Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 145 (2020) 106925

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing

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

Synchronization and stability control of dual-motor intelligent

steer-by-wire vehicle
SongChun Zou, WanZhong Zhao ⇑
College of Energy and Power Engineering, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing 210016, China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In order to improve the safety of steer-by-wire (SBW) system, a dual-motor SBW system is
Received 18 December 2019 proposed to enhance the fault tolerance and reliability of the system. However, the dual-
Received in revised form 8 March 2020 motor SBW vehicle often loses its stability due to the external interference, and the asyn-
Accepted 22 April 2020
chronous response between the dual-motor will further deteriorate the stability of the
vehicle. Aiming at the existing problems, this paper proposes a hierarchical control strat-
egy, in which the upper layer controls the vehicle stability and the lower layer controls
Keywords:
the synchronization of the dual-motor. Firstly, the models of dual-motor SBW system
Dual-motor
Steer-by-wire
and the vehicle are established. Secondly, considering the interference of lateral wind, sen-
H2/H1 control sor noise and the limitation of control output, a yaw rate controller is designed in the upper
Synchronization control layer based on the mixed H2/H1 robust control theory to improve the stability and tracking
Cross-coupling structure performance of the vehicle. Thirdly, a sliding mode speed synchronization control strategy
Sliding mode control is proposed in the lower layer based on the cross-coupling control structure and the sliding
mode control algorithm to enhance the synchronization performance between the dual-
motor. Finally, the simulation is carried out by using Carsim/Simulink and the hardware-
in-the-loop experiment is conducted based on the dual-motor SBW experimental station.
The simulation and experimental results verify the effectiveness of the control strategy
proposed in this paper.
Ó 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

With the rapid development of computer technology and information technology, vehicle is gradually developing
towards electrification, intelligence and networking. Automated driving is the trend of vehicle development in the future,
and steer-by-wire (SBW) is the preferred form of automated driving steering. The SBW system cancels part of the mechanical
connection between the steering wheel and the wheel, and changes the steering system from mechanical hard connection to
electronic soft connection [1,2]. Compared with the traditional mechanical steering system, the SBW system can freely
design the steering angle transmission ratio according to the demand, and easily realize the compatibility of the steering
force transmission characteristic and the angle transmission characteristic. Consequently, the SBW system can effectively
improve the steering characteristic of the vehicle, and improve the handling stability and comfort [3,4]. However, the reli-
ability and safety of the electronic connection system is a major concern, and how to ensure the smooth operation of the
SBW system under fault state has become a very urgent topic in the future research field of SBW [5,6].
In order to meet the needs of high-level automated driving, the common measure to solve the reliability and safety prob-
lems of the SBW is fault-tolerant control. Fault-tolerant control of SBW system is divided into hardware redundancy fault

⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: 18851178705@163.com (W. Zhao).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymssp.2020.106925
0888-3270/Ó 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
2 S. Zou, W. Zhao / Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 145 (2020) 106925

