Proceeding of the 11th World Congress on Intelligent Control and Automation
Shenyang, China, June 29 - July 4 2014
Adaptive Optimal Control of Starting-up of Automated
Manual Transmission*
Bin Wang and Bingzhao Gao
State Key Laboratory of Automotive Simulation and Control
Jilin University
Changchun, Jilin Province , China
Abstract – An adaptive optimal control algorithm based on LQR
theory is designed for the automated manual transmission vehicle
starting up. The control strategy uses a reduced-order observer
of driveline system to estimate the error caused by changes of
vehicle parameters. With the estimated modeling error, the
optimal control law can engage the clutch rapidly and smoothly
when the work condition of the driveline system changes.
Through the simulink-AMESim joint simulations on a mid-size
passenger car (BESTURN B50 of FAW, China), it is proved that
the proposed control strategy can complete the starting-up of the
car with satisfied performance even when it’s parameters
changes.
Index Terms – Adaptive optimal control. Automated manual
transmission. Reduced-order observer.
I. INTRODUCTION
Automated manual transmission (AMT) is generally
constituted by a dry clutch and a multi-speed gearbox, both
equipped with electro-mechanical or electro-hydraulic
actuators, which are driven by an electronic control unit.
Compared with other topologies of automatic transmissions
(ATs), AMT has the advantages of lower weight and higher
efficiency [1, 2], and it is widely adopted to offer easy drive
and fuel efficiency for trucks. However, the starting-up of
AMT is always an important and difficult control issue.
The starting-up of these AMT vehicles is realized through
clutch slipping. So the engagement of the dry clutch becomes
the key control issue, and it is expected to satisfy the
following different and sometimes conflicting objectives:
minimizing clutch lock up time, minimizing friction losses
during the slipping phase, and ensuring smooth acceleration of
vehicle. In addition, the bad working environment of the
driveline system and the varied road conditions also greatly
increased the difficulty of controlling of these vehicles
starting-up.
Because the starting-up of AMT is a multi-objective
control problem, optimization-based algorithm becomes a
potential solution. For example, linear-quadratic based
optimal control [3, 4, 5, 6] are used to control the engagement
of a dry clutch and LQR (Linear Quadratic Regulation)
theory, which has many successful industrial applications [7,
*
This work is supported by the 973 Program (2012CB821202), the National Nature Science Foundation of China (61034001, 61374046), and the Program for
Changjiang Scholars and Innovative Research Team in University (No.IRT1017).
1723
978-1-4799-5825-2/14/$31.00 ©2014 IEEE
Hong Chen
State Key Laboratory of Automotive Simulation and Control
Department of Control Science and Engineering
Jilin University
Changchun, Jilin Province, China
Corresponding Author: chenh @jlu.edu.cn
8, 9], is also used to provide an optimal control law for the
launch control of dry clutch vehicles.
But optimization-based algorithm is difficult to meet the
control requirements with changeable working conditions,
because optimization-based algorithm has high requirements
on the accuracy of the model. If the model error is large,
optimization-based algorithm will be deteriorated and may
even lose control ability. In other words, it is necessary to
consider the influence of the model error in the control
algorithm.
So in this paper, we design a model error observer to
estimate the error might occur in the model. At the same time,
the error is regarded as the state variable of the optimal
control, thus constituting the adaptive optimal controller. The
rest of the paper is organized as follows. The control problem
description is given in Section 2. The model error observer
and adaptive optimal controller are designed in Section 3 and
Section 4 respectively. The simulation result is given in
Section 5. Concluding remarks are given in Section 6.
II. CONTROL PROBLEM DESCRIPTION
A. Driveline Modeling
The procedure of clutch engagement is rather complex in
AMT vehicle starting process. Engine speed need remain
stable without extreme fluctuations so that engine stall and
bad emission can be avoided. Good drivability is the core
purpose of clutch control, which can be evaluated by vehicle
jerk. On the other hand, vehicle starts through continuous
sliding friction between clutch plates, so the facing wear is
unavoidable, which is represented by friction work of clutch.
Friction work and vehicle jerk are contradictory. If you want
to decline friction work of clutch, you have to shorten the
friction time. But this will lead to big launch shock. Thus
keeping the jerk in the appropriate range and reducing the
friction work of clutch as much as possible is not so easy to
realize.
 Choosing x=[ωe ∆ω]T, u=[Tc Te Tl] as the control state
variables and control input. Then equation (4) (5) can be
rewritten by the following state-space equation

