Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 176 (2022) 109162

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ymssp

Longitudinal-lateral-cooperative estimation algorithm for vehicle

dynamics states based on
adaptive-square-root-cubature-Kalman-filter and
similarity-principle
Xiang Chen a, Shaohua Li b, *, Liang Li c, Wanzhong Zhao a, Shuo Cheng c
a
College of Energy and Power Engineering, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing, Jiangsu 210016, China
b
State Key Laboratory of Mechanical Behavior and System Safety of Traffic Engineering Structures, Shijiazhuang Tiedao University, Shijiazhuang,
Hebei 050043, China
c
State Key Laboratory of Automotive Safety and Energy, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Communicated by Yaguo Lei
Keywords:
Vehicle dynamic states
Tire-road peak adhesion coefficient
Partitioned similarity-principle
Four-wheel-independent-drive-electric-vehicle
Adaptive-square-root-cubature-Kalman-filter
It is infeasible to measure vehicle dynamics states (VDS) directly without expensive measurement
instruments, especially for the tire-road peak adhesion coefficient (μmax). However, four-wheel-
independent-drive-electric-vehicle (4WIDEV) provides convenience for the observation of these
dynamic states, because the rotation rate and torque of the in-wheel motor can be acquired
directly. Vehicle nonlinear longitudinal-lateral dynamics, the single estimation method for all
VDS and the time-varying measurement noise of sensors cause difficulties for the observation.
Common the extended-Kalman-filter (EKF) is unsuitable to estimate VDS in strong nonlinear
region. This paper propose a longitudinal-lateral cooperative estimation algorithm based on
adaptive-square-root-cubature-Kalman-filter (ASRCKF) and partitioned similarity-principle (SP)
to estimate the vehicle states and the tire-road peak adhesion coefficient sequentially for
4WIDEV. Firstly, a nonlinear 7-degree-of-freedom (7DOF) vehicle model and magic-formula (MF)
tire model are built as the base of the successive estimation scheme. Then, recursive-least-squares
(RLS) is adopted to estimate the tire longitudinal force. With the estimated tire longitudinal force,
an ASRCKF which can be adjusted adaptively by the feedback dynamics states, is designed for the
estimation of vehicle states. Next, the SP algorithm combined with the characteristic of
longitudinal-lateral dynamics, which is benefit for μmax estimation when tire dynamics enters the
nonlinear region, is proposed. Finally, experiment and simulation results show that excellent
performance can be achieved with the proposed estimation method in varying driving conditions.

Abbreviations: VDS, Vehicle-dynamics-states; 4WIDEV, Four-wheel-independent-drive-electric-vehicle; 7DOF, 7-degree-of-freedom; KF, Kalman-

filter; EKF, Extended-Kalman-filter; UKF, Unscented-Kalman-filter; AUKF, Adaptive-unscented-Kalman-filter; CKF, Cubature-Kalman-filter; SCKF,
Square-root-cubature-Kalman-filter; ASRCKF, Adaptive-square-root-cubature-Kalman-filter; SP, Similarity-principle; MF, Magic-formula; RLS,
Recursive-least-squares; ABS, Anti-lock-braking-systems; ESP, Electronic-stability-programs; LO, Luenberger-observer; SMO, Sliding-mode-observer;
RO-SMO, Reduced-order-sliding-mode-observer.
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: lishaohua@stdu.edu.cn (S. Li).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymssp.2022.109162
Received 15 September 2021; Received in revised form 3 April 2022; Accepted 9 April 2022
Available online 23 April 2022
0888-3270/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
X. Chen et al. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 176 (2022) 109162

1. Introduction

Nomenclature

m Vehicle mass
mw Tire mass
lf Distance from the mass center to the front axle
lr Distance from the mass center to the rear axle
Bw Wheel-base
IZ Moment of the vehicle inertia around the Z axis
Rw Tire rolling radius
Iw Moment of the tire inertia around the rotation axis
h Distance between roll center and the center of sprung mass
δf Steering angle of the front axle
r Vehicle yaw rate
β Vehicle sideslip angle
vX Vehicle longitudinal velocity
vY Vehicle lateral velocity
aX Vehicle longitudinal acceleration
aY Vehicle lateral acceleration
ωij Rotation rate of each wheel
FXij Longitudinal tire force
FYij Lateral tire force
FZij Vertical tire force
Ffij Rolling resistance of each wheel
Tdij Driving torque of each wheel
Tbij Braking torque of each wheel
vXij Longitudinal translational velocity of each wheel
αij Tire lateral sideslip angle of each wheel
λij Tire longitudinal slip ratio of each wheel
Equivalent tire longitudinal slip ratio of each wheel
′
λij
μmax Tire-road peak adhesion coefficient
μutilize Utilization adhesion coefficient
Equivalent utilization adhesion coefficient
′
μutilize
Q Process noise covariance matrix
R Measurement noise covariance matrix
ij i=f,r (f means front, r means rear) j=l,r (l means left, r means right)

1.1. Motivation

Instantaneous knowledge of VDS, especially for the tire-road friction potential is expected to result in improving the performance of
several active chassis control systems [1,2]. For example, anti-lock-braking-systems (ABS) [3] and electronic-stability-programs (ESP)
[4] will be beneficial from the information of VDS. In recent years, automated driving vehicles have been developed rapidly [5].
Almost all kinds of automatic driving functions such as active collision avoidance systems [6] and path tracking control [1,7] also rely
heavily on the acquisition of VDS.Therefore, many approaches have been proposed to estimate VDS with different requirements of
sensors and levels of excitations which can be mainly categorized into ‘measuring-instrument-based’ and ‘vehicle-dynamics-based’
approaches [8]. Considering the cost of VDS measurement, ‘vehicle-dynamics-based’ approach is essential to obtain VDS by low-cost
sensors.

1.2. Literature review

Usually, critical vehicle states mainly contain vehicle sideslip angle, longitudinal velocity, lateral velocity, yaw rate. Among them,
the most difficult to estimate accurately are the sideslip angle and lateral velocity. In general, if one of the two states is estimated, the
other can be easily calculated for the reason that the vehicle sideslip angle is defined as the angle between the velocity direction of the
center of vehicle and the vehicle longitudinal axis [9]. As for vehicle sideslip angle, there are three common estimation algorithms
[10], which are the Luenberger-observer (LO) [11,12], the sliding-mode-observer (SMO) [13,14], the KF [13], and their variants
[9,15–18]. Chen et al. proposed a reduced-order-sliding-mode-observer (RO-SMO) with a system damping integrated to estimate

2
X. Chen et al. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 176 (2022) 109162

Fig. 1. Overall scheme for estimating vehicle dynamic states.

vehicle sideslip angle and tire force, which can reduce the computing burden and improve the estimation accuracy simultaneously
[14]. In [16] a dual extended Kalman filter is adopted to estimate the vehicle states and parameters, however, the linearization process
may reduce the accuracy of the system and even lead to divergence in the large nonlinear region. Thus, a nonlinear Kalman filter
combined with a deep neural network is put forward to estimate vehicle sideslip angle, which can also solve the uncertainty problem
[17]. To address the problems of model uncertainty and system non-linearity, an adaptive unscented-Kalman-filter (UKF) with dy­
namic correction (AUKF) for vehicle body sideslip angle is brought forward [18]. UKF is better than EKF for its nonlinear advantage,
but the stability of UKF is not guaranteed for the reason that the covariance matrix must be semi-definite. So, an adaptive-square-root-
cubature-Kalman-filter (ASCKF)-based estimator with the integral correction fusion is proposed, which is beneficial for non-linear
dynamics, parameters uncertainty, system stability and computing burden [9]. In addition, Chen et al. also proposed an estimation
method to observe VDS specifically for 4WIDEV [19].
To sum up the above paragraph, the KF series algorithm is mostly used for vehicle states estimation. KF can only be used in linear
region although the amount of calculation is minimal. EKF could be utilized in nonlinear system through the linearization method,
which can only ensure the first-order accuracy and needs to consume large computing resources to calculate the numerical Jacobian
matrix, whose analytical solution is difficult to obtain. UKF uses the unscented transformation method to ensure the second-order
accuracy, which is better than EKF, but the stability of UKF may be uncertain because it requires the covariance matrix to be posi­
tive definite. Compared with UKF, CKF adopts a spherical-radial cubature rule, which can reduce computational burden and ensure
positive definite of the prediction matrix. Square-root-cubature-Kalman-filter (SCKF) is a square-root extension of the standard CKF but
it uses the least-squares method for the Kalman gain and triangularization for covariance updates to preserve the symmetry and
positive (semi) definiteness of the covariance [9].
Tire-road peak friction coefficient is extremely important for vehicle dynamics control and it is also difficult to be estimated
accurately and instantaneously. In general, μmax can be estimated from the dynamics response of longitudinal and lateral. A direct and
effective method is to use the longitudinal dynamic characteristics to estimate the maximum tire-road friction coefficient, which needs
an adequate excitation of driving or braking torque to modulate the required wheel slip ratio [20,21]. The typical method to calculate
the μmax is the well-known slope-based method discussed in [22]. The tire-road adhesion coefficient can also be estimated by lateral
dynamics which are mainly related to steering torque and lateral tire force/stiffness [23,24]. Form the point of tire aligning torque, Ma
et al. proposed a novel estimation of road adhesion coefficient based on single tire self-aligning-torque (SAT) instead of total tire SAT to
reduce the estimation error [25]. The above methods can only be used to estimate the road adhesion coefficient under a single working
condition. But most of the vehicles are driving in combined conditions. Thus, some estimation methods for maximum tire-road friction
coefficient with the consideration of longitudinal and lateral dynamics were put forward [26,27]. For instance, two separate
Lyapunov-based estimators are designed to estimate the tire-road friction coefficient and the longitudinal stiffness iteratively, which is
suitable for the combined longitudinal and lateral motion [28]. Besides, a frequency domain data fusion method is proposed to
improve the estimation accuracy for the tire-road friction coefficient in the condition of small acceleration based on the natural
frequencies of the steering system and the in-wheel motor driving system [29]. In [30], two moving horizon estimation methods for
μmax are designed based on HSRI tire model, which is also specifically for four-wheel drive electric vehicle.