tolerance and software fault tolerance. Hardware redundancy fault tolerance usually includes sensor redundancy, controller
redundancy and actuator redundancy [7–11], while software fault tolerance contains yaw moment distribution, CAN net-
work fault-tolerant, model prediction control and so on [12–16].
In this paper, dual-motor hardware redundancy fault-tolerant method is used to improve the safety and reliability of the
SBW system. The dual-motor SBW system adopts two steering motors to complete the steering operation. The electronic
control unit will quickly switch to the normal electric drive system when one of the motors fails, which can realize the
redundancy of the steering system from the hardware. It can not only avoid the failure of steering command caused by motor
fault, but also greatly improve the reliability of SBW system. In addition, the dual-motor SBW system can reduce the load of a
single motor, thus improving the service life of the steering motor. However, the use of two steering motors also brings some
problems. For example, the inconsistent motor parameters, load interference and current mutation will lead to the asyn-
chronous phenomenon of dual-motor, which will affect the steering efficiency and the service life of the steering motor.
Therefore, it is necessary to control the dual-motor SBW system synchronously, so as to eliminate the asynchronous problem
between the dual-motor.
Due to the importance of synchronization control of dual-motor, many scholars have done a lot of research on them. Zhao
et al. [17] designed a nonsingular fast terminal sliding mode controller by incorporating the variable gain neural network
observer to guarantee motor speed synchronization and load position tracking of dual-motor driving servo systems. The sim-
ulation and experimental results showed that the speed synchronization performance and load position tracking perfor-
mance of dual-motor were improved effectively. Liu et al. [18] utilized a speed synchronization controller to enhance the
synchronization by compensating error between speeds of the two motors. Compared with the results obtained without syn-
chronization control, the speed difference between the two motors was reduced with synchronization control. Jin et al. [19]
researched the synchronization control of dual-motor driving for large rotary car dumper, and proposed a synchronization
scheme based on fuzzy correction of non-attainment and common feedback. Simulation results indicated that the proposed
synchronization scheme could reduce the synchronization error of two motors effectively. Wu et al. [20] studied the position
precision and synchronization performance between the wafer stage and the reticle stage of lithography, and presented a
cross-coupled structure to decrease the synchronization error during scanning operation. The simulation results showed that
the synchronization error can be significantly deceased under the condition of ensuring tracking precision and dynamic per-
formance. Liu et al. [21] analyzed the dual-motor dynamic characteristics of hydraulic lifting system, and put forward a con-
trol strategy combining fuzzy control and traditional PID. Compared with traditional PID control, the fuzzy PID control
strategy had better dynamic response and smaller synchronization error between the two motors. Sun et al. [22] provided
a cross-coupling synchronization controller to achieve a synchronization motion for high-precision positioning system with
uncertainty and disturbance. In this case, each motor tracked its desired trajectory while synchronizing motion with the
other one, and the experimental results demonstrated the effectiveness of the proposed control method. Chen et al. [23]
adopted the integral-proportional controller and proportional controller in the velocity loop and the position loop for a single
axis respectively, and applied the cross-coupled controller to restrain the synchronized error for the dual-axis synchronized
motion system. The experiment results proved that the tracking error and synchronized error had been reduced. Sun et al.
[24] presented a fuzzy sliding mode control strategy to improve the control precision of multiple induction motors drive sys-
tems, which combined the fuzzy sliding mode control technique with the ring coupling synchronization structure. The
numerical simulation results clearly demonstrated the effectiveness of the proposed synchronization strategy at different
operating conditions. Feng et al. [25] researched a novel system architecture based on network-on-chip for multi-motor syn-
chronous control. Compared with traditional multi-motor control architectures, the experimental results showed that the
proposed network-on-chip architecture possessed better accuracy and synchronization performance.
Besides, there are many researches on the stability control of the SBW system. Nam et al. [26] proposed a robust yaw
stability control strategy for electric vehicles based on active front steering control through a SBW system, which consisted
of an inner-loop controller and an outer-loop tracking controller. The simulation and experimental results verified the effec-
tiveness of the proposed yaw stability control strategy. Duan et al. [27] studied two control strategies to improve the vehicle
handling stability of SBW, and one was the immobile steering sensibility type control strategy while the other was the yaw
rate and sideslip angle control strategy. Then, the hardware-in-the-loop experimental results of SBW based on dSPACE
showed that the vehicle stability was improved under the control strategy. Krishna et al. [28] provided a fuzzy logic-
based yaw stability controller for active front steering of the vehicle by using SBW system. The simulation results indicated
that, compared with the existing fuzzy control system, the proposed controller could achieved smaller yaw rate error and
vehicle body sideslip angle. Zheng et al. [29] researched a yaw stability control algorithm with active front wheel steering
control of a vehicle equipped with a SBW system, and the control algorithm realized the decoupling of the lateral and
yaw motion of a vehicle. The results showed that the yaw rate was significantly reduced under the proposed control algo-
rithm. Wang et al. [30] introduced a kind of integrated feedback control strategy, which was based on weighting factors of
the real-time yaw rate and the lateral acceleration. It could be seen from the simulation results that, compared with manual
steering control system, the yaw rate and the lateral acceleration had been significantly reduced under the proposed inte-
grated feedback control strategy. Guo et al. [12] proposed a coordinated path following system and direct yaw moment con-
trol system consisting of two-levels for autonomous electric vehicles. The simulation and experimental results showed that
the proposed control system strengthened the lateral stability and improved the path tracking performance. Zhao et al. [31]
designed a l controller to track the desired sideslip angle and yaw rate. The simulation results indicated that, compared with
H1 control, the designed l controller could make the vehicle well track the reference model and improved the vehicle
 S. Zou, W. Zhao / Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 145 (2020) 106925 3