x& = Ax + Bu + w (7)
Fig. 1 Simplified driveline model.
⎡ − Ce I e 0 ⎤
A=⎢ ⎥ (8a)
We consider the powertrain in a mid-size passenger car ⎣Cv I v − Ce I e − Cv I v ⎦
with an AMT, which contains a dry clutch and a five-speed ⎡ −1 I e 1 Ie 0 ⎤
manual transmission. When the vehicle is starting-up, the B=⎢ ⎥ (8b)
driveline can be simplified as a two-mass system as shown in ⎣ − (1 I e + 1 I v ) 1 I e 1 I v ⎦
Figure 1, and the motion of the driveline can be described by
The estimated value of the error is summarized by ŵ .
the following equations:
The observer is then designed in the form of
ω& e = − Ce ( I eωe ) + 1 ( I eTe ) − 1 ( I eTc ) (1)
wˆ& = L ⎡⎣ x& − ( Ax + Bu + wˆ ) ⎤⎦ , (9)
ω& c = − Cv ( I vωc ) + 1 ( I vTc ) − 1 ( I vTl ) (2)
where L ∈ R 2×2 is the time-invariant (constant) observer gain
T&c = u (3) to be determined. In order to avoid taking derivatives of the
measurements ŵ , the following transformation is made.
where ωe is engine speed, ωc is clutch output speed, Te is Let
engine torque, Tc is clutch friction torque, Tl is resistance η = ŵ − L x , (10)
torque, Ce and Cv are damp coefficients, and Ie and Iv are
inertia moments. The control input u is chosen as the time then we can infer for a time-invariant L that
derivative of the clutch friction torque, so that the shift shock,
η& = w&ˆ − Lx&
i.e. vehicle jerk could be taken into consideration in the (11)
controller design. = L ⎡⎣ x& − ( Ax + Bu + wˆ ) ⎤⎦ − Lx&
to arrive at
B. Control Problem Description
Due to the changes in friction coefficient caused by η& = − LAx − LBu − Lη − L2 x . (12)
temperature changes, the computed clutch friction torque will Equations (10) and (12) then constitute the reduced-order
contain error. Other modeling uncertainties include uncertain observer of driveline system.
parameters such as the vehicle mass and the road grade. These By defining the observer error as
model uncertainties are summarized by w=[w1, w2], which will
be estimated by the following observer: e = w − wˆ , (13)

ωe = − Ce ( I eωe ) + 1 ( I eTe ) − 1 ( I eTc ) + w1 (4) the error dynamics can then be described as follows:

Δω& = ( Cv I v − Ce I e ) ωe − Cv ( I v Δω ) − e& = w& − w&ˆ

(5) = w& − L ⎡⎣( Ax + Bu + w ) − ( Ax + Bu + wˆ ) ⎤⎦ (14)
(1 I e + 1 I v ) Tc + 1 ( I eTe ) + 1 ( I vTl ) + w2
= w& − Le .
where Δω = ωe − ωc .
To minimize driveline shock and friction loss at the same If the model error is assumed to be slowly changed, the error
time, the objective function V is designed as dynamics can be expressed as
1 ∞ e& = − Le . (15)
V=
2 ∫t0
( qΔω Δω 2 + q frictionTc Δω + rT&c2 )dt (6)
Taking the value of observer gain L as
where q∆ω qfriction and r are weighting factors, and from
⎡ −40 0 ⎤
analysis of physical meanings, it is clear that L=⎢ ⎥ (16)
y item q∆ω ∆ω2 forces the slip speed to converge to zero, i.e. ⎣ 0 −40 ⎦
to minimize clutch lockup time;
the error dynamics then is described as follows:
y item qfrictionTc∆ω minimizes the friction losses;
y item rT&C ensures smooth acceleration of the vehicle,
2
e&1 = −40e1 (17a)
because Tc determines the acceleration of the vehicle and
then vehicle jerk can be reflected by T&c . e&2 = −40e2 , (17b)

