5th IFAC Symposium on Mechatronic Systems

Marriott Boston Cambridge

Cambridge, MA, USA, Sept 13-15, 2010

Modeling and control of an

electro-mechanical brake-by-wire actuator
for a sport motorbike ?
Andrea Dardanelli ∗ Giovanni Alli ∗ Sergio M. Savaresi ∗
∗
Dipartimento di Elettronica e Informazione, Politecnico di Milano,
Milano, Italy (e-mail: {Dardanelli, Alli, Savaresi}@elet.polimi.it).

Abstract: In this paper the control of the pressure inside the rear brake hydraulic circuit of
a sport motorbike is considered. A newly-designed electro-mechanical actuator, controlled by a
dedicated ECU, is capable of properly moving the piston inside the brake master cylinder and
is used to achieve the control purpose. In particular, this paper proposes a third-order linear
model for the hydraulic braking system and formalizes its theoretical derivation. Furthermore,
the work points out the relevance of friction inside the master cylinder chamber and discusses a
technique to compensate its negative effects. The pressure control system is designed referring
to the braking system linear model properly identified. The performances of such a controller
are assessed on the instrumented motorbike.

Keywords: Brake-by-wire, Friction compensation, Hydraulic actuators, PID controllers,

Motorcycle dynamics

1. INTRODUCTION AND MOTIVATION
A hard-braking maneuver on a sport motorbike might be
a very critical task to achieve by a non-professional driver:
in fact the driver has to be aware of the vehicle dynamics
so that he can control correctly and rapidly the behavior
of the vehicle; furthermore a braking maneuver strongly
depends on several critical phenomena (such as road
conditions) which yields to vehicle instability problems
(i.e. wheel locking). Even a professional driver might not
be able to obtain ”optimal” braking performances in terms
of stability and maximum deceleration for every external
condition, especially in cornering. These considerations
highlight the potential benefits of an active braking control
strategy in order to improve both the safety of the system
and the maneuver performances. In the framework of
active braking control systems, the technological and the
control design aspects, which are strictly related to each
other, must be pointed out.
From a technological point of view, the classical structure
of motorcycle braking systems is based upon a hydraulic
circuit and passive mechanical devices. It basically consists
of a master cylinder, a pipeline, brake calipers (and their
relative brake pads) and a brake disk (mounted on the
wheel); the driver gets the braking force through the brake
lever which pushes the piston of the master cylinder: this
action causes the oil pressure inside the master cylinder
chamber to increase, inducing the movement of the brake
pads against the disk. The friction between the surfaces of
these two devices produces the desired braking force on the
? This work has been partially supported by FIRB project ”Highly
Innovative motorbikes with ultra-low emission engines, active sus-
pensions, electronic brakes and new materials” , MIUR project
”New methods for Identification and Adaptive Control for Industrial
Systems”, MV Agusta Motor S.p.A. and Brembo S.p.A.
vehicle. Even the majority of automobiles braking systems
are based on this working principle, but the devices used
in this field are quite different (tandem master cylinders,
brake boosters, ...). In order to integrate an active braking
control on motorbikes, this classical structure has to be
modified. One of the most interesting solution in this
direction is the so-called ”Brake By Wire” (BBW): this
technology is based on the concept of physically decoupling
the braking command of the driver and the braking
action itself. In a BBW system, the entire braking process
is governed by the ECU: the driver braking request is
acquired by a proper transducer and processed by the
control unit which generates the command for the braking
actuator according to the available measurements and a
specific control law. The power produced by the actuator
is then transferred to the brake pads, generating the brake
force.
From the control design view-point there is a huge gap
between bikes and automobiles. Active braking control
systems, such as Antilock Braking System, come standard
on most four-wheeled vehicles produced today; the inter-
action between braking system and other devices on the
automobiles (active suspensions, active differentials and
active steering) have been analyzed and some appealing
solutions have been presented (see e.g. Zanten (2002)).
In the framework of motorcycles, instead, active braking
control systems are still little studied: from a cultural
point of view, the motorcycle world and, especially, mo-
torcyclists are very resistive to the introduction of active
control systems on their bikes, since automation and elec-
tronics usually mean ”unsafe” for them; from a practical
point of view, the mechanical design represents a critical
task, in particular for what regards the choice of weights
and dimensions of the devices introduced to control the
system. Hence, nowadays, motorcycles are not produced