maneuverability. Liu et al. [32] presented a novel adaptive integral terminal sliding mode control scheme to control the
wheel steering angles in both single-wheel situation and four-wheel situation. The results showed that the handle uncertain-
ties, disturbances and robust stability were effectively improved.
Throughout the published literatures, it can be seen that the synchronization control of dual-motor mainly focuses on the
control structure and control algorithm [33–35]. However, there are few researches on the application of dual-motor in the
SBW system and its synchronization control. In addition, the studies on the stability of SBW vehicle have achieved good
results [26,36,37], but the output of the controller is not taken into account in the study of vehicle stability and tracking per-
formance. These literatures mainly adopt sliding mode control, neural network control and robust control to make the SBW
system achieve better robust stability and interference suppression performance, but this often means that the system needs
more control output to achieve the desired control effect. In reality, the control output is limited due to the consideration of
the physical performance and economy of the system. As far as the SBW system is concerned, the front wheel angle can’t be
increased infinitely, and the sideslip force will tend to be saturated or even reduced with the increase of the sideslip angle.
Therefore, the control requirement that has to be considered is to achieve the ideal control effect with a small control output
as far as possible in the design process of vehicle stability controller.
Aiming at the existing problems, this paper proposes a hierarchical control strategy, in which the upper layer controls the
vehicle stability and the lower layer controls the synchronization of the dual-motor. Considering the disturbance of lateral
wind, sensor noise and the limitation of control output, a yaw rate controller is designed in the upper layer based on the
mixed H2/h1 robust control theory to improve the stability, tracking performance and control output performance. In the
lower layer, based on the cross-coupling control structure and sliding mode control algorithm, this paper proposes a
dual-motor synchronization control strategy. Then, a sliding speed synchronization controller is designed to compensate
the current loop of the dual-motor system, so that the dual-motor can achieve synchronization as soon as possible.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, the steering motor model, the vehicle, the tire and rack and
pinion models are modeled. A yaw rate control method is developed by applying mixed H2/H1 robust control theory in Sec-
tion 3. In Section 4, the synchronization control strategy of dual-motor is proposed, and the sliding mode speed synchroniza-
tion controller is designed. The simulations and hardware in-the-loop experiments are implemented in Section 5. Finally, the
paper is concluded in Section 6.

2. System dynamics model

The structure of the dual-motor SBW system proposed in this paper is shown in Fig. 1, which is mainly composed of steer-
ing wheel module, steering execution module, controller module, fault-tolerant module and power module. The main com-
ponents of steering wheel module include steering wheel, steering shaft, angle sensor and road sense motor, while the
steering execution module consists of steering motor, rack and pinion mechanism, front wheel angle sensor, etc. The con-
troller module is the core of the SBW system, which analyzes and processes the vehicle dynamic signals collected by various
sensors to judge the real-time driving state of the vehicle, so as to control the smooth operation of each actuator.

Steering wheel assembly

Road motor Steering wheel

Steering column
Motor Driver Angle sensor

ECU Worm gear

Steering execution
assembly
Steering motor
Pinion

Rack

Wheel

Fig. 1. Structure of dual-motor SBW system.

4 S. Zou, W. Zhao / Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 145 (2020) 106925

2.1. Steering motor model

The two steering motors of the SBW system adopt the permanent magnet brushless DC motor with the same specifica-
tion, which possesses the advantages of large starting torque, wide range of speed adjustment, simple structure, convenient
maintenance, etc. Fig. 2 shows the basic structure of permanent magnet brushless DC motor and its control system, which
includes DC power supply, inverter, drive circuit, DC motor, rotor position sensor and controller.
In order to facilitate the establishment and analysis of the mathematical model of permanent magnet brushless DC motor,
the following assumptions are generally made for the motor:

(1) The eddy current loss and hysteresis loss are ignored;
(2) The magnetic circuit of the motor is not saturated
(3) The stator winding is completely symmetrical;
(4) The parameters of three-phase winding are the same.

According to the above assumptions, the voltage equation of the stator winding of the permanent magnet brushless DC
motor can be expressed as:
2 3 2 32 3 2 3 2 3 2 3
ua R 0 0 ia L 0 0 ia ea
6 7 6 76 7 6 7d6 7 6 7
4 ub 5 ¼ 4 0 R 0 54 ib 5 þ 4 0 L 0 5 4 ib 5 þ 4 eb 5 ð1Þ
dt
uc 0 0 R ic 0 0 L ic ec

where ua, ub, uc are three-phase phase voltages; ia, ib, ic are three-phase phase currents; ea, eb, ec are three-phase back elec-
tromotive forces; R is stator resistance; L is the equivalent inductance.
The electromagnetic power of the permanent magnet brushless DC motor is equal to the sum of the product of the back
electromotive force and the phase current:

Pe ¼ ea ia þ eb ib þ ec ic ð2Þ

where Pe is the electromagnetic power of the motor.