III. MODEL ERROR OBSERVER DESIGN

1724
which implies that the estimation error converges in 0.1s. ⎡ q11 0 0 0 0 0 0⎤
Equation (10) and (12) constitute the modelling error ⎢ 1 ⎥
observer, which will provide the values of w1 , w2 in the next ⎢0 qΔω q friction 0 0 0 0⎥
⎢ 2 ⎥
section [11]. ⎢ ⎥
1
⎢0 q friction 0 0 0 0 0 ⎥
IV. CONTROLLER DESIGN Q=⎢ 2 ⎥
⎢0 0 0 q44 0 0 0 ⎥
A. Controller Design ⎢ ⎥
In order to control the above model, this paper introduces ⎢0 0 0 0 q55 0 0⎥
LQR control theory. In order to represent this optimal problem ⎢0 0 0 0 0 q66 0⎥
⎢ ⎥
as standard LQR control form, the engine torque Te and
⎣⎢ 0 0 0 0 0 0 q77 ⎦⎥
driving resistance torque Tl are also regarded as 7 system
states, besides engine speed ωe , clutch output speed ωc , R = [r ] (21)
clutch torque Tc and the model error w1 , w2 . Choosing
x1 = ωe , x2 = Δω , x3 = Tc , x4 = Te , x5 = Tl , x6 = w1 , with q11 , q44 , q55 , q66 and q77 being small values. Note that
x7 = w2 , the driveline motion can then be rewritten by the although this is an infinite-time optimal control problem, the
following state space equations clutch engagement can still be assured because of the penalty
on the states x T Qx .
x& = Ax + Bu (18) After suitable definition of system states, the launch
where control problem is represented as a standard LQR problem
(Bryson, 1981), and the solution is
x = [ωe w2 ]
T
Δω Tc Te Tl w1
u = Kx (22)
u = T&c (19a)
where K ∈ R is the controller gain, which makes the cost
1× 7

⎡ − Ce I e 0 −1 I e 1 Ie 0 1 0⎤ function V minimum.
⎢C I − C I − Cv I v −1 I e − 1 I v 1 I e 1 I v 0 1 ⎥⎥
⎢ v v e e B. Controller Tuning in Consideration of System Constraints
⎢ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0⎥
⎢ ⎥ During the start-up process, the system should satisfies
A=⎢ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0⎥ the following constraints:
⎢ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0⎥ y The engine speed is larger than the stalling speed;
⎢ ⎥ y The clutch torque is less than the maximum torque;
⎢ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0⎥
⎢ y The changing rate of clutch torque is less than the
⎣ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ⎥⎦
actuator capacity.
Although these constraints are not considered directly in the
⎡0⎤
⎢0⎥ controller design process, they are taken into consideration
⎢ ⎥ when the controller gain is tuned. The most important
⎢1 ⎥
⎢ ⎥ parameters are qΔω , q friction and r . Improving qΔω and q friction
B = ⎢0⎥ (19b) results in harder clutch engagement, and improving r can
⎢0⎥ prevent the constraints from being violated.
⎢ ⎥
⎢0⎥ The vehicle of interest is a mid-size passenger car,
⎢0⎥ BESTURN B50 of the First Automobile Workshop (FAW),
⎣ ⎦ China, and the parameters used for controller design are
Because Te and Tl change along with the driver’s shown in Table 1.
operation of engine and the present angle of road slope, which TABLE I
are measurable (estimable) but not predictable, the derivatives PARAMETERS FOR CONTROL DESIGN
of Te and Tl are set as zero in the above equations. The Symbol Parameters Value Unit
derivatives of w1 , w2 are also set as zero. Ie Engine inertia 0.16 kg·m2
Ce Engine damp 0.06 Nm/(rad/s)
The control problem is then to minimize the following
Iv Driveline equivalent inertia 0.618 kg·m2
objective function Cv Driveline equivalent inertia 0.04 Nm/(rad/s)
1 ∞ T
min V =
u (t ) 2 ∫t0
( x Qx + uT Ru )dt (20) Through simulations on the powertrain simulation model,
which will be introduced later in Section 4, the weighting
where Q ∈ R 7×7 and R ∈ R1×1 are weighting matrices. matrics Q and R can be tuned, and the tuned values of Q and R
are

1725
 ⎡ 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 ⎤ idf Gear ratio 4.533
⎢ 0 Drive shaft
⎢ 1 0.5 0 0 0 0 ⎥⎥ Is Equivalent inertia 1 kg·m2
⎢ 0 0.5 0 0 0 0 0 ⎥ Cs Damp of input of drive shaft 0.1 Nm/(rad/s)
⎢ ⎥ Cst Damp of drive shaft twist 35 Nm/(rad/s)
Q=⎢ 0 0 0 0.01 0 0 0 ⎥ Ks Drive shaft stiffness 120 Nm/deg
⎢ 0 0 0 0 0.01 0 0 ⎥ Tires
⎢ ⎥ Iw Inertia of one tire 0.5 kg·m2
⎢ 0 0 0 0 0 0.01 0 ⎥ Rw Tire radius 0.317 m
⎢ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.01⎥⎦ Tw Rolling resistance 71.325 Nm
⎣
dSw Longitudinal slip threshold 0.1
R = [1] , (23) Fxmax Maximum longitudinal force 12000 N
Vehicle
m Vehicle mass 1500 kg
which results in the controller gain θg Road grade 0 deg
K = [0.1157, − 0.9262, 3.8046, − 3.2276, ρ Air density 1.2 Kg/m3
(24) AA Front area 2 m2
− 0.9205, 0.0414, − 0.5579] CD Aerodynamic drag coefficient 0.35