3
X. Chen et al. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 176 (2022) 109162

Fig. 2. Nonlinear 7DOF vehicle dynamic model.

The noise information of vehicle states is often different when vehicles are driving on different adhesion roads, which means that
vehicle states and μmax will influence each other. However, to the best of our knowledge, vehicle states estimation with the consid­
eration of the varying of μmax has not been researched, and the estimation of μmax which should consider the dynamics interaction of
longitudinal and lateral is also inadequate. Thus, it is essential to research the estimation method of VDS more comprehensively.

1.3. Novelty of this contribution

Some researchers have drawn attention to the estimation knowledge for VDS and some research results have been achieved.
However, the problems of the vehicle nonlinear longitudinal-lateral dynamics, the unicity of estimation method for all VDS and the
measurement noise of sensors cause difficulties for the observation still have not been solved perfectly. Cheng et al. adopted an ASCKF
to estimate the vehicle sideslip angle with the consideration of the problems of the system nonlinear characteristics and the influence of
measurement parameters on the noise covariance matrices, which can not only reduce the calculation burden, but also improves the
estimation accuracy [9]. Nevertheless, the factors of longitudinal velocity and μmax are not considered, which may also effect the VDS
estimation results. As a classical estimation method for μmax, slip-slope-based method can estimate μmax simply and quickly [31], but
this method can only be used to estimate μmax in a specific tire slip region. Too large or too small slip ratio may all lead to inaccurate
estimation. In view of the above problems, this paper proposed a longitudinal-lateral-cooperative estimation method for VDS based on
ASRCKF and SP. The structure of this paper is mainly schemed as Fig. 1, and the main contributions are specified as: 1) An ASRCKF
observer for vehicle body states is designed with the consideration of longitudinal velocity and the influence of measurement pa­
rameters on the noise covariance matrices. 2) SP algorithm is introduced in this paper and it is used to calculate μmax with the
consideration of the interaction of longitudinal-lateral dynamics subsequently. 3) Experiment and co-simulation are designed to verify
the effectiveness of the estimation method for VDS.

1.4. Paper organization

The rest of this paper is arranged as follows: Section 2 presents a nonlinear 7DOF vehicle model and MF tire model for the base of
the successive estimation. Section 3 puts forward RLS and ASRCKF to observe the tire longitudinal force and vehicle states, respec­
tively. Section 4 proposes the partitioned SP algorithm with the consideration of longitudinal-lateral dynamics to calculate μmax.
Section 5 demonstrates the performance result of the proposed estimation method by experiment and co-simulation. Section 6 con­
cludes the paper profoundly.

2. Vehicle and tire model

In order to observe the vehicle dynamic states accurately, a nonlinear 7DOF vehicle model and Magic Formula (MF) tire model are
adopted as the modeling base to design the cooperative estimation algorithm.

2.1. Nonlinear 7DOF vehicle model

A nonlinear 7DOF vehicle model is used to describe the dynamic characteristics, which includes the freedom of longitudinal

4
X. Chen et al. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 176 (2022) 109162

motion, lateral motion, yaw motion and the rotation of four wheels. The nonlinear 7DOF vehicle dynamic model is shown in Fig. 2.
The vehicle dynamic equilibrium equations of longitudinal, lateral and yaw can be expressed as [16]:
⎧
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ m(v̇X − rvY ) = (FXfl + FXfr )cosδf + FXrl + FXrr − (FYfl + FYfr )sinδf
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ m( v̇Y + rvX ) = (FXfl + FXfr )sinδf + (FYfl + FYfr )cosδf + FYrl + FYrr
⎪
⎨
[(
IZ ṙ = (FXfl + FXfr )lf sinδf + FXfr − FXfl )cosδf + (FXrr − FXrl )
] Bw (1)
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ 2
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ Bw
⎪
⎪ + (FYfl + FYfr )lf cosδf + (FYfl − FYfr ) sinδf − (FYrl + FYrr )lr
⎪
⎪ 2
⎪
⎩

In this equation, m and IZ represent the vehicle sprung mass and the moment of the vehicle inertia around the Z axis, lf, lr and Bw
mean the distance from the mass centre to the front axle, the distance from the mass centre to the rear axle and wheel-base of the
vehicle respectively. Assume that the front wheel-base and rear wheel-base are equal, just as:Bf = Br = Bw . δf is the steering angle of
the front axle, and on the basis of neglecting the characteristics of the steering mechanism, the steering angle of left and right wheel are
assumed approximately equal, just as:δl = δr = δf .r, β and vX indicate yaw rate, sideslip angle and longitudinal velocity, respectively.
FXij and FYij stand for tire force of longitudinal and lateral (where i = f or r, j = l or r, and fl means the front left, fr means the front right, rl
means the rear left, rr means the rear right), respectively.
The rotational dynamic equilibrium equation of each wheel is:
Iw ω̇ij = Tdij − Tbij − FXij R − Ffij R (i = f , r j = l, r) (2)

Where Iw is the moment of wheel inertia around each axis of rotation. R means effective radius of each wheel. ωij represents the rotation
rate of each wheel. Tdij and Tbij stand for the driving torque and braking torque of each wheel respectively, Ffij indicates the rolling
resistance of each wheel which can be expressed as:Ffij = froll FZij , and the parameter froll can set as 0.02 approximately.

2.2. MF tire model

In this part, a simplified MF tire model based on similarity principle [32] is introduced. The general form of MF tire model can be
described as follows:
Y0 (x) = Dsin{Carctan[Bx − E(Bx − arctan(Bx))]} (3)

Yμ (x) = (μ/μ0 )Y0 ((μ0 /μ)x ) (4)

Where Y0(x) represents pure longitudinal and lateral tire force in the condition of normalized tire-road friction coefficient in this paper.
Yμ(x) stands for pure longitudinal and lateral tire force in the condition of actual tire-road friction coefficient. μ0 and μ are normalized
tire-road friction coefficient and actual tire-road friction coefficient, respectively. In this paper, μ0 is set as 1. x can be the longitudinal
slip ratio and lateral slip angle. B, C, D and E represent the stiffness factor, shape factor, peak value and curvature factor, respectively.
The tire longitudinal slip ratio of each wheel can be expressed as:
⎧
⎪
⎪
ωij R − vXij
⎪
⎨ ωij Rw Driving Conditon
λij = (i = f , r j = l, r) (5)
⎪
⎪ vXij − ωij R
⎪
⎩ Braking Conditon
vXij

Where vXij stands for the longitudinal translational velocity of each wheel, which can be calculated as following:
⎧
⎪
⎪ vXfl = (vX − rBw /2)cosδf + (vX β + rlf )sinδf
⎨
vXfr = (vX + rBw /2)cosδf + (vX β + rlf )sinδf
(6)
⎪
⎪ vXrl = vX − rBw /2
⎩
vXrr = vX + rBw /2

The tire lateral sideslip angle of each wheel can be expressed as:
⎧
⎪
⎪ βvX + rlf βvX − rlr
⎨ αfl = vX − rBw /2 − δf αrl = vX − rBw /2
⎪
(7)
⎪
⎪ βvX + rlf βvX − rlr
⎪
⎩ αfr = − δf αrr =
vX + rBw /2 vX + rBw /2

The parameters B, C, D and E in the longitudinal MF tire model can be represented as follows:
( )
C = a0 , D = a1 FZ2 + a2 FZ , B = a3 FZ2 + a4 FZ ea5 FZ /(CD), E = a6 FZ2 + a7 FZ + a8

5
X. Chen et al. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 176 (2022) 109162

Table 1
MF tire model parameters of a0 ~ a8 and b0 ~ b6.
Parameter a0 a1 a2 a3 a4 a5 a6 a7 a8

Value 1.706 − 18.452 1011.2 2786 61,795 − 0.436 − 6.49 12.58 1.73
Parameter b0 b1 b2 b3 b4 b5 b6
Value 1.3937 − 2.6758 987.45 71,717 9.157 − 0.702 0.894