In this paper, the permanent magnet brushless DC motor adopts the three-phase Y-type connection without a neutral
line, and works in two phase conduction mode. Ignoring the effect of the dynamic commutation process, only two phases
flow through the same magnitude and opposite direction current, and the third phase current is 0. Assuming that the
two phases A and B are conducted, ea ¼ eb , ia ¼ ib , ic ¼ 0, then

dia
ua  ub ¼ qud ¼ 2Ria þ L þ 2ea ð3Þ
dt

ea ¼ eb ¼ K e x ð4Þ

np ðea ia þ eb ib Þ 2np ea ia
Te ¼ ¼ ¼ 2np K e ia ¼ K t ia ð5Þ
x x
where Te is the electromagnetic torque; np is the pole-pair number of the motor; q is the duty cycle; x is the angular speed of
the motor; ud is the DC bus voltage; Ke is the back electromotive force coefficient; Kt is the torque coefficient.
The motion equation of permanent magnet brushless DC motor can be given as:

dx
Te ¼ J þ Bx þ T l ð6Þ
dt
where J is the moment of inertia; B is the viscous friction coefficient; Tl is the load torque.
The dynamic model of permanent magnet brushless DC motor is shown in Fig. 3.

DC power
Inverter
supply

DC motor
Torque
Drive circuit
output
Rotor position
sensor
Control
Controller
signal

Fig. 2. Permanent magnet brushless DC motor and its control system.

 S. Zou, W. Zhao / Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 145 (2020) 106925 5

Fig. 3. The dynamic model of permanent magnet brushless DC motor.

2.2. Rack and pinion model

The two sets of independent steering actuators in the dual-motor SBW system adopt components with the same param-
eters, including the same steering motor, reducer and steering pinion. In additions, the two sets of steering actuators are
symmetrically distributed on the left and right sides, and jointly drive the rack to move.
The dynamic model of the rack and pinion can be written as:
8
>
> M r €xr þ Br x_ r þ F fl þ F fr ¼ NT l1 =r p þ NT l2 =r p
>
>
>
< F fl ¼ T fl =Gfl
>
F fr ¼ T fr =Gfr ð7Þ
>
>
>
> T l1 ¼ K d ðh1  Nxr =r p Þ
>
>
:
T l2 ¼ K d ðh2  Nxr =r p Þ

where xr is the rack displacement; Mr is the rack mass; Br is the rack damping coefficient; Ffl, Ffr are the steering resistance of
the left and right front wheel acting on the rack, respectively; Tfl, Tfr are the positive torque of the left and right front wheel,
respectively; Gfl, Gfr are the length of the left and right front wheel steering rocker arm, respectively; h1, h2 are the rotation
angle of the two steering motor, respectively; Tl1, Tl2 are the output torque of the two steering motor, respectively; Kd is the
stiffness of the steering motor shaft; N is the reduction ratio of the reducer; rp is the radius of the pinion.

2.3. Vehicle dynamics model

Taking into account complexity of vehicle dynamic behavior in reality, in order to facilitate the analysis and research, the
two degree-of-freedom vehicle model including lateral and yaw motion is adopted in this paper. The two degree-of-freedom
vehicle model is shown in Fig. 4.
Applying Newton’s second law, the vehicle dynamic model can be expressed as:
(
muðb_ þ rÞ ¼ kf af þ kr ar
ð8Þ
Iz r_ ¼ akf af  bkr ar

According to Fig. 4, the sideslip angle of the front and rear wheels can be written as:
(
af ¼ df  b  ua r
ð9Þ
ar ¼ b þ ub r
Then, the vehicle state equation can be depicted as:
" # 2 3 2 3
 1 b
kf þkr akf bkr kf
b_
¼4 5 4
mu mu2 mu 5
þ ak df ð10Þ
r_ akf bkr a2 kf þb2 kr r f
Iz
Iz Iz u

where a is the distance from the vehicle center of mass to the front axle; b is the distance from the vehicle center of mass to
the rear axle; v is the lateral speed; u is the longitudinal speed; df is the front wheel angle; kf, kr are the front wheel and rear
wheel cornering stiffness, respectively; af, ar are the front wheel and rear wheel sideslip angle, respectively; m is the vehicle
mass; b is the vehicle sideslip angle; r is the yaw rate; Iz is the moment of inertia of the vehicle about the Z axis.
The design and simulation parameters used in this paper are shown in Table 1.