978-3-902661-76-0/10/$20.00 © 2010 IFAC 524 10.3182/20100913-3-US-2015.00072

Mechatronics'10
Cambridge, MA, USA, Sept 13-15, 2010

implementing active braking control systems as standard

devices. However, the reader can find several works which
are devoted to the study of such control systems applied to
motorbikes. Limebeer et al. (2001) points out the effects of
acceleration and braking on motorcycle stability. Robust
control strategies for the wheel slip and their effectiveness
in governing the dynamic of motorbikes have been studied
(see e.g. Corno et al. (2009b)); Hirsch et al. (2006) presents
a safe ABS structure for bikes, able to avoid dangerous
overshoot in braking pressure which may lead to a tran-
sient loss of cornering force. More theoretical results on
ABS can be found in Tanelli et al. (2009). Interesting
results for brake-by-wire applications have been accurately
discussed (see e.g. Tanelli et al. (2008b); Savaresi and
Tanelli (2010); Tanelli et al. (2008a); Tanelli et al. (2007);
Schwarz. et al. (1999)). The concept of ”optimal braking”
has been discussed too (see e.g. Sharp (2009); Cossalter
et al. (2000)); in particular Corno et al. (2008) depicts and
analyzes, via numerical simulations, an interesting control
solution which underlines the relevant role played by the
rear brake in a sport motorbike.
This paper focuses on the analysis and control of an
electro-mechanical brake-by-wire actuator whose layout
will be presented in the next session. This work aims
to design a controller capable to regulate pressure inside
the rear brake hydraulic circuit, guaranteeing high perfor-
mances in terms of bandwidth and overshoots. The ways
the pressure reference can be generated are not considered
in this work.
The outline of this paper is as follows: in Section 2
the electro-mechanical actuator layout is introduced. Sec-
tion 3 is devoted to the modeling of the actuator. Sec-
tion 4 presents the friction identification and the technique
adopted for its compensation. In Section 5 the identifi-
cation of the braking system is discussed. The design of
the pressure control loop and the experimental results are
tackled in Section 6.
2. SYSTEM ARCHITECTURE
The working principle of the proposed actuator rests
upon the idea of pushing or pulling the piston inside the
master cylinder chamber by means of an electric DC motor
coupled with a suitable mechanical gearbox. Thus, the
layout of the proposed braking actuator can be ideally
divided into two parts:
(1) the electrical system;
(2) the braking system.
The former consists of the DC motor, the H-bridge con-
verter and the ECU (with a micro controller running at
1 kHz)); the latter can be further divided into two subsys-
tems:
2.a the mechanical subsystem, composed by the DC mo-
tor, the gears, the ball screw and the master cylinder;
2.b the hydraulic subsystem, which consists of the master
cylinder, the pipeline and the calipers.
Notice that such an actuator does not modify the structure
of the classical braking system. A high performance DC
motor has been chosen. This motor is coupled with a first
gearbox which reduces the rotational speed by a certain
Fig. 1. Schematic of the proposed brake system
factor. Then a ball screw transforms the rotation into
longitudinal motion. Notice that this layout allows the
complete decoupling between the driver’s input and the
braking force. In addition, consider that the transmission
ratio is an important design parameter. This parameter,
together with the motor power, has been chosen by a-priori
calculation; in particular, a closed-loop 10 Hz bandwidth
has been considered. The proposed layout, as well as the
logical control scheme which will be analyzed further on,
are schematically depicted in Fig. 1.
The physical layout of the actuator and the instrumented
bike are depicted in Fig. 2. The rear (and front) brake
pressure is measured by means of a piezoelectric pressure
sensor with measuring range from 0 bar to 50 bar (abso-
lute): this transducer is located at the middle of the rear
(front) brake pipeline. The reader observes that the brake
pedal is instrumented with a potentiometer mounted on
the lever, so that the actual brake pedal position is mea-
sured. A Hall-effect current transducer (measuring range
[−22.5A +22.5A]) measures the motor current. The ”Ana-
log to Digital Converter” (ADC) on the micro controller of
the ECU samples and holds the sensor measurements. The
anti-aliasing filters (with cut-off frequency fAAF = 180 Hz)
reject the high-frequency measurement noises. The ECU is
capable of generating a PWM signal with a 20 kHz carrier.
3. ACTUATOR MODELING
In this section a dynamic model for the entire device is
developed. First of all, it is important to highlight the
quantities, with respect to the previously defined subsys-
tems, which will be considered in the theoretical analysis.
The input and output variables of the electrical system
are the duty cycle D and the motor current i respectively.
The motor current i and the pressure pmc in the master
cylinder chamber are the input and the output of the
braking system. The relationship T = Ke i (where Ke is
the ”Back Electro-Motive Force constant”) links these two
systems. The modeling and control of the electrical system

525
Mechatronics'10
Cambridge, MA, USA, Sept 13-15, 2010

Current Step Response

0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6

Current [A]
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2 Motor Current Setpoint
(a) Physical layout of the actuator 0.1 Measured Motor Current
Simulated Motor Current
0
Actuator Rear brake Front brake 0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035 0.04
Time [s]
Pressure Pressure
sensor sensor Fig. 3. Current Closed-Loop step response (Iset = 0.73 A)