The parameters B, C, D and E in the lateral MF tire model can be represented as follows:

C = b0 , D = b1 FZ2 + b2 FZ , B = b3 sin[2arctan(FZ /b4 ) ]/(CD), E = b5 FZ + b6

where a0 ~ a8 and b0 ~ b7 can be calibrated by tire force tests. and their values are demonstrated in Table 1.
FZ represents tire vertical force, where the vertical force of each tire can be expressed as follows [16]:

⎧
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
FZfl = mw g + mglr /(lf + lr ) − mv̇X h/(lf + lr ) − m(rvX + v̇Y )hlr /[Bw (lf + lr )]
⎪
⎪
⎪
FZfr = mw g + mglr /(lf + lr ) − mv̇X h/(lf + lr ) + m(rvX + v̇Y )hlr /[Bw (lf + lr )]
(8)
⎪
⎨
⎪
⎪ F = mw g + mglf /(lf + lr ) + mv̇X h/(lf
⎪ Zrl
⎪
⎪ + lr ) − m(rvX + v̇Y )hlf /[Bw (lf + lr )]
⎪
⎪
⎩ FZrr = mw g + mglf /(lf + lr ) + mv̇X h/(lf + lr ) + m(rvX + v̇Y )hlf /[Bw (lf + lr )]
⎪
⎪
⎪

where mw means the tire mass, and g is gravitational acceleration. h represents the distance between the roll center and the sprung mass
center. The longitudinal and lateral tire forces are limited in the adhesion ellipse. Meanwhile, longitudinal and lateral forces can
interact each other. Therefore, the tire force calculated by MF can be modified by the following expressions [32]:
⎧ μ μ
⎪
⎪
⎪ FX = FX∗ cos(η) FY = FY∗ sin(η)
⎪
⎪ μ 0 μ 0
⎪
⎪ ⃒ ⃒
⎪
⎪ F ∗ = Y (μ λ′ /μ) ′
⎪
⎪
⎨ X μ 0
∗
FY = Yμ (μ0 α /μ) η = arctan⃒σ ∗Y /σ ∗X ⃒
′ ′
λ = σ ∗total σ Xmax /(1 + σ∗total σ Xmax ) α = arctan(σ ∗total σ Ymax ) (9)
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
⎪
⎪
⎪ ∗
σ∗Y = σY /σYmax σ ∗total = σ ∗2 ∗2
⎪ σ X = σ X /σ Xmax
⎪
⎪ X + σY
⎪
⎩
σ X = λ/(1 + λ) σY = α/(1 + λ)

where σ Xmax and σ Ymax represent the value of σ X and σY in peak adhesion, respectively. The calculation of Yμ (μλ /μ0 ) and Yμ (μα /μ0 )
′ ′

need the parameters of longitudinal MF tire model and lateral MF tire model, respectively.

3. Hierarchical control scheme for torque allocation

According to Fig. 1, μmax is the final parameter to be estimated which needs the input signals of tire sideslip angle, tire longitudinal
force and slip ratio. In this section, two observers will be designed to estimate tire longitudinal force and vehicle states which are used
to calculate tire longitudinal slip ratio and sideslip angle by Eqs. (5) and (7). As the following introduced, the first observer of recursive-
least-squares (RLS) is put forward to estimate tire longitudinal force, the second observer of ASRCKF is presented to estimate the
vehicle states.

3.1. Estimation for tire longitudinal force with RLS

According to Eq. (2), the rotational dynamic equilibrium equation of four wheels can be formulated in a form of parameters
identification as:
y = ψΘ (10)
[ ]T [ ]T
Where y = yfl yfr yrl yrr , and yij = Tdij − Tbij − Ffij − Iw ω̇ij , (i = f, r), (j = l, r). ψ = R ⋅ diag(1,1,1,1),Θ = FXfl FXfr FXrl FXrr .
y is the system output, ψ is the system input and Θ is the parameter to be estimated. The driving torque Tdij and braking torque Tbij can
be measured directly for the in-wheel motor, Ffij can be calculated by the vertical force and ω̇ij can be obtained by differentiating wheel
rotation rate and high-pass filter. Eq. (10) can be transformed into a standard discretized parameter identification form:
y(k) = ψ (k)Θ(k) + e(k) (11)

where:

6
X. Chen et al. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 176 (2022) 109162

Table 2
Implementary pseudocode for SCKF.
Inputs:

1. X(0),
̂ S(0), Q(0), R(0), ξi (i = 1, 2, ⋯2n)
Time update:
for i = 1: 2n
2. Calculate the state cubature points:Xi (k − 1) = S(k − 1)ξi + X(k
̂ − 1)
3. Propagate the state cubature points:X−i (k|k − 1) = f(Xi (k − 1), u(k − 1))
end for
∑
4. Estimate the predicted state: X(k|k
̂ − 1) = 1/(2n) 2n X− (k|k − 1)
i=1 i
5. Calculate the weighted, centered matrix of state:
√̅̅̅̅̅̅[ ]
χ− (k|k − 1) = 1/ 2n X−1 (k|k − 1) − X(k|k
̂ − 1)⋯ ⋯X−2n (k|k − 1) − X(k|k
̂ − 1)
6. Calculate the square-root of the process noise covariance:Q(k − 1) = SQ (k − 1)STQ (k − 1)
7. Calculate the square-root factor of the predicted error covariance:
S(k|k − 1) = Tria([ χ − (k|k − 1) SQ (k − 1) ])
Measurement update:
for i = 1: 2n
8. Calculate the predicted state cubature points:Xi (k|k − 1) = S(k|k − 1)ξi + X(k|k
̂ − 1)
9. Propagate the measured cubature points:Zi (k) = h(Xi (k|k − 1), u(k))
end for
∑
10. Estimate the predicted measurement: Z(k)
̂ = 1/(2n) 2n Zi (k)
i=1
11. Calculate the weighted, centered matrix of measurement:
√̅̅̅̅̅̅
ζ(k) = 1/ 2n[Z1 (k) − Z(k)⋯
̂ ̂
⋯Z2n (k) − Z(k)]
12. Calculate the square-root of the measurement noise covariance:R(k) = SR (k)STR (k)
13. Calculate the square-root factor of the innovation error covariance:SZ (k) = Tria([ ζ(k) SR (k) ])
14. Calculate the weighted, centered matrix of the innovation state:
√̅̅̅̅̅̅
χ (k|k − 1) = 1/ 2n[X1 (k|k − 1) − X(k|k
̂ − 1)⋯ ⋯X2n (k|k − 1) − X(k|k
̂ − 1)]
15. Calculate the cross-covariance:PXZ (k) = χ (k|k − 1)ζ T (k)
16. Calculate the Kalman gain:K(k) = (PXZ (k)/STZ (k))/SZ (k)
17. Estimate the state: X(k)
̂ ̂
= X(k|k − 1) + K(k)(Z(k) − Z(k))
̂
18. Calculate the square-root factor of the corresponding error covariance:
S(k) = Tria([ χ (k|k − 1) − K(k)ζ(k) K(k)SR (k) ])
Outputs: X(k),
̂ S(k), K(k)

̂ − 1)
e(k) = y(k) − ψ (k) Θ(k (12)
Thus, the vector Θ to be estimated can be expressed as the following form:
̂
Θ(k) ̂ − 1) + K y (k)e(k)
= Θ(k (13)

Where
[ ]−
(14)
1
Ky (k) = Py (k − 1)ψ (k) λy + ψ T (k)Py (k − 1)ψ (k)
{ [ ]− 1 }
Py (k) = I − Py (k − 1)ψ (k) λy + ψ T (k)Py (k − 1)ψ (k) ψ T (k) Py (k − 1)λ−y 1 (15)

The matrix λy in Eqs. (14) and (15) is a matrix of forgetting factor, which is used to gradually weakened the effect of old data on new
data. If the tire-road adhesion coefficient changes suddenly or sudden acceleration or deceleration, the corresponding tire force and
wheel speed will change suddenly. The estimation results need to reduce the proportion of old data in the estimation process and
increase the proportion of new data, so it is necessary to introduce the forgetting factor. This forgetting factor matrix can be expressed
as:λy = λy ⋅ diag(1,1,1,1), where λy is typically set in the interval (0.9, 1). After calibration, we found that the effect is the best when λy
is set as 0.95.