3. Vehicle stability control

The SBW vehicle cancels part of the mechanical connection of the traditional mechanical steering system, which can not
only adjust the steering system transmission ratio according to the vehicle speed and the steering wheel angle, but also pro-
vide additional wheel angle to control the steering stability of the vehicle. During the driving process, the vehicle may
6 S. Zou, W. Zhao / Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 145 (2020) 106925

Fig. 4. The vehicle dynamics model.

Table 1
Design and simulation parameters.

Parameter value Parameter value

m 1818.2 kg J 0.00098 kgm2
A 1.463 m B 0.00021 Nm /(rad/s)
b 1.585 m R 0.42 X
Iz 3885 kgm2 Ke 0.0345 V/(rad/s)
N 16.5 Kt 0.065 Nm/A
Kd 172 Nm/rad L 0.00034H
kf 95000 N/rad Br 653 Nm/(rad/s)
kr 90000 N/rad Gfl, Gfr 0.138 m
rp 0.007 m Mr 2 kg

Fig. 5. Vehicle stability control strategy.

encounter various complex conditions, such as the change of road adhesion coefficient, lateral wind interference, etc. In this
case, the SBW system can provide an additional compensation torque for the vehicle by controlling the front wheel angle, so
as to maintain the stability of the vehicle. The yaw rate is a very important parameter in the vehicle driving state parameters,
which can well represent the driving state of the vehicle in the steering process. The stability control strategy of dual-motor
 S. Zou, W. Zhao / Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 145 (2020) 106925 7

SBW vehicle proposed in this paper is shown in Fig. 5. Through the feedback control of the vehicle yaw rate, the vehicle is
compensated for the external interference and the uncertainty of the model to ensure the steering stability.

3.1. Variable transmission ratio design

Compared with the traditional mechanical steering system, the angle transmission characteristic of the SBW system can
be designed flexibly. Therefore, the steering sensitivity of the vehicle can be kept unchanged by designing the variable angle
transmission ratio law, thereby enhancing the comfort of the vehicle. At present, the design of the variable transmission ratio
of the SBW system mainly includes two methods, one is based on the invariable yaw rate gain and the other is based on the
invariable lateral acceleration gain. The variable transmission ratio is determined based on the invariable yaw rate gain in
this paper, and the steering characteristic of vehicle is usually expressed by the yaw rate gain, i.e. steering sensitivity:
r ¼ Grhsw hsw ¼ Grhsw df i ¼ Grdf df ð11Þ

where Grhsw is the yaw rate gain;hsw is the steering wheel angle; i is the transmission ratio; Grdf is the steady yaw rate gain.
According to the two degree-of-freedom vehicle model, when the vehicle enters the steady state, its expression can be
written as:
(
mur ¼ ðkf þ kr Þ vu þ 1u ðakf  bkr Þr  kf df
ð12Þ
0 ¼ ðakf  bkr Þ vu þ 1u ða2 kf þ b kr Þr  akf df
2

The following equation can be obtained by combining Eqs. (11) and (12):
u=ða þ bÞ
Grdf ¼ ð13Þ
1 þ Ku2
 
where K ¼ ðaþbÞ
m
2
a
kr
 kb .
f

Hence, the ideal transmission ratio i can be depicted as:

u=ða þ bÞ
i¼ ð14Þ
Grhsw ð1 þ Ku2 Þ

Considering the actual situation, on the one hand, if the transmission ratio is too small, the front wheel angle can easily
reach the limit value. On the other hand, if the transmission ratio is too large, the front wheel angle response will be very
slow. Therefore, the transmission ratio should be set to the minimum and maximum values, and the modified ideal trans-
mission ratio can be written as:
8
> 7 u 6 20km=h
<
u=ðaþbÞ
i¼ Grhsw ð1þKu2 Þ
20km=h < u 6 100km=h ð15Þ
>
:
25 u P 100km=h

3.2. Mixed H2/H1 robust control

Considering the road roughness, lateral wind and sensor noise in the complex driving conditions, the vehicle stability con-
troller is required to be robust and anti-interference. In this section, the controller design is based on the robust control the-
ory. No matter the problem of robust stability or interference suppression, it can eventually be transformed into the H1
standard problem. The H1 standard control structure is shown in Fig. 6.
As shown in Fig. 6, w is the interference input, i.e. noise, reference input, etc; u is the controller output; z is the control
performance evaluation output vector; y is the system output; K(s) is the controller; G(s) is the generalized control object, i.e.
the transfer function matrix from input w, u to output z, y; G(s) can be described as:

Fig. 6. H1 standard control structure.