3.2 Modeling of the mechanical subsystem

Spring for The model is derived by applying the kinetic energy

brake pedal theorem to the whole mechanical subsystem:
feedback Instrumented dEk
brake pedal Wmc + Wmot + Wl = (2)
dt
In (2), Wmc and Wmot are introduced. The former repre-
(b) Instrumented bike
sents the power produced by the applied forces and torques
on the piston of the master cylinder and the latter is the
Fig. 2. Braking actuator mounted on the bike mechanical power generated by the DC motor; the term
Wl refers to the power loss due to friction in the gear; Ek
is first developed. The braking system is then analyzed is the total kinetic energy of the subsystem.
following a modular approach: the mechanical and the Neglecting the gear inertia, the total kinetic energy is equal
hydraulic subsystems are separately modeled. to the sum of the motor and the piston kinetic energies,
so that:
dEk dΩ dvmc
= Jmot Ω + Mmc vmc (3)
3.1 Modeling and control of the electrical system dt dt dt
where vmc is the velocity of the piston (assuming a pure
The DC motor can be simply modeled as a Resistive- translational motion for this element) and Mmc defines its
Inductive circuit plus an ideal voltage generator, which mass.
describes the Back Electro-Motive Force; the H-bridge is The terms Wmc , Wmot and Wl take the following expres-
described by a static model, neglecting its high-frequency sions:
dynamics behavior. The equations of the electrical system
model are: Wmc = −pmc Amc vmc − Fdamp vmc − Ff r vmc (4)
Wmot = T Ω (5)
  
di(t) dΩ
Wl = −(1 − ηg ) T Ω − Jmot Ω (6)


 Lm = Rm i(t) − v(t) + e(t), e(t) = Ke Ω(t)


 dt dt

v(t) = KH D(t) (1) where pmc is the pressure in the master cylinder chamber
and Fdamp = kdamp vmc is a damping term which takes into




 Ω(t) account the dissipation of fluid kinetic energy into sound
 Jm = T (t) − Tc (t), T (t) = Ke i(t)

dt and heat (see e.g. Ho et al. (2009)); with Ff r = f (vmc ) we
denote the non-linear friction force in the master cylinder,
where i(t) and v(t) are the motor current and the motor which will be worked out later. ηg is the gear efficiency
voltage, e(t) is the back EMF, Ω(t) is the rotor angular and Amc represents the master cylinder piston area.
speed, T (t) and Tc (t) are the motor and load torques Assuming the gear ratio:
respectively; D(t) represents the duty cycle imposed by the
ECU to the drivers of the H-bridge. By Lm , Rm , Ke and vmc T
kg = = (7)
Jm we denote the motor inductance, the motor resistance, Ω F
the back EMF constant and the rotor inertia respectively. and substituting (3), (4), (5) and (6) into (2), the model
KH is the static gain of the converter. In order to control of the mechanical subsystem is:
the motor current, the parameters of the system have been dΩ ηg T − kg (pmc Amc + kdamp kg Ω + Ff r )
identified and then a PI controller has been tuned to obtain = (8)
a current loop bandwidth equal to 100 Hz (see Fig.3). dt ηg Jmot + kg2 Mmc

526
Mechatronics'10
Cambridge, MA, USA, Sept 13-15, 2010

3.3 Modeling of the hydraulic subsystem 

dϑ
= Ω


dt

The model for the hydraulic subsystem is deduced by



dΩ ηg T − kg (pmc Amc + kdamp kg Ω + Ff r )

analyzing separately each component, the master cylinder, 

 =
the pipeline and the caliper. The model is based upon these ηg Jmot + kg2 Mmc

 dt
assumptions: dpmc β

ppd − pmc

= + Amc kg Ω



(1) the brake fluid is the DOT 4 oil; 

 dt (smc − kg ϑ)Amc Klf
(2) the flow of the oil through the pipeline is considered

dppd Kpd pmc − ppd


= 2

laminar (Re < 2000);