3.2. Estimation for vehicle states with ASRCKF

According to Eq. (1), the vehicle dynamic equilibrium equations of longitudinal, lateral and yaw can be formulated in a recursive
discrete state equation form:
{
X(k + 1) = f (X(k), u(k)) + v(k)
(16)
Z(k) = h(X(k), u(k)) + w(k)

Where X(k) = [ vX (k) vY (k) r(k) ]T , and Z(k) = [ aX (k) aY (k) r(k) ]T represent the system state vector and measured vector,
respectively. v(k) is the process noise vector, which is described by process noise covariance matrix Q = E(vvT ). w(k) is the mea­
surement noise vector, which is described by measurement noise covariance matrix R = E(wwT ). v(k) and w(k) are both white Gaussian

7
X. Chen et al. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 176 (2022) 109162

noise. The discrete state equation and output equation of the nonlinear system can be expressed as follows:
⎡ ⎤
⎡ ⎤ vX (k) + [mr(k)vY (k) + (FXfl (k) + FXfr (k))cosδf (k) + FXrl (k) + FXrr (k) − (FYfl (k) + FYfr (k))sinδf (k)]T/m;
vX (k + 1) ⎢ vY (k) + [− mr(k)vX (k) + (FXfl (k) + FXfr (k))sinδf (k) + (FYfl (k) + FYfr (k))cosδf (k) + FYrl (k) + FYrr (k)]T/m; ⎥
⎣ vY (k + 1) ⎦ = ⎢
⎣ r(k) + [(FXfl (k) + FXfr (k))lf sinδf (k) + (FXfr (k) − FXfl (k))cosδf (k)Bw /2 + (FXrr (k) − FXrl (k))Bw /2
⎥
⎦ (17)
r(k + 1)
+ (FYfl (k) + FYfr (k))lf cosδf (k) + (FYfl (k) − FYfr (k))sinδf (k)Bw /2 − (FYrl (k) + FYrr (k))lr ]T/IZ
⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤
aX (k) [(FXfl (k) + FXfr (k))cosδf (k) + FXrl (k) + FXrr (k) − (FYfl (k) + FYfr (k))sinδf (k)]/m;
⎣ aY (k) ⎦ = ⎣ [(FXfl (k) + FXfr (k))sinδf (k) + (FYfl (k) + FYfr (k))cosδf (k) + FYrl (k) + FYrr (k)]/m; ⎦ (18)
r(k) r(k);

ASRCKF whose noise covariance matrices can be adaptively adjusted is adopted in this paper. The iterative steps of the SCKF are
expressed in the form of pseudocode in Table 2 [33].Where, n is the system state dimension, ξi is the cubature point, which can be
expressed as:
⎧⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞⎫
{ √̅̅̅ ⎪
⎪ 1 0 0 − 1 0 0 ⎪
⎪
⎨⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜0⎟ ⎜ 0 ⎟ ⎜− 1⎟ ⎜ ⎟⎬
√n̅̅[1] (i = 1, 2, ⋯, n) 0⎟ ⎜1⎟ ⎟, …, ⎜ 0 ⎟
ξi = ̅ i , [1] = ⎜
⎝ ⎠, ⎝ ⎠, …, ⎜ ⎟, ⎜
⎝ ⎠ ⎝
⎟, ⎜
⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ (19)
− n [1]i (i = n + 1, n + 2, ⋯, 2n) ⎪
⎪ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⎪
⎪
⎩ ⎭
0 0 1 0 0 − 1 2n

The symbol/in step 16 in Table 2 represents the matrix right divide operator. When we perform the operation A/B, it applies the
back substitution algorithm for an upper triangular matrix B and the forward substitution algorithm for a lower triangular matrix B. A
general triangularization algorithm is denoted (e.g., the QR decomposition) as C = Tria(A), where C is a lower triangular matrix. The
matrices A and C are related as follows: Let D be an upper triangular matrix obtained from the QR decomposition on AT; then C = DT
[33].
The accuracy of the model will decrease with the increase of tire force for that, the vehicle dynamics becomes more nonlinear.
Meanwhile, the reliability of the measured value will enhance when measured data increases for the reason of sensor characteristics.
To solve this problem, we propose a noise covariance matrices adaptive adjustment method which is inspired by some references, such
as [9,34–40]. Aiming at the problem of stochastic noise may be heavy-tailed, nonstationary distributed and nonlinear, Y. Huang and M.
Bai et al deeply studied the noise distribution and adaptive method from the mechanism aspect [35–39]. For example, they developed a
novel adaptive progressive-Gaussian-approximate-filter (PGAF) with changing or unknown noise conditions to improve the estimation
accuracy nonlinear filtering system, which achieved important results [39]. In addition, a new KF, called the maximum-correntropy-
Kalman-filter (MCKF), which adopts the robust maximum-correntropy-criterion (MCC) as the optimality criterion, instead of using the
MMSE, is proposed to improve the robustness of KF against impulsive noises caused by heavy-tailed impulsive noises [40].
The above literature makes an in-depth study on the noise treatment in the estimation process from the theoretical level. However,
adaptive matrices Q and R will be adjusted by VDS through the method of simulation and real car tests calibration. The mechanism
derivation of adaptive matrices will be studied in future research, when sufficient sensor data is collected and analysed. Our experience
tells us that the larger the vehicle states (ax, ay, r), the easier the vehicle will enter the nonlinear zone, then the accuracy of the model
will be reduced and the measurement accuracy will be improved relatively in comparison. The reliability from the model decreases and
the reliability from the measurement increases, which can be realized by increasing Q and decreasing R, with the increase of vehicle
states. Therefore, the noise covariance matrices Q and R are set as an adaptive form in Ref. [34,9]. However, the tire-road peak
adhesion coefficient also effects the model accuracy. The lower tire-road peak adhesion coefficient μmax, the vehicle will be more
inclined to enter the nonlinear region and the reliability of the model will be reduced. Similarly, this influence factor can also be
realized by decreasing Q, with the increase of μmax. All parameters affecting the model and measurement accuracy are expressed in the
form of first-order polynomial in the adaptive factors Q and R in this paper. Thus, the noise covariance matrices Q and R can be
adaptively adjusted as follows:
{
Q = diag(Q1 , Q2 , Q3 )
(20)
R = diag(R1 , R2 , R3 )
⎧
⎨ Q1 = (cQ11 |aX | + cQ12 |aY | + cQ13 |r| + dQ1 )/(κ1 μmax + ρ1 )
Q2 = (cQ21 |aX | + cQ22 |aY | + cQ23 |r| + dQ2 )/(κ2 μmax + ρ2 ) (21)
⎩
Q3 = (cQ31 |aX | + cQ32 |aY | + cQ33 |r| + dQ3 )/(κ3 μmax + ρ3 )
⎧
⎨ R1 = cR1 (dR1 − |aX |)
R = cR21 (dR21 − |aY |) + cR22 (dR22 − |r|) (22)
⎩ 2
R3 = cR3 (dR3 − |r|)

where cQ11, cQ12, cQ13, cQ21, cQ22, cQ23, cQ31, cQ32, cQ33, dQ1, dQ2, dQ3,κ1 ,κ2 ,κ3 , ρ1 , ρ2 , ρ3 , cR1, cR21, cR22, cR3, dR1, dR21, dR22 and dR3 can be
calibrated by simulation and real car tests. Trial and error method is adopted for calibrating these parameters by hand and different
vehicles have different calibrated parameters. Due to the small coupling of various parameters, the debugging process is not too
complex.

8
X. Chen et al. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 176 (2022) 109162

3.3. Robust stability analysis for ASRCKF

∑ ∑
Firstly, as Ref. [33] mentioned, ( i |ωi |)/( i ωi ) is defined as the stability factor, where ωi is the weighting factor for estimating the
∑
mean values of predicted state and predicted measurement. Neither UKF nor CKF can all meet the condition that i ωi = 1, the
∑ ∑2n
molecular term i |ωi | still remain equal to 1, but the molecular term in UKF is expressed as: i=0 |ωi | = 2n/3 − 1, which means that
∑
when n goes beyond three, the molecular term will exceed 1. If i |ωi | need to keep equal to 1, the weight of the central sample point
must be negative, which will cause the covariance matrix to be non-positive definite in UKF. Then, the square root of the covariance
matrix can’t be calculated, that leads to system instability and even divergence. As a result, CKF is more stable than UKF, especially in
high-dimensional systems.
In addition, the stability conditions of UKF have been given by K. Xiong et al. [41,42], whose proof conclusions will be used in this
paper directly. For convenience, the k or k-1 in parentheses will be written at the bottom right of the parameters, such
as: X(k|k
̂ − 1) ⇒ X ̂ k|k− 1 . The estimation error and prediction error are defined as:
{
̃ k = Xk − X
X ̂k
̂ k|k−
̃ k|k− 1 = Xk − X (23)
X 1

Expanding Xk and X
̂ k|k− 1 by a Taylor series about X
̂ k− 1 , then substituting them into (23) as:

̃ k|k− 1 = Fk X
X ̃ 2 ) + vk
̃ k− 1 + Δ(X
k− 1 (24)
( )
Where Fk = ∂f(X) ̂ k−
=X ̃ 2 ) represents second-order and higher-order residuals. Define diagonal matrix ηk = diag(η1,k ,
, and Δ(X
∂X |X 1 k− 1

η2,k , η3,k ) is introduced to maintain the following relationship.