Obviously, the optimal controller uses the feedback of

engine speed ωe , clutch slip speed ∆ω, clutch friction torque
Tc, engine torque Te , resistance torque Tl and the model error
w1 , w2. Using Δω = ωe − ωc , the controller can be rewritten
as the following form
u = k1ωe + k2ωc + k3Tc + k4Te + k5Tl + k6 w1 + k7 w2 (25)

V. SIMULATION RESULT
A. Vehicle Simulation Model
In this section, a complete powertrain simulation model of
the considered vehicle is constructed by commercial
simulation software AMESim, which supports the Simulink
environment by S-Function. The constructed model can
capture the important transient dynamics of the driveline, such
as the delay of the engine torque generation, clutch twist
vibration, drive shaft oscillation and tire slip. The model
represents a typical medium-duty passenger car equipped with
a 1.6-litre gasoline engine.
The values of the parameters used in the powertrain
Fig. 2 Drivetrain AMESim model.
simulation platform are listed in Table II and the drivetrain
AMESim model is shown in Fig. 2, which represents a mid- B Simulation Result
size passenger car, BESTURN B50 of the First Automobile
Workshop (FAW) of China. After completing the model building, first of all, use the
normal LQR controller with no observer to control the clutch
TABLE Ⅱ engagement in the course of the vehicle starting-up. The
PARAMETERS OF DRIVETRAIN OF BESTURN B50 design of the normal LQR controller is described in the
Symbol Parameters Value Unit references [10]. The control result for accurate model by
Engine
Ie Engine inertia 0.16 kg·m2
normal LQR controller is shown in the Figure 3. The
tlag1 Lag time for atmosphere 0.025 s controller gain is chose as
tlag2 Lag time for torque generation 0.01 s
Clutch
K = [0.1157, − 0.9262, 3.8046, − 3.2276, − 0.9205] (26)
Ic Inertia of clutch plate 0.02 kg·m2
Cct Damp of clutch twist 0.2 Nm/(rad/s) As can be seen from the figure 3, the clutch completes the
Tc max Maximum friction torque 188 Nm engagement within 1.5s, rapidly and with small jerk, which
Transmission proves the normal LQR controller can meet the control
It Inertia of transmission input 0.0015 kg·m2 requirements when the model has little error.
Ct Damp of transmission input 0.015 Nm/(rad/s) But in actual driving of vehicles, vehicle parameters vary
3.445, 1.955
I1-5 Gear ratios 1.284, 0.975 because of the change of the operating conditions and the bad
0.815 environment. For example, friction coefficient of the clutch
Differential gear disk will decrease along with the rise of temperature, and the

1726
vehicle’s weight, the road gradient and other parameters are
100

Engine Torque (Nm)

all likely to change. Those changes will result in errors. These
errors will affect the control performance, resulting in the

Throttle(%)
Te Thr
variation of the starting-up performance, and even losing 50
ability to start. The adaptive optimal control algorithm
proposed in this paper can estimate the errors through the 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
reduced-order observer which are fed back to the optimal
Time(s)
controller, thus realizing the remedy of the model error which
4000
improve the starting-up performance. The Figure 4 and 5

Speed(r/min)
ωe ωv
respectively show the simulation result of normal optimal
2000
control and adaptive optimal control in the case that the
friction coefficient of the clutch disk changes from original
0
value 0.4 to 0.3. The Figure 6 and 7 respectively show the 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
simulation result of the two control methods in the case that Time(s)

Acc(rm/s2)&Jerk(m/s3)
the vehicle is in 5-degree ramp and it’s weight changes from 10
1500kg to 1900kg at the same time.
As can be seen from the above simulation results, when 0
the road gradient changes, the engagement time of the clutch a da
-10
applied on the normal optimal control will be longer, which 0
1.5 0.5 2 2.5 1 3
will increase friction losses. The case that friction coefficient Time(s)
changes or the road gradient and vehicle weight changes at the Fig. 4 Simulation result.
same time will cause the vehicle with the normal optimal (LQR, Friction coefficient μ=0.3, road grade=0deg, vehicle mass=1500kg)
control losing ability of start-up. By contrast, in those
conditions, adaptive optimal control can still make the vehicle
to start up smoothly and rapidly. Starting characteristics of the 100
Engine Torque (Nm)

vehicle remain basically unchanged compared to the condition

Throttle(%)

Te Thr
with no model error. Those simulation results show that the 50
adaptive optimal control can reduce the influence of errors
which is more applicable to the vehicle starting -up control. 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Time(s)
Engine Torque (Nm)