dt Apd Klf
(3) the brake caliper is modeled as a single-acting hy-
draulic cylinder plus a linear spring element which (13)
takes into account the elasticity of the brake pads; The rotor position is defined by the variable ϑ = xmc /kg .
(4) the density ρ and the kinematic viscosity ν of the Typical values of the parameters in (13) are listed in
brake fluid are assumed constant; table 1.
(5) the compressibility of the brake fluid is taken into In order to obtain a linear model, the static friction force is
account by means of a constant bulk modulus β = neglected and the term Ff r in (13) takes into account just
ρ(dp/dρ); the viscous friction, related to the piston velocity through
(6) the pipeline dynamics (such as the pressure waves a proportionality constant µ ≈ 10−2 N/m2 (the value for
and the transport phenomenon) are neglected; fur- µ will be estimated in Section 4).
thermore no leakage is assumed. Equation (13) is linearized around the equilibrium point
The principle of mass conservation (see e.g. Sharp (1981), defined by the condition where the piston is stopped in its
Isermann (2005)) is used to derive the model of the master nominal position (xmc ):
cylinder: xmc
ϑ=ϑ= Ω=Ω=0
dpmc β kg
= (−qmc + Amc vmc ) (9) ηg
dt Vmc pmc = pmc = T ppd = ppd = pmc
By qmc we denote the volumetric flow rate exiting the kg Amc
master cylinder; Vmc = Amc (smc − xmc ) represents the The corresponding third-order continuous-time linear sys-
volume of fluid inside the chamber, where smc is the piston tem has the following expression:
stroke and xmc defines its position (considered positive
when the corresponding movement increases pressure). 
The model for the caliper is derived in the same way: dδΩ
= −ap δpmc + aT δT − aΩ δΩ



 dt
! 
β A2pd dppd

β dδpmc
1+ = qpd (10) = bp (−δpmc + δppd ) + bΩ δΩ (14)
Vpd Kpd dt Vpd 
 dt

 dδp pd
The reader observes that (10) includes the equation of the = cp (δpmc − δppd )


load ppd Apd = Kpd xpd , where ppd indicates the pressure of dt
the pads and xpd is the piston position (considered positive It’s worth noticing that the equation relative to the rotor
when the corresponding movement decreases the pressure position ϑ does not appear in the linearized model since
ppd ); Kpd is the pad spring constant and Apd represents the it does not affect the dynamic behavior of the other state
pad area; qpd defines the volumetric flow rate entering the variables: in this way it has been possible to reduce the
caliper and the volume of fluid inside the caliper chamber order of the system. The parameters in (14) are:
can be expressed by Vpd = Apd xpd . Since the inequality ηg Amc kg
βA2pd  Vpd Kpd normally holds, (10) can be simplified as: aT = 2
ap =
ηg Jmot + kg Mmc ηg Jmot + kg2 Mmc
dppd Kpd kg kdamp + µ β
= 2 qpd (11) aΩ = kg bp =
dt Apd ηg Jmot + kg2 Mmc V mc Klf
Neglecting its dynamics, the pipeline causes a pressure β Kpd
drop between the master cylinder and the caliper (due to bΩ = Amc kg cp = 2
V mc Apd Klf
the distributed friction along its walls), so that its model
is simply defined by the two equations: Taking the Laplace transform of (14) and resorting the
pmc − ppd relationship T = Ke i, the transfer function between the
qmc = qpd = q, q = (12)
Klf input current i and the output pressure pmc is:
The term Klf = 32νρπLpl /A2pl is the ”laminar flow
coefficient” (see e.g. Sharp (1981)), where Apl is the area at 1 + sTp
of the pipeline cross-section and Lpl represents its length. Ke   (15)
ap µτ 3 µ(1 + aΩ τ ) 2 µaΩ
s + s + + Tp s + 1
ap ap ap
3.4 Modeling of the braking system
The parameters µ, τ and Tp are defined as:
The braking system model gathers the equations (8), (9),
1 1 + bp Tp Tp
and (11) (the volumetric flow rates qmc and qpd in (9) and Tp = Tp = µ= τ=
(11) have been substituted according to (12)): cp bΩ µbΩ

527
Mechatronics'10
Cambridge, MA, USA, Sept 13-15, 2010

By substituting the values of table 1 into (15), the dynamic force is proportional to the pressure in the master cylin-
behavior of the system can be analyzed. The transfer der chamber (pmc ), is adopted. The pressure dependence
function (15) is characterized by the three poles T1 , T2 describes the changes in the contact surfaces due to the
and TH , the zero τH and the gain K gathered in table 2 deformations of the piston seals as pressure in the master
(in (15) the pressure is expressed in bar and not in Pascal). cylinder increases.
In particular, TH is an high-frequency pole and is related At first, it is useful to express the friction force Ff r in
to the master cylinder pressure/position dynamics; the the master cylinder in terms of friction torque Tf r at the
other two poles are located at frequencies f ≈ 1Hz and DC motor. The relation between these two variables is
f ≈ 10Hz: they are strictly connected to the elastic described by the kinematic equation (7). Let Tf r , Tcf ,
behavior of both the fluid and the pads and they determine Tpr and µΩ be the total friction, the Coulomb friction,
the dynamic response of the braking system. The system the preload and the viscous friction torques respectively.
step response in a nominal pressure range will be shown The friction model is represented by the following set of
further in this paper (see Fig. 6). equations:

Tcf 1 + (kbrk,p − 1)e−c|Ω| + µΩ


 if Ω ≥ 0,
 Tf r =

4. FRICTION IDENTIFICATION AND 
−Tcf 1 + (kbrk,n − 1)e−c|Ω| + µΩ if Ω < 0.


COMPENSATION 
 Tpr + fcf r,p pmc if Ω ≥ 0,
 Tcf =


Friction in the actuator is mainly caused by the relative Tpr + fcf r,n pmc if Ω < 0.
motion between the piston O-ring seals and the internal (16)
cylinder surface. Friction is responsible of undesired behav- The parameters introduced in (16) are:
iors of the braking system, such as stick-slip phenomenon,
hysteresis and non-repeatability, which involve problems - c: it expresses the transition between the static fric-
in both identification and control. These considerations tion torque Tsf and the Coulomb friction torque Tcf ;
lead to the necessity of compensating friction, in order - µ: represents the viscous friction coefficient;
to correctly estimate the system parameters and achieve - kbrk,i (i = p, n): it defines the relationship between
better control performances. The pursued approach can be the breakaway friction torque (Tbrkf = Tcf + Tsf )
divided into two steps: at first a suitable friction model is and the Coulomb friction torque;
formalized and identified; then a compensation technique - fcf r,i (i = p, n): it governs the Coulomb friction
is discussed and its performances are evaluated. torque increasing with pressure.
The reader observes that the model is able to describe
4.1 Friction modeling and identification friction asymmetric behavior, since kbrk and fcf r may
have different values for positive or negative motor angular
A ”modified” version of the Stribeck friction model (see speeds. The vector of parameters:
e.g. Olsson et al. (1998)), in which the Coulomb friction ξ = [c µ kbrk,p fcf r,p kbrk,d fcf r,d ]
Table 1. Physical parameter values is estimated via numerical simulation. The identification
approach (see Corno et al. (2009a)) is divided in the
Symbol Value following steps:
DOT4 Bulk Modulus β 1 × 109 [Pa]
DOT4 Cinematic viscosity ν 5 × 10−4 [m2 /s] (1) the slowly-varying current ramp profile:
DOT4 Oil damping kdamp 2 × 104 [N/(m/s)]

0.2 t if t ∈ [0 25]
DOT4 Density ρ 1 × 103 [kg/m3 ] iset = (17)
10 − 0.2 t if t ∈ (25 50]
Pipeline cross-section di-
dpl 8 [mm] is applied to the motor (the current control loop
ameter
Pipeline length Lpl 1 [m] ensures that i ≡ iset ) and the pressure response pmc
is measured. The same current profile is applied to
Master Cylinder piston the non linear model (defined by (13) and (16)); the
Amc 1.2 × 10−4 [m2 ]
area
pressure ps,mc is registered;
Master Cylinder nominal
xmc 7 × 10−3 [m] (2) the vector of estimated parameters ξ̂ is obtained
position
Pad area Apd 3 × 10−4 [m2 ]
by minimizing,
Pn with respect to ξ, the loss function
2
Pad spring constant Kpd 1 × 106 [N/m] J(ξ) = k=1 (pmc (k) − ps,mc (ξ, k)) through a non-
Gear ratio kg 3 × 10−4 [m/rad] linear least square algorithm.
Gear efficiency ηg 0.9
Rotor inertia Jmot 1 × 10−5 [kg m2 ] The estimated values are listed in table 3 and the related
Back EMF constant Ke 30.4 × 10−3 [Wb] Stribeck curves are depicted, for different pressure values,
Master cylinder piston in Fig. 4.
Mmc 1 × 10−2 [kg]
mass
4.2 Friction compensation
Table 2. Gain, poles and zeros for the braking
system transfer function (15) Since the identified friction model is affected by great
uncertainty, friction is compensated adopting the dither-
K τH T1 T2 TH ing technique. Formally, this strategy provides an open-
loop friction compensation by using an high-frequency
10.1 1/(2π160) 1/(2π0.866) 1/(2π9.75) 1/(2π4.7 104 )
disturbance, named dither signal, to ”smooth” the effect

528
Mechatronics'10
Cambridge, MA, USA, Sept 13-15, 2010

Identified Stribeck curves for different pressure values Pressure / Current: quasi-static characteristic
0.15 5.5
pressure p = 2 [bar] With Dither
mc 5
pressure pmc= 20 [bar] Without Dither

Measured motor current (filtered) [A]