(25)
2
̃ k− 1 = Fk X
ηk Fk X ̃ )
̃ k− 1 + Δ(X
k− 1

So that, Eq. (24) can be rewritten as:

̃ k|k− 1 = ηk Fk X
X ̃ k− 1 + vk (26)

Similarly, measurement error can be rewritten as:

̃ k|k−
Z 1
̃ k− 1 + wk
= ϛk H k X (27)
( ∂h(X) )
Where Hk = ∂X
̂ k− 1 , diagonal matrix ϛk = diag(ϛ1,k , ϛ2,k , ϛ3,k ), and system covariance matrix can be expressed as:
|X = X

Pk|k− 1 = ηk Fk Pk− 1 FTk ηk + Qk + ΔPk|k− 1 + δPk|k− 1 = ηk Fk Pk− 1 FTk ηk + Ξk (28)

Where Pk|k− 1 = Sk|k− 1 STk|k− 1 ,Pk− 1 = Sk− 1 STk− 1 ,Ξk = Qk + ΔPk|k− 1 + δPk|k− 1 , ΔPk|k− 1 is the difference between ηk Fk Pk− 1 FTk ηk and
E(ηk Fk X ̃ T FT ηk ),
̃ k− 1 X δPk|k− 1 is the difference between the real covariance matrix E(X ̃ T ) and the calculation one Pk|k− 1 .
̃ k|k− 1 X
k− 1 k k|k− 1
Similarly, measurement covariance matrix can be rewritten as:

PZ,k = ϛk Hk γTk Pk|k− 1 γk HTk ϛk + Rk + ΔPZ,k + δPZ,k = ϛk Hk γTk Pk|k− 1 γk HTk ϛk + Σk (29)

Where PZ,k = SZ,k STZ,k ,PXZ,k = SXZ,k STXZ,k ,Σk = Rk + ΔPZ,k + δPZ,k , γk = diag(γ1,k , γ 2,k , γ3,k ) which is a diagonal matrix, ΔPZ,k is the
difference between ϛk Hk γTk Pk|k− 1 γk HTk ϛk and E(ϛk Hk X ̃ T HT ϛk ), δPZ,k is the difference between the real covariance matrix
̃ k− 1 X
k− 1 k
̃ T ) and the calculation one PZ,k . Then, give the definition as follows:
̃ k|k− 1 Z
E(Z k|k− 1

Ak = ηk Fk Bk = ϛk Hk Gk = ϛk Hk γ Tk (30)

So, Eq. (28), (29), Ξk and Σk can be rewritten as:

Pk|k− 1 = Ak Pk− 1 ATk + Ξk , PZ,k = Bk Pk|k− 1 BTk + Σk , Ξk = Pk|k− 1 − Ak Pk− 1 ATk , Σk = PZ,k − Gk Pk|k− 1 GTk (31)

The estimation errors of the filters X

̃ k can be written as a uniform formulation:

̃ k = Ck Ak X
X ̃ k− 1 + Ck vk − K k wk (32)

− 1
Where Kk = Pk|k− 1 GTk (Gk Pk|k− 1 GTk + Σk ) ,Ck = I − K k Bk . The corresponding error covariance matrix is:

Pk = (I − K k Gk )Pk|k− 1 (33)

Theorem 1. Consider the estimation error of a filter that is formulated as Eq. (32). Let the following assumptions hold for every k:
① There are real values amin, amax, bmax, cmax, gmin, gmax ∕
= 0 such that the following bounds on various matrices are fulfilled:

9
X. Chen et al. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 176 (2022) 109162

Fig. 3. Diagram of partitioned SP for μutilize − λ lines.

a2min I⩽Ak ATk ⩽a2max I, Bk BTk ⩽b2max I, Ck CTk ⩽c2max I, g2min I⩽Gk GTk ⩽g2max I,
(34)
(Gk − Bk )(Gk − Bk )T ⩽(gmax − bmax )2 I,
② There are real values pmin, pmax, qmax, rmax,Ξmin ,Ξmax , Σmin such that the following bounds are fulfilled:
pmin I⩽Pk ⩽pmax I, Qk ⩽qmax I, Rk ⩽rmax I, Ξk ⩽Ξmax I,
(35)
Ξk > Ξmin I, Σk > Σmin I,

Where Σ1 = a2max (gmax − bmax )2 (pmax + p2max a2max Ξ−min

1
),Σ2 = b2max (a2max pmax + Ξmax ) − gmax
2
(a2min pmin + Ξmin ),Σmin = max(Σ1 , Σ2 ). Then there
are constants πmax > 0, 0 < θmin ⩽1 such that the following equation holds:
{⃦ ⃦ } {⃦ ⃦ }
⃦ ̃ ⃦2 pmax ⃦ ̃ ⃦2 πmax ∑
k− 1
E ⃦X k ⃦ ⩽ E k
⃦X0 ⃦ (1 − θmin ) + (1 − θmin )i (36)
pmin pmin i=1

Proof. Choose a Lyapunov function Vk (X ̃k) = X ̃ T P− 1 X

̃ k , which can verify the robust stability. The detailed proof process has been
k k
given in [41] with the conditions of Eqs. (34) and (35). Although the noise covariance matrices Q and R are adaptive, as long as they
fulfill the requirements in Eq. (35), system stability can be guaranteed.

4. Estimation for μmax by partitioned similarity-principle

In this section, an estimation algorithm of partitioned SP for μmax by is proposed. The μutilize − λ lines and the calculation method for
μmax based on partitioned SP will be expatiated in the following two parts.

4.1. Partitioned SP for μutilize − λ lines

As shown in Fig. 3, the lines of μutilize − λ are different in various conditions of μmax. However, these lines have a common char­
acteristic of similarity [32]. The similarity is reflected by the shape of these curves in different regions (I, II and III), which are divided
into three regions by two straight lines of l1 and l2. Draw an oblique line to intersect with each curves in the region I and II, the ratio of
each utilization adhesion coefficient μutilize equals to the ratio of each peak adhesion coefficient approximately. Draw a vertical line to
intersect with each curve in region III, the ratio of each utilization adhesion coefficient also equals to the ratio of each peak adhesion
coefficient approximately.
In the first region I, all the ordinate values of these lines gradually increase to the peak value with the increase of longitudinal slip
ratio λ, and the growth rate gradually decreases to 0. Introduce a line l3 from the origin to intersect with the different lines, it is obvious
that, all the intersections locate in the similar parts of these lines, and all the ordinate values of these intersections change with the
increase of μmax nearly linearly.
In the second region II, all the ordinate values of these lines decline approximately linearly with the increase of λ. Introduce a line l4
from the origin to intersect with the different lines, similarly, all the intersections also locate in the similar parts of these lines, and all
the ordinate values of these intersections also change with the increase of μmax nearly linearly.
In the third region III, a random vertical line l5 is introduced to intersect with the different lines, it is obvious that, all the ordinate
values of these intersections also change with the increase of μmax nearly linearly, but almost unchanged with the increase of λ.

10
X. Chen et al. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 176 (2022) 109162

Fig. 4. Calculation method for μmax by partitioned SP in three blocks.

4.2. Equivalent longitudinal utilization adhesion coefficient with longitudinal-lateral-cooperative

The definition of the utilization adhesion coefficient based on longitudinal dynamics is given as:
μutilize = |FX |/FZ (37)

The ratio of longitudinal and lateral slip ratio corresponding to the peak adhesion coefficient of each curves equals to the ratio of the
peak adhesion coefficient approximately. So the longitudinal and lateral slip ratio corresponding to the peak adhesion coefficient can
be expressed as:
{
λμmax = μmax θX
(38)
αμmax = μmax θY
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
Where θX and θY are two constant coefficients, respectively. And let θ = θX /θY , let σ = λ2 + θ2 α2 . According to Eq. (9), the
following expressions can be obtained as:
{ ′
λ = σ /(1 + λ + σ )
(39)
cosη = λ/σ
Introduce Eq. (39) into Eq. (9), so Eq. (37) can be transformed step by step as:
⃒ ∗⃒ ⃒ ⃒ ⃒ ⃒
|F | ⃒F ⃒ μ ⃒Yμ (μ λ′ /μ)⃒ μ 1 ⃒⃒ μ0 σ ⃒ μ λ
μutilize = X = X
cosη = 0
cosη = Y ( ⋅ )⃒⋅ ⋅ (40)
FZ ⃒ μ 1 + λ + σ ⃒ μ0 σ
μ
FZ F Z μ0 FZ μ0
The definition of the equivalent utilization adhesion coefficient based on longitudinal dynamics is given as:
⃒ ⃒
μ ⃒F ∗ ⃒
(41)
′
μutilize = ⋅ X
μ0 F Z
Thus, combine with Eq. (40), the equivalent utilization adhesion coefficient can also be expressed as the following two forms:
⃒ ′ ⃒
μ ⃒Yμ (μ0 λ /μ)⃒
(42)
′
μutilize = ⋅
μ0 FZ

σ |F |
μutilize = ⋅ X (43)
′

λ FZ

4.3. Calculation method for μmax based on partitioned similarity principle

Firstly, an equivalent line of μutilize − λ should be appointed as the baseline, which can be seen in Fig. 4. In this paper, the μutilize − λ
′ ′ ′ ′

baseline is chosen as:μmax,0 = 1. The blue line in region I can be obtained by the longitudinal MF tire model and Eq. (42), which can be
expressed as:

(44)
′ ′ ′ ′ ′
μutilize,0,I = |Y0 (λ )|/FZ = |Dsin{Carctan[Bλ − E(Bλ − arctan(Bλ ))] } |/FZ

11
X. Chen et al. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 176 (2022) 109162

Table 3
Main parameters of experimental vehicle.
Parameters Value/Unit Parameters Value/Unit

m 812 kg IZ 808 kg⋅m2

mw 20 kg Iw 0.5 kg⋅m2
lf 1.1 m h 0.27 m
lr 1.25 m Rw 0.29 m
θX 0.14/- θY 0.183/-

Fig. 5. Driving environment description in CarSim.