100 4000
Speed(r/min)
Throttle(%)

Te Thr ωe ωv
50 2000

0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Time(s) Time(s)
Acc(rm/s2)&Jerk(m/s3)

2000
10
ωe ωv
Speed(r/min)

a da
1000
0

0 -10
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Time(s) Time(s)
Acc(rm/s2)&Jerk(m/s3)

10
a da 800
Estimation error

600 w1 w2
0 400
200
-10 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Time(s) Time(s)
Fig. 3 Simulation result of the accurate model. Fig. 5 Simulation result.
(LQR, Friction coefficient μ=0.4, road grade=0deg, vehicle mass=1500kg)
(Adaptive Optimal, Friction coefficient μ=0.3, road grade=0deg, vehicle
mass=1500kg)

1727
 VI. CONCLUSIONS
Engine Torque (Nm)

100 Because of the variation of vehicle parameters, the

Throttle(%)

Te Thr optimization-based algorithm which has high requirements on

50
the accuracy of the model is unable to meet control
0 requirements for vehicle starting. But the adaptive optimal
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 control algorithm proposed in this paper can still realizes
Time(s) smooth starting-up of the vehicle. This paper designs a
reduced-order observer of the model error, and the estimated
1500 ωe ωv errors are regarded as a part of the system states. For that
Speed(r/min)

1000 system, an optimal control strategy based on LQR theory is

500 designed, thus constituting adaptive optimal control. The
0 simulation of the starting-up procedure of a midsize car
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 verifies that the proposed adaptive optimal controller
Time(s) ensures the smooth and rapid starting-up even when the
Acc(rm/s2)&Jerk(m/s3)

10 parameter changes.
REFERENCES
0
a da [1] G. Lucente, Modelling of an automated manual transmission system,
Mechatronics 17(2–3) (2007), pp. 73–91.
-10
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 [2] P. Dolcini, C.C. Wit, and H. Béchart, Lurch avoidance strategy and its
implementation in amt vehicles, Mechatronics 18(5–6) (2008), pp. 289–
Time(s)
300.
Fig. 6 Simulation result. [3] C.C. Lin, H. Peng, J.W. Grizzle, J. Liu, and M. Busdiecker, Control
(LQR, Friction coefficient μ=0.4, road grade=5deg, vehicle mass=1900kg) system development of an advancedtechnology medium-duty hybrid
electric truck, SAE Tech. Paper 2003-01-3369, SAE International,
Warrendale, PA, 2003.
[4] A. Ge, Theory and Design of Automatic Transmissions, China Machine
Press, Beijing, 1993 (in Chinese)
Engine Torque (Nm)

100
[5] R.E. Lawrie, R.G. Reed, and D.J. Rausen, Automated manual
Throttle(%)

Te Thr transmission shift sequence controller, United States Patent, No.

50 6,019,698, 2000.
[6] J. Fredriksson and B. Egardt, Nonlinear control applied to gearshifting
0 in automated manualtransmissions, Proceedings of the 39th IEEE
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 Conference on Decision and Control,Vol. 1, Sydney,Australia, 2000, pp.
Time(s) 444–449.
[7] M. Pettersson and L. Nielsen, Gear shifting by engine control, IEEE
1500
ωe ωv Trans Control Syst. Tech. 8(3) (2000), pp. 495–507.
Speed(r/min)

1000 [8] M. Pettersson, Driveline modeling and control, Ph.D. Thesis, Linköping
University, Sweden, 1997.
500
[9] M. Pettersson and L. Nielsen, Diesel engine speed control with handling
0 of driveline resonances, Control Eng. Pract. 11(3) (2003), pp. 319–328.
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 [10] B.-Z. Gao, H. Chen, X.-H. Lu and K. Sanada, “An Improved Optimal
Time(s) Controller for Start-up of AMT Trucks in Consideration of Driver’s
Intention”, International Journal of Automotive Technology, Vol. 14,
Acc(rm/s2)&Jerk(m/s3)

10 No. 2, pp. 213-220. 2013.

a da
[11] B.-Z. Gao, H. Chen, H.-Y. Zhao, K. Sanada, A Reduced-Order
Nonlinear Clutch Pressure Observer for Automatic Transmission, IEEE
0 Transactions on Control Systems Technology, Vol.18, No.2, pp.446-453,
2010.
-10
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Time(s)
Estimation error

400 w w
1 2
200
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Time(s)
Fig. 7 Simulation result.
(Adaptive Optimal, Friction coefficient μ=0.4, road grade=5deg, vehicle
mass=1900kg)

1728