0.1 4.5
pressure pmc = 40 [bar]
4
Friction Torque Tfr [Nm]

pe
3.5 S lo
0.05 ve
3 is ti
Po
p:
2.5 am
0 R
2

1.5
−0.05
1
e Slope
gativ
0.5 p: Ne
Ram
−0.1 0
−2 −1.5 −1 −0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Motor velocity Ω [rad/sec] Measured master cylinder pressure [bar]

Fig. 4. Identified Stribeck curves (simulation results)

of frictional forces (see e.g. Michaux et al. (2007)). In this
specific problem, a current periodic signal idit is added
to the current setpoint iset in order to keep the piston
in motion and avoid the static friction phenomenon. This
dither signal has to be properly tuned with respect to its
waveform, amplitude and frequency.
The selected waveform is a sinusoid; this signal, compared
to a square or to a triangle wave, guarantees a low value of
THD (”Total Harmonic Distorsion”). This aspect is very
important because the dither signal must be band-limited
due to the high non-linearity of the braking system which
could cause undesired behavior of the actuator (such as
exciting resonant frequencies). The selected frequency is
fdit = 50 Hz. In this way the dither signal frequency is
out of the pressure control loop band (the pressure loop
bandwidth is equal to 10 Hz) but the current control loop
correctly tracks it (the current loop bandwidth is equal to
100 Hz). The amplitude of the dither signal is chosen ac-
cording to the parameters of the identified friction model.
The relation between the breakaway friction torque and
the pressure in the master cylinder can be obtained by
assuming Ω = 0 in (16):
Tbrkf = kbrk,p Tcf = kbrk,p (Tpr + fcf r,p pmc )
The breakaway friction torque is converted in a ”break-
away friction current” (which represents the amplitude
Adit of the dither signal) by using the equation T = Ke i:
kbrk,p
ibrkf = Adit = (Tpr + fcf r,p pmc ) (19)
Ke
Equation (19) underlines the proportionality between the
dither current amplitude and the pressure in the master
cylinder chamber. The dither signal then assumes the
following expression:
Table 3. Friction parameter values
Symbol Value
kbrk,p 2.6
fcf r,p 1.6 × 10−8
c 5
µ 2 × 10−7
fcf r,n 5.4 × 10−9
kbrk,n 2.3
Fig. 5. Quasi-static characteristic of the braking system.
kbrk,p
idit (t) = Adit sin(2πfdit t), Adit = (Tpr + fcf r pmc )
Ke
(20)
The results achieved by adopting this strategy can be
appreciated observing Fig. 5: this figure is obtained by
imposing a slow varying current ramp profile (with positive
and negative slopes), as formalized in (17); the pressure in
the master cylinder chamber, as well as the motor current,
are measured. The motor current measurement is then
post-processed, by filtering it through a first order low-
pass filter with cut-off frequency f = 20 Hz: this solution
has been used in order to take into account just the low
frequency dynamics of the system. Thus, the quasi static
behavior of the braking system is achieved: the hysteresis
in the motor current/pressure characteristic due to friction
phenomena in the master cylinder is totally removed.
5. IDENTIFICATION OF THE BRAKING SYSTEM
In this section the open-loop identification of the linear
behavior of the braking system is discussed. Since we can
assume, for this analysis, the current reference equal to
(18) the measured motor current, the input of the ”braking
system” is the setpoint current iset ≡ i whereas the output
is the measured pressure pmc . The dither signal in (20)
is always added to the current reference. The system is
identified around three different pressure values in order to
obtain three models capable to describe the linear behavior
of the braking system at low (pmc < 10 bar), medium
(10 bar ≤ pmc < 35 bar) and high (pmc ≥ 35 bar) pressure
ranges respectively.
According to (15), a class of models suitable for the
identification is represented by the transfer function:
P (s) 1
G(s) = =K (21)
I(s) (1 + sT1 )(1 + sT2 )
where the high frequency pole TH and zero τH have been
neglected. As it is evident from Fig. 6, the braking system
is characterized by a low frequency dynamic whose effects
reflects on the great settling time of pressure. Such phe-
nomenon is due to the presence of air in the brake fluid (see
e.g. Junge et al. (2009)). Since this complex phenomena
has not been modeled, a zero-pole couple (τL , TL ) is intro-

529
Mechatronics'10
Cambridge, MA, USA, Sept 13-15, 2010

Step Response (Iset = 0.35 A) 6. PRESSURE CONTROL AND EXPERIMENTAL

29 RESULTS
28.5
As stated at the beginning of this paper, the primary ob-
28 jective of this work regards the development of a pressure
Low frequency dynamic control loop able to satisfy the following requirements:
Pressure [bar]