The blue line in block II can be approximately regard as a straight line, which can be replaced by a red oblique line, this red line can
be expressed as:

(45)
′ ′
μutilize,0,II = kλ λ + bλ

Where the parameters kλ and bλ can be obtained through the method of parameter fitting. In this paper, kλ = -0.1403 and bλ = 1.0011.
The intersection of the two lines in block I and block II is called peak point, which is calculated as: P (0.14, 0.9815) in this paper. So, the
slope of l1 which separates block I and II can be obtained as: kλ1 = 7.0107, and the slope of l2 which separates block II and III can be
obtained as: kλ2 = 0.8608.
Therefore, once the longitudinal tire force FX, vertical tire force FZ, tire longitudinal slip ratio λ and tire sideslip angle α can be
estimated in Section 3, the actual equivalent utilization adhesion coefficient can be obtained as:
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅ √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
2 2
λ̂ = ̂ 2 /(1 + ̂ ̂2 ) (46)
′
̂
λ + θ2 α λ+ ̂
λ + θ2 α
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
2
̂
λ + θ2 α ̂2 |F ̂X|
(47)
′
μ utilize
̂ = ⋅
̂
λ ̂Z
F
′
Then, draw a straight line through the origin and the point (̂ μ utilize ) to intersect with the baseline of μutilize − λ , the slope of the
′ ′ ′
λ, ̂
straight line drawn above and the function of this straight line can be obtained as follows:

12
X. Chen et al. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 176 (2022) 109162

Fig. 6. Information of vehicle states on clothoid segments road.

′
(48)
′
μ utilize /̂λ
kλ = ̂

(49)
′ ′
μutilize = kλ λ
′
Compare kλ with kλ1 and kλ2, the actual point (̂ μ utilize ) can be judged which block it belongs to. If the point is located in block I, the
′
λ, ̂
intersection A (λA,max , μutilize,A,max ) can be calculated by Eqs. (44) and (49). If the point is located in block II, the intersection B (λB,max ,
′ ′ ′ ′ ′

′
μutilize,B,max ) can be calculated by Eqs. (45) and (49). If the point is located in block III, the only information needed is the actual point (̂λ ,
′

μ utilize ) for the reason that, the ordinate values of the intersection change with the increase of μmax nearly linearly, but hardly change
′
̂
with the increase of λ . So, μmax can be calculated as:
′

⎧
⎪
⎪ ′ ′
⎪
⎪ μ
(̂ /μutilize,A,max )μmax,0 kλ ⩾kλ1 (Block I)
⎨ utilize,A
(50)
′ ′
μ max = (̂
̂ μ utilize,B /μutilize,B,max )μmax,0 kλ2 < kλ < kλ1 (Block II)
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪k ̂ ′
⎩ μ μ utilize,C k ⩽k (Block III)
λ λ2

Where kμ is the ratio of the maximum tire-road friction coefficient to the pure sliding friction coefficient, and this value can be
calibrated as: kμ = 1.1617.
Once μmax is obtained, the lateral tire force can be calculated by lateral MF tire model, the noise covariance matrix Q can also be
obtained, that can adaptively to adjust the ASRCKF to estimate the vehicle states more precisely in Section 3.2.

5. Co-simulation and experiment validation

To validate the effectiveness of the proposed observation algorithm, CarSim-Matlab co-simulation and real vehicle experiment are
carried out. Matlab/Simulink is utilized to implement the proposed algorithm, and CarSim can provide an accurate vehicle model.
Some complex and dangerous working conditions can be verified by simulation instead of experiment. The road surface information
such as tire-road friction, curvature and so on are often time-varying, which are difficult to acquire. Therefore, test condition with
variable pavement adhesion coefficient is firstly designed by co-simulation to validate the algorithm on the changeable pavement.

13
X. Chen et al. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 176 (2022) 109162

Fig. 7. Information of vehicle dynamics states of front left tire on clothoid segments road.

What is more, two real car experimental scenes are also adopted subsequently.
In order to expound the effectiveness of the proposed estimation technique, the conventional slip-slop-based estimation [22,31] is
adopted to compare with the proposed similarity-principle-estimation. Likewise, square-root-cubature-Kalman-filter observation is
adopted to compare with the proposed adaptive-square-root-cubature-Kalman-filter observation. For convenience, some abbreviations
are explained. “SS” means slip-slop-based estimation, “SP” represents similarity-principle-estimation, “SRCKF” indicates square-root-
cubature-Kalman-filter observation, “ASRCKF” stands for adaptive-square-root-cubature-Kalman-filter observation.
The experimental vehicle is shown in Fig. 9, whose main parameters are listed in Table3, and the CarSim vehicle model parameters
are consistent with those of the real one.

5.1. Co-simulation and analysis

Fig. 5(a)–(b) shows the vehicle model, driving scene and road description. Clothoid segments road whose tire-road friction coef­
ficient can be set section by section was adopted as a typical driving environment to verify the proposed algorithm. The details of the
clothoid segments road are described in Fig. 5(b). This road contains 3 straight sections and 2 curved sections, which can satisfy the
requirement of estimation algorithm verification for vehicle longitudinal and lateral dynamics states. Fig. 5(c) gave the details of tire-
road friction coefficient in all sections subsequently. It was obvious that, this road was a split pavement in lateral direction, and it was
divided into 6 sections in forward direction. These sections almost cover all kinds of pavements, which can proof the proposed esti­
mation algorithm comprehensively.
Fig. 6 shows the comparison results of “Real value”, “Estimated by SRCKF” and “Estimated by ASRCKF”, which manly include
longitudinal velocity, sideslip angle and yaw rate.The noise covariance matrices Q and R in SRCKF are constant matrices, which are set
as: Q = diag(0.0001,0.0001,0.000001), R = diag(0.0001,0.0001,0.000001). It is obvious that, the difference between “Estimated by
SRCKF” and “Estimated by ASRCKF” of longitudinal velocity and yaw rate are very small, and they are all very close to the truth values,
which are benefit from the factors that the measured values of longitudinal acceleration and yaw rate are close to the model values.
However, the estimation of the sideslip angle is not so accurate for the reason that sideslip angle is calculated through the operation of
subtraction and integration, which may result in the increased error. But the “Estimated by ASRCKF” curve is more close to the “Real
value” than that of “Estimated by SRCKF”, which is benefit from the adaptive factors of noise covariance matrices Q and R.
Fig. 7 shows the information of vehicle dynamics states of front left tire on clothoid segments road. The tire side slip angle α,
longitudinal slip ratio λ and equivalent longitudinal slip ratio λ are given in Fig. 7(a). λ is an equivalent longitudinal slip ratio, whose
′ ′

curve shape is similar to that of λ, but a little smaller than the absolute value of λ, since λ is the comprehensive result of λ and α. Fig. 7
′

14
X. Chen et al. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 176 (2022) 109162

Fig. 8. Information of vehicle dynamics states of rear right tire on clothoid segments road.

Fig. 9. Real vehicle test scheme for two scenes.

(c) shows the tire longitudinal and lateral force, it’s obvious that, λ can more accurately reflect tire longitudinal slip characteristics
′

when there is side slip angle or steering angle. The estimated and real curves of μmax are lied in Fig. 7(b), it’s clearly that, the estimated
μmax by SP is more accurately than that by SS in almost all sections, that’s because SS algorithm only considers the longitudinal slip rate
and the slip slop rate is linearly proportional to μmax, which is not applicable to this condition that contains nonlinear longitudinal and
lateral dynamics. While SP is nonlinear algorithm, and the tire side slip angle is also converted into the equivalent longitudinal slip
ratio. Therefore, tire-road peak adhesion coefficient can be estimated by SP accurately in real time, even the real μmax often changes in
a wide range. In addition, the maximum error between SP algorithm and the real value does not exceed 8%, which is an accurate
estimation result that can be used in precise vehicle dynamics control.
Because the road in the co-simulation condition is split section pavement, the tire-road peak adhesion coefficient of the left and
right pavement is completely different. So the information of vehicle dynamics states of rear right tire is given in Fig. 8 as the
representative. Compare Fig. 8(a) to Fig. 7(a), it’s easy to find that the estimated longitudinal and lateral force are also consistent with

15
X. Chen et al. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 176 (2022) 109162

Fig. 10. Vehicle longitudinal velocity and longitudinal displacement.

