Process., 2017, 91, pp. 41–56
[19] Cheng, S., Li, L., Liu, C.-Z., et al.: ‘Robust lmi-based H-infinite controller
integrating afs and dyc of autonomous vehicles with parametric uncertainties’,
IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Syst., 2020, pp. 1–10
[20] Fallah, S., Khajepour, A., Fidan, B., et al.: ‘Vehicle optimal torque vectoring
using state-derivative feedback and linear matrix inequality’, IEEE Trans.
Veh. Technol., 2013, 62, (4), pp. 1540–1552
[21] Liu, M., Gu, F., Huang, J., et al.: ‘Integration design and optimization control
of a dynamic vibration absorber for electric wheels with in-wheel motor’,
Energies, 2017, 10, (12), p. 2069
[22] Pan, H., Li, H., Sun, W., et al.: ‘Adaptive fault-tolerant compensation control
and its application to nonlinear suspension systems’, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man
Cybern. Syst., 2020, 50, (5), pp. 1766–1776
[23] Kong, Y., Zhao, D., Yang, B., et al.: ‘Robust non-Fragile H ∞/L2-L∞ control
of uncertain linear system with time-delay and application to vehicle active
suspension’, Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control, 2015, 25, (13), pp. 2122–2141
[24] Jing, H., Wang, R., Li, C., et al.: ‘Fault-tolerant control of active suspensions
in in-wheel motor driven electric vehicles’, Int. J. Veh. Des., 2015, 68, (1-3)
pp. 22–36
[25] Wang, R., Jing, H., Karimi, H.R., et al.: ‘Robust fault-tolerant H∞ control of
active suspension systems with finite-frequency constraint’, Mech. Syst.
Signal Process., 2015, 62–63, pp. 341–355
[26] Liu, M., Zhang, Y., Huang, J., et al.: ‘Optimization control for dynamic
vibration absorbers and active suspensions of in-wheel-motor-driven electric
vehicles’, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. D, J. Automob. Eng., 2020, 234, (9), pp.
2377–2392
[27] Iwasaki, T., Hara, S.: ‘Generalized Kyp lemma: unified frequency domain
inequalities with design applications’, IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, 2005, 50,
(1), pp. 41–59
[28] Apkarian, P., Tuan, H.D., Bernussou, J.: ‘Continuous-time analysis,
eigenstructure assignment, and H/sub 2/synthesis with enhanced linear matrix
inequalities (lmi) characterizations’, IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, 2001, 46,
(12), pp. 1941–1946
[29] Ouellette, D.V.: ‘Schur complements and statistics’, Linear Algebra Appl.,
1981, 36, pp. 187–295
[30] Zhang, H., Wang, R., Wang, J., et al.: ‘Robust finite frequency H∞ static-
output-feedback control with application to vibration active control of
structural systems’, Mechatronics. (Oxf), 2014, 24, (4), pp. 354–366
[31] Zhang, H., Mehr, A.S., Shi, Y.: ‘Improved robust energy-to-peak filtering for
uncertain linear systems’, Signal Process., 2010, 90, (9), pp. 2667–2675
[32] Rubió-Massegú, J., Rossell, J.M., Karimi, H.R., et al.: ‘Static output-feedback
control under information structure constraints’, Automatica, 2013, 49, (1),
pp. 313–316
[33] Gahinet, P., Nemirovskii, A., Laub, A.J., et al.: ‘The lmi control toolbox’.
Proc. of 1994 33rd IEEE Conf. on Decision and Control, Lake Buena Vista,
FL, USA, 1994
[34] Badri, P., Amini, A., Sojoodi, M.: ‘Robust fixed-order dynamic output
feedback controller design for nonlinear uncertain suspension system’, Mech.
Syst. Signal Process., 2016, 80, pp. 137–151
11