27.5
- bandwidth: fp = 10 Hz;
27 - phase margin: ϕm ≥ 60◦ ;
- overshoot: OS% ≤ 15%;
26.5
- zero steady-state error;
26
Theorethical Non-Linear Model Hard−Braking Test
25.5 Measured
Identified Model (medium pressure) 40
25
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 35
Time [s]
30

Pressure [bar]
Fig. 6. Time comparison between the braking system,
25
the identified system and the theoretical model (Step
response of Iset = 0.35 A; medium pressure range) 20

15

10

5 Pressure Setpoint
duced in (21) in order to achieve a thorough class of models Measured Pressure
which accurately catches this low frequency dynamic too: 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
Time [s]
P (s) (1 + sτL )
G(s) = =K (22) (a) Hard-braking test (the step setpoint is generated via software)
I(s) (1 + sT1 )(1 + sT2 )(1 + sTL )
Tracking Test
Let ξ = [K τL T1 T2 TL ] be the vector of the
30
parameters in (22); for each pressure working point, the
strategy adopted for the estimation of ξ consists of two
steps: 25

(1) identification of the low frequency (f < 1 Hz) braking

Pressure [bar]

20
system dynamics;
(2) identification of the high frequency (1 Hz ≤ f <
15 Hz) braking system dynamics. 15

The first one is based on the step response identification

10
and is capable of estimating the parameters K, τL and
TL accurately. The second one, indeed, is based on the Pressure Setpoint
frequency response identification and provides precise es- 5 Measured Pressure
timations for the parameters T1 and T2 . The identification 39 39.5 40 40.5 41 41.5 42
is carried out using the Levenberg-Marquardt non-linear Time [s]
least square algorithm: while in the identification of the (b) Tracking test (the step setpoint is generated via instrumented
low frequency dynamics we minimize (for each time sam- brake pedal)
ple) the distance between the estimated and the measured
step responses, in the identification of the high frequency Fig. 7. Tests on the pressure control loop
dynamics we minimize (for each frequency sample) the
distance (in terms of magnitude and phase) between the Table 4. Estimated parameter for the braking
measured and the estimated frequency response. The ini- system transfer function
tial guesses for the parameters T1 , T2 and K are chosen
according to the theoretical model (see table 2); the initial Pressure Estimated Parameters
guesses for the parameters TL and τL are chosen one
decade before the pole T1 . The estimated parameters are K τL T1 T2 TL
listed in table 4. Figure 6 shows the obtained results, com-
paring the current step response of the measured pressure, Low 10 1 1 1 1
2π 0.095 2π 1.15 2π 6.78 2π 0.104
of the transfer function identified for medium pressures
and of the one obtained with the model (13) presented in Medium 10.2 1 1 1 1
2π 0.096 2π 1.25 2π 7.15 2π 0.104
Section 3. These results prove that the theoretical model
previously derived is able to catch the most preeminent High 10.5 1 1 1 1
2π 0.085 2π 1.36 2π 8.27 2π 0.095
dynamics of the braking system.