Fig. 11. Information of vehicle dynamics states of left side tires in test scene I.

their real forces, and the shape of the two forces still correspond to λ and α. Thus, whether λ is large or α is large, the estimation
′

algorithm can get good results as before. On a positive note, the estimation μmax by SP in Fig. 8(b) achieves a better result than that in
Fig. 7(b), the maximum error between SP algorithm and the real value does not exceed 5% of rear right tire, even in the time when the
road adhesion coefficient jump occurs.

5.2. Experiment and analysis

In this part, two scenes of real vehicle tests are designed to validate the effectiveness of the proposed algorithm in this paper, which
can be shown in Fig. 9. The first experiment is acceleration and deceleration test without steering on split pavement, whose right side is
cement pavement and a section of right side about 20 m is low adhesion pavement built by polythene film. This test is used to verify the
effect of the algorithm in real vehicle test under large tire longitudinal slip ratio. The second experiment is serpentine test on single

16
X. Chen et al. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 176 (2022) 109162

Fig. 12. Information of vehicle dynamics states of right side tires in test scene I.

cement pavement, which is used to verify the effect of the algorithm in real vehicle test under continuous large tire lateral side slip
angle.
As shown in Fig. 9, a 4WID electric vehicle is adopted in the two experiments, which mainly consists of the 4WID electric vehicle
itself, an auto-box (dSPACE-MicroAutoBox 1401/1501 with 800 MHz), a personal computer (PC) and an IMU (BOSCH k1s1 CEM10).
The PC is used to download the estimation algorithm into auto-box, the auto-box can calculate the results according to the algorithm
and receive the vehicle measured information from PC in real time. The IMU is used to obtain the vehicle state information, which can
be sent to PC simultaneously.

5.2.1. Acceleration and deceleration test on split pavement

In the first experiment, the vehicle was driven through a split pavement, whose right side is cement pavement, and the left side has a
section of low adhesion pavement built by polythene film. Vehicle longitudinal velocity and longitudinal displacement are shown in
Fig. 10, it is obvious that the vehicle experienced the process of accelerating first and then decelerating.
Fig. 11 shows the results of vehicle dynamics states of left side tires in test scene I, which contains tire longitudinal slip ratio,
longitudinal tire force, front tire-road peak adhesion coefficient μmax, and rear μmax. The front wheel had serious slip during accel­
eration, and the front and rear wheel had both been locked for a period of time, which were caused by excessive driving and braking
force. As can be seen from the figure that longitudinal tire force will drop immediately when the tire slips seriously or be locked. The
last two figures of Fig. 11 are the real μmax and estimated μmax of the front and rear wheels, respectively. It is shown that, the front
wheel entered the low attachment area during the interval 3.2 s ~ 5.5 s, and the rear wheel entered the low attachment area during the
interval 3.5 s ~ 5.9 s subsequently. The results show that the μmax estimated by SS is not accurate enough, but a little more accurate
than the results in the co-simulation. The reason is that there is no steering in this experiment, and some accurate estimated results are
obtained even in some time points, such 0.4 s, 1.1 s, 3.1 s of the front tire and so on. Compared with the results by SP method, the μmax
estimated by SP is about 0.84, which is very close to 0.85 on cement pavement, and the estimated μmax by SP on polythene film
pavement is about 0.2, which is highly consistent with the real value.
Because the split pavement of left and right sides are different, the estimation results on the right side are also given in Fig. 12. It can
be seen that, the right side tire didn’t occur the phenomenon of serious slip or locking, for the reason that there was sufficient lon­
gitudinal tire force from the cement pavement to drive or brake the vehicle. The estimated μmax by SS fluctuated around 0.85, but the
error between the estimated value and the real value was a little large. However, the results by SP method still showed excellent effect,
the estimated μmax is between 0.79 ~ 0.85, and the result is around 0.84 most of the time, which is also very close to 0.85.

17
X. Chen et al. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 176 (2022) 109162

Fig. 13. Information of vehicle states in test scene II.

5.2.2. Serpentine test on cement pavement

This experiment was tested on single cement pavement with serpentine steering manner, which is similar to sine steering. The
steering amplitude was about 90◦ , the period was about 3 s, and the vehicle longitudinal velocity was about 35 km/h, which is shown
in Fig. 13(a) and (b). From Fig. 13(a), it can be seen that, the maximum lateral acceleration reached 4 m/s2, which can fully reflect the
lateral nonlinear dynamic characteristics. Fig. 13(b)~(d) are vehicle longitudinal velocity, sideslip angle and yaw rate, respectively.
The estimated results by SRCKF and ASRCKF of longitudinal velocity and yaw rate are very close, which means that the two estimation
algorithms have almost the same observation effect on longitudinal velocity and yaw rate. However, the difference of the estimated
value by SRCKF and ASRCKF is showed up in sideslip angle, which can be seen in Fig. 13(c). The measured value of sideslip angle was
∫
obtained by indirect measurement and calculation as: β = (aY (t) − vX (t)r(t))dt/vX , it can be considered that the error caused by
integration is small when the time is short. The estimated sideslip angle by ASRCKF is more close to the measured value than that by
SRCKF, which is benefit from the adaptive factors of matrices Q and R.
Fig. 14 shows the information of vehicle dynamics states of front left tire in serpentine steering test. Due to the characteristics of this
experiment, the amplitude of tire sideslip angle was much larger than the longitudinal slip ratio, and the tire lateral force was also
much larger than the tire longitudinal force. It’s obvious that, the absolute value of equivalent longitudinal slip ratio λ was lied
′

between α and λ, and λ reflected the lateral dynamic characteristics more instead of the longitudinal dynamic characteristics, which
′

may affect the observation accuracy of μmax. Fig. 14(b) shows the estimated result of μmax, the estimated value by SS is around 0.85, but
the maximum and minimum values reached 1.1 and 0.41, which had exceeded the error accuracy range seriously. Compared with the
result by SS algorithm, the estimated result by SP worked much better, the SP curve fluctuated around 0.85, the maximum and
minimum values was about 0.89 and 0.73, and the average value is about 0.82, which is close to the real value 0.85.
Although it is a uniform road in this experiment, the front and rear dynamics characteristics are often inconsistent. So the vehicle
dynamics states of rear right tire were also given as Fig. 15 shown. The estimated μmax by SP fluctuated around 0.85, the maximum and
minimum values was about 0.89 and 0.69, which was slightly less accurate than that of the front left tire, but was also much better than
the estimated value by SS algorithm.
From the results of simulation and experiments, the proposed algorithm can achieve more accurate VDS than other methods.
ASRCKF with the adaptive matrices Q and R can obtained more accurate vehicle states than SRCKF, which also verify the fact that μmax
influences the matrices Q and R. While SP algorithm mainly plays an important role in the estimation of μmax, and the estimation
accuracy will be greatly improved, especially in the nonlinear region and the coupling region of longitudinal and lateral dynamics.

18
X. Chen et al. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 176 (2022) 109162

Fig. 14. Information of vehicle dynamics states of front left tire in test scene II.

Fig. 15. Information of vehicle dynamics states of rear right tire in test scene II.

19
X. Chen et al. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 176 (2022) 109162

6. Conclusion

A novel estimation algorithm based on ASRCKF and partitioned similarity-principle is proposed to estimate accurately the vehicle
dynamics states, especially μmax in real-time. Firstly, a nonlinear 7DOF vehicle model is built as the base of the estimation research. To
observe longitudinal tire force accurately, RLS with a forgetting factor is designed. Then, ASRCKF observation is proposed to estimate
the vehicle dynamics states, and its noise covariance matrices Q and R can be adjusted by the feedback measured states and estimated
μmax. Then, the SP algorithm is designed to calculate the μmax subsequently. Finally, the correctness of the proposed algorithm and its
advantages are validated by typical co-simulation and experiments.
The main advantages of the proposed algorithm can be drawn as follows:

• ASRCKF observation fully considers the influence of dynamical working conditions in the noise covariance matrices Q and R, which
will affect definitely the accuracy of estimation results. co-simulation and experiments also proved that ASRCKF can improve the
estimation accuracy, especially for vehicle sideslip angle.
• SP algorithm adopted the partitioned manner to calculate μmax, which fully considers the different similar characteristics of
different regions, and the nonlinear characteristics of the first region I in Fig. 3 is the research focus. Co-simulation and experiments
demonstrated that, no matter how the relationship between tire longitudinal slip ratio and sideslip angle changes, accurate μmax can
always be obtained. Results also show that even small excitation by longitudinal or lateral direction can also estimate μmax well.

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to
influence the work reported in this paper.

Acknowledgements

The authors are very grateful to the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No.52002211 and No.11972238).

References

[1] J. Guo, Y. Luo, K. Li, Y. Dai, Coordinated path-following and direct yaw-moment control of autonomous electric vehicles with sideslip angle estimation[J],
Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 105 (2018) 183–199.
[2] K.B. Singh, M.A. Arat, S. Taheri, Literature review and fundamental approaches for vehicle and tire state estimation, Veh. Syst. Dyn. 57 (11) (2019) 1643–1665.
[3] Z. Wei, G. Xuexun, An ABS control strategy for commercial vehicle, IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatron. 20 (1) (2014) 384–392.
[4] W. Cho, J. Choi, C. Kim, S. Choi, K. Yi, Unified chassis control for the improvement of agility, maneuverability, and lateral stability, IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 61
(3) (2012) 1008–1020.
[5] H. Guo, Z. Yin, D. Cao, H. Chen, C. Lv, A review of estimation for vehicle tire-road interactions toward automated driving, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybernet. Syst.
49 (1) (2019) 14–30.
[6] J. Funke, M. Brown, S.M. Erlien, J.C. Gerdes, Collision avoidance and stabilization for autonomous vehicles in emergency scenarios, IEEE Trans. Control Syst.
Technol. 25 (4) (2017) 1204–1216.
[7] S.E. Li, H. Chen, R. Li, Z. Liu, Z. Wang, Z. Xin, Predictive lateral control to stabilise highly automated vehicles at tire-road friction limits, Veh. Syst. Dyn. 58 (5)
(2020) 768–786.
[8] W. Zhenpo, D. Xiaolin, Z. Lei, et al., Overview on Key Technologies of Acceleration Slip Regulation for Four-wheel-independently-actuated Electric Vehicles[J],
J. Mech. Eng. 55 (12) (2019) 99–120.
[9] S. Cheng, L. Li, J. Chen, et al., Fusion Algorithm Design Based on Adaptive SCKF and Integral Correction for Side-Slip Angle Observation[J], IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron. 65 (7) (2018) 5754–5763.
[10] D. Chindamo, B. Lenzo, M. Gadola, et al., On the Vehicle Sideslip Angle Estimation: A Literature Review of Methods, Models, and Innovations[J], Appl. Sci. 8 (3)
(2018) 355.
[11] N. Ding, W. Chen, Y. Zhang, G. Xu, F. Gao, An extended Luenberger observer for estimation of vehicle sideslip angle and road friction[J], Int. J. Veh. Des. 66 (4)
(2014) 385.
[12] H. Cherouat, M. Braci, S. Diop, et al., Vehicle velocity, side slip angles and yaw rate estimation[C], in: International symposium on industrial electronics, (2005)
349–354.
[13] J. Dakhlallah, H. Imine, Y. Sellami, et al., Heavy vehicle state estimation and rollover risk evaluation using Kalman Filter and Sliding Mode Observer[C], Eur.
Control Conf. (2007:) 3444–3449.
[14] Y. Chen, Y. Ji, K. Guo, et al., A reduced-order nonlinear sliding mode observer for vehicle slip angle and tyre forces[J], Veh. Syst. Dyn. 52 (12) (2014)
1716–1728.
[15] S. Cheng, L. Li, B. Yan, C. Liu, X. Wang, J. Fang, Simultaneous estimation of tire side-slip angle and lateral tire force for vehicle lateral stability control[J], Mech.
Syst. Sig. Process. 132 (2019) 168–182.
[16] T.A. Wenzel, K.J. Burnham, M.V. Blundell, R.A. Williams, Dual extended Kalman filter for vehicle state and parameter estimation[J], Veh. Syst. Dyn. 44 (2)
(2006) 153–171.
[17] D. Kim, K. Min, H. Kim, K. Huh, Vehicle sideslip angle estimation using deep ensemble-based adaptive Kalman filter[J], Mech. Syst. Sig. Process. 144 (2020)
106862.
[18] J. Chen, J. Song, L. Li, G. Jia, X.u. Ran, C. Yang, UKF-based adaptive variable structure observer for vehicle sideslip with dynamic correction[J], IET Control
Theory Appl. 10 (14) (2016) 1641–1652.
[19] T.e. Chen, X. Xu, L. Chen, H. Jiang, Y. Cai, Y. Li, Estimation of longitudinal force, lateral vehicle speed and yaw rate for four-wheel independent driven electric
vehicles[J], Mech. Syst. Sig. Process. 101 (2018) 377–388.
[20] K. Han, E. Lee, M. Choi, S.B. Choi, Adaptive scheme for the real-time estimation of tire-road friction coefficient and vehicle velocity, IEEE/ASME Trans.
Mechatron. 22 (4) (2017) 1508–1518.
[21] A. Albinsson, F. Bruzelius, B. Jacobson, J. Fredriksson, Design of tyre force excitation for tyre–road friction estimation, Veh. Syst. Dyn. 55 (2) (2017) 208–230.
[22] F. Gustafsson, Slip-based tire-road friction estimation[J], Automatica 33 (6) (1997) 1087–1099.
[23] Y.-H. Liu, T. Li, Y.-Y. Yang, X.-W. Ji, J. Wu, Estimation of tire-road friction coefficient based on combined APF-IEKF and iteration algorithm[J], Mech. Syst. Sig.
Process. 88 (2017) 25–35.

20
X. Chen et al. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 176 (2022) 109162

[24] K. Han, M. Choi, S.B. Choi, Estimation of the tire cornering stiffness as a road surface classification indicator using understeering characteristics, IEEE Trans.
Veh. Technol. 67 (8) (2018) 6851–6860.
[25] B. Ma, C. Lv, Y. Liu, M. Zheng, Y. Yang, X. Ji, Estimation of road adhesion coefficient based on tire aligning torque distribution, J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Contr. 140 (5)
(2018).
[26] Z. Qi, S. Taheri, B. Wang, H. Yu, Estimation of the tyre–road maximum friction coefficient and slip slope based on a novel tyre model, Veh. Syst. Dyn. 53 (4)
(2015) 506–525.
[27] L. Li, K. Yang, G. Jia, X. Ran, J. Song, Z.-Q. Han, Comprehensive tire–road friction coefficient estimation based on signal fusion method under complex
maneuvering operations, Mech. Syst. Sig. Process. 56-57 (2015) 259–276.
[28] T. Hsiao, J.W. Yang, Iterative estimation of the tire-road friction coefficient and tire stiffness of each driving wheel, in: 2016 American Control Conference
(ACC); 2016 Jul 6-8; Boston, MA, USA. IEEE, 2016: 7573-7578.
[29] L. Chen, Y. Luo, M. Bian, Z. Qin, J. Luo, K. Li, Estimation of tire-road friction coefficient based on frequency domain data fusion, Mech. Syst. Sig. Process. 85
(2017) 177–192.
[30] Y. Feng, H. Chen, H. Zhao, H. Zhou, Road tire friction coefficient estimation for four wheel drive electric vehicle based on moving optimal estimation strategy
[J], Mech. Syst. Sig. Process. 139 (2020) 106416.
[31] J. Wang, L. Alexander, R. Rajamani, et al., Friction estimation on highway vehicles using longitudinal measurements[J], J. Dyn. Syst. Measur. Control-Trans.
ASME 126 (2) (2004) 265–275.
[32] H. Pacejka, R.S. Sharp, Shear Force development by Pneumatic Tyres in Steady State Conditions: A Review of Modelling Aspects, Veh. Syst. Dyn. 20 (3–4)
(1991) 121–175.
[33] I. Arasaratnam, S. Haykin, Cubature Kalman Filters[J], IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 54 (6) (2009) 1254–1269.
[34] L. Li, G. Jia, X.u. Ran, J. Song, K. Wu, A variable structure extended Kalman filter for vehicle sideslip angle estimation on a low friction road[J], Veh. Syst. Dyn.
52 (2) (2014) 280–308.
[35] Y. Huang, Y. Zhang, Z. Wu, N. Li, J. Chambers, A Novel Adaptive Kalman Filter With Inaccurate Process and Measurement Noise Covariance Matrices[J], IEEE
Trans. Autom. Control 63 (2) (2018) 594–601.
[36] M. Bai, Y. Huang, Y. Zhang, F. Chen, A Novel Heavy-Tailed Mixture Distribution Based Robust Kalman Filter for Cooperative Localization[J], IEEE Trans. Ind.
Inf. 17 (5) (2021) 3671–3681.
[37] M. Bai, Y. Huang, F. Chen, Y. Zhang, A Novel Robust Kalman Filtering Framework Based on Normal-Skew Mixture Distribution[J], IEEE Trans. Syst. Man
Cybernet. Syst. 99 (2021) 1–17.
[38] M. Bai, Y. Huang, G. Jia, Y. Zhang, A robust fixed-interval smoother for nonlinear systems with non-stationary heavy-tailed state and measurement noises[J],
Signal Process 180 (2021) 107898.
[39] M. Bai, Y. Huang, Y. Zhang, G. Jia, A Novel Progressive Gaussian Approximate Filter for Tightly Coupled GNSS/INS Integration[J], IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas.
69 (6) (2020) 3493–3505.
[40] B. Chen, X.i. Liu, H. Zhao, J.C. Principe, Maximum correntropy Kalman filter[J], Automatica 76 (2017) 70–77.
[41] K. Xiong, H.Y. Zhang, C.W. Chan, Performance evaluation of UKF-based nonlinear filtering [J], Automatica 42 (2) (2006) 261–270.
[42] K. Xiong, H.Y. Zhang, C.W. Chan, Author’s reply to “Comments on ‘Performance evaluation of UKF-based nonlinear filtering”’[J], Automatica 43 (3) (2007)
569–570.

21