530
Mechatronics'10
Cambridge, MA, USA, Sept 13-15, 2010
The pressure controller is tuned with respect to the lin-
ear model identified at medium pressures: this range of
pressure is indeed considered the nominal working region
of the braking system. The control strategy consists of a
PID regulator whose action is based on the pressure error
(pset − p); this controller generates the current reference
i∗set : this signal, in addition to the dither current idit , repre-
sents the reference iset for the internal current control loop
(see Fig. 1). In order to get a decoupling action between the
internal and the external control loop, a second order low-
pass filter with cut-off frequency f = 80 Hz is applied to
the signal iset . The PID has been tuned and implemented
adopting an anti-wind up configuration.
The experimental results depicted in Fig. 7 show the
excellent performances in terms of overshoot and settling
time obtained in the whole ranges of pressure. In Fig. 7(a)
an hard-braking maneuver is considered: it basically con-
sists of a step response where the pressure setpoint pset
(generated via software) changes from 6 bar to approx-
imately 37 bar. Fig. 7(b), instead, presents the tracking
results achieved when the pressure reference comes from
the instrumented brake pedal: its position is translated,
through a static map, into the the setpoint pset .
7. CONCLUSION
In this paper the control of an electro-mechanical brake-
by-wire actuator has been presented. The identification
of the system have exploited a model-based approach,
in order to achieve a better understanding of the brake
behavior: the third-order model developed in this paper
turns out to be a suitable model for the pressure con-
trol, since it is capable of taking into account the most
relevant dynamics of the braking system. The friction
compensation has been obtained via dithering technique:
the effectiveness of such a method for this specific problem
has been proven by the experimental results. The pressure
control loop, based upon a PID controller plus the dither
signal, guarantees the 10 Hz bandwidth and the bounded
overshoots. The capabilities of such an actuator represent
the basis from which more sophisticated high-level braking
control strategies can be further implemented.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Thanks are due to ing. Nicola Iovine for having supported
the test analysis, to ing. Carlo Cantoni and ing. Riccardo
Arrigoni from Brembo S.p.A. and to ing. Luciano Spag-
giari from MV Agusta Motor S.p.A.
REFERENCES
Corno, M., Panzani, G., Maggio, G., Mazzocchi, P., Goggi,
A., and Savaresi, S.M. (2009a). Nonlinear modeling and
control of a dual-stage hybrid ride-by-wire throttle body
for a sport motorbike. In 2nd ASME Annual Dynamic
Systems and Control Conference (DSCC09). Hollywood.
Corno, M., Savaresi, S.M., and Balas, G.J. (2009b). On
Linear Parameter Varying (LPV) Slip-Controller design
for two-wheeled vehicles. International Journal on
Robust and Nonlinear Control, 19, 1313–1336.
Corno, M., Savaresi, S.M., Tanelli, M., and Fabbri, L.
(2008). On optimal motorcycle braking. Control En-
gineering Practice, 16(6), 644–657.
531
Cossalter, V., Doria, A., and Lot, R. (2000). Optimum sus-
pension design for motorcycle braking. Vehicle System
Dynamics, 34(3), 175–198.
Hirsch, M., Alberer, D., and del Re, L. (2006). Stability
control by advanced full-braking systems of motorbike.
In Proceedings of IMECE2006: 2006 ASME Interna-
tional Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition.
Ho, H.P., Day, A.J., Hussain, K., and Johnstone, A.
(2009). Modelling and simulation of the characteristics
of a hydraulic brake master cylinder. In SAE Interna-
tional - SAE 2009 Brake Colloquium.
Isermann, R. (2005). Mechatronic systems. Springer
Berlin.
Junge, C., Senicar, F., Wegener, R., and Soter, S. (2009).
Pressure control of a nonlinear system with a linear-
pmsm and a standard inverter. In Electric Machines
and Drives Conference, 2009. IEMDC ’09. IEEE Inter-
national, 83–88.
Limebeer, D.J.N., Sharp, R.S., and Evangelou, S. (2001).
The stability of motorcycles under acceleration and
braking. Journal of Computational and Nonlinear Dy-
namics, 9(215), 1095–1110.
Michaux, M.A., Ferri, A.A., and Cunefare, K.A. (2007).
Effect of tangential dither signal on friction induced
oscillations in an sdof model. Journal of Computational
and Nonlinear Dynamics, 2, 201.
Olsson, H., Astrom, K.J., Wit, C.C.D., Gafvert, M., and
Lischinsky, P. (1998). Friction models and friction
compensation. European Journal of Control, 4, 176–195.
Savaresi, S.M. and Tanelli, M. (2010). Active braking
control system design for vehicles. Springer-Verlag. To
appear.
Schwarz., R., Isermann, R., Bohm, J., Nell, J., and Rieth,
P. (1999). Clamping force estimation for a brake-by-wire
actuator.
Sharp, J.J. (1981). Hydraulic modelling. Butterworths
London. 1981. 242.
Sharp, R.S. (2009). Limit braking of a high-performance
motorcycle. Vehicle System Dynamics, 47(5), 613–625.
Tanelli, M., Astolfi, A., and Savaresi, S.M. (2007). Mixed
slip-deceleration control in automotive braking sys-
tems. ASME Transactions: Journal of Dynamic Sys-
tems, 129(1), 20–31. Awarded with the 2007 ASME
Dynamic Systems and Control Rudolf Kalman Best
Paper Award.
Tanelli, M., Astolfi, A., and Savaresi, S.M. (2008a). Robust
Nonlinear Output Feedback Control for Brake by Wire
Control Systems. Automatica, 44(4), 1078–1087.
Tanelli, M., Osorio, G., Bernardo, M.D., Savaresi, S.M.,
and Astolfi, A. (2009). Existence, stability and robust-
ness analysis of limit cycles in hybrid Anti-lock Braking
Systems. International Journal of Control, 82(4), 659–
678.
Tanelli, M., Prandini, M., Codeca, F., Moia, A., and
Savaresi, S. (2008b). Analysing the interaction between
braking control and speed estimation: the case of two-
wheeled vehicles. In 47th IEEE Conference on Decision
and Control, 2008. CDC 2008, 5372–5377.
Zanten, A.T.V. (2002). Evolution of electronic control
systems for improving the vehicle dynamic behavior.
In 6 th International Symposium on Advanced Vehicle
Control, AVEC, Hiroshima, Japan.