8 S. Zou, W. Zhao / Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 145 (2020) 106925

8
< x_ ¼ Ax þ B1 x þ B2 u
>
z ¼ C 1 x þ D11 x þ D12 u ð16Þ
>
:
y ¼ C 2 x þ D21 x þ D22 u
The input and output can be further expressed as:
      
z w G11 ðsÞ G12 ðsÞ w
¼ GðsÞ ¼ ð17Þ
y u G21 ðsÞ G22 ðsÞ u
   
C1 D11 D12
where G11 ðsÞ ¼ ½A; G12 ðsÞ ¼ ½B1 B2 ; G21 ðsÞ ¼
; G22 ðsÞ ¼ .
C2 D21 D22
The closed-loop transfer function from interference input w to control performance evaluation output vector z can be
written as:

T zw ðsÞ ¼ G11 þ G12 KðI  G22 KÞ1 G21 ð18Þ

Thus, the H1 standard design problem is to solve the controller K(s), which makes the closed-loop system internal stable
for a given generalized control object G(s) and makes Eq. (18) satisfy the following equation:
k T zw ðsÞ k1 < 1 ð19Þ
The system is often subject to external interference in actual engineering, and there is uncertainty in the controlled object
within a certain range. The H1 mixed sensitivity robust control problem is one of the most typical problems in H1 control,
and the H1 mixed sensitivity design problem is based on robust H1 control. In additions, the H1 mixed sensitivity control
considers the model uncertainty of the system control object, the tracking performance, anti-interference ability, transient
performance and robustness of the system, so it can solve various performance indexes and robust stability of the system.
The H1 mixed sensitivity control structure is shown in Fig. 7.
In Fig. 7, K(s) is the transfer function of the controller; G0(s) is the nominal transfer function; w is the reference input of
the system; u is the control output of the system; W1 and W2 are the weighting functions; z1 and z2 are the control perfor-
mance evaluation outputs.
According to Fig. 7, the transfer functions from system input x to e and y can be depicted as:
I
SðsÞ ¼ ð20Þ
I þ GðsÞKðsÞ

GðsÞKðsÞ
TðsÞ ¼ ð21Þ
I þ GðsÞKðsÞ
where S(s) is the sensitivity function; T(s) is the supplementary sensitivity function; S(s) and T(s) reflect the influence of the
system input signal w on the controller input e and the system output y, and they have the following relationship:
SðsÞ þ TðsÞ ¼ I ð22Þ
In the H1 mixed sensitivity control problem, it is necessary to find such a stable controller K(s) to satisfy the following
requirement:
W 1 ðsÞSðsÞ
min k k <1 ð23Þ
KðSÞ W 2 ðsÞTðsÞ 1

Although H1 mixed sensitivity control method can make the system possess better robust stability and interference sup-
pression performance, it also means that the system needs a larger control output to achieve the desired control effect. How-
ever, the control output is limited due to the consideration of the physical performance and economy of the system.
Therefore, the controller should be designed with a small output to achieve the desired control effect. It can be seen from
the relevant literature that the H2 norm can be used to measure the size of the control output of the system. As shown in
Fig. 8, a mixed H2/H1 robust control strategy is proposed in this paper, which optimizes the H2 norm from the system inter-
ference input to the control output.

Fig. 7. H1 mixed sensitivity control structure.

 S. Zou, W. Zhao / Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 145 (2020) 106925 9

Fig. 8. mixed H2/H1 robust control structure.

As shown in Fig. 8, the mixed H2/H1 robust control actually increases the limit on the output of the controller based on
the H1 mixed sensitivity control. W2 is the weighting function of control output, and the transfer function from system inter-
ference input w to control output u can be written as:
KðsÞ
RðsÞ ¼ ¼ KðsÞSðsÞ ð24Þ
I þ GðsÞKðsÞ
The mixed H2/H1 robust control problem is to find such a stable controller K(s) to satisfy the following equation:
8
< Minimize : k W 3 ðsÞKðsÞSðsÞ k2
>
W 1 ðsÞSðsÞ ð25Þ
>
: Subject to : k k <1
W 2 ðsÞTðsÞ 1

3.3. Design of mixed H2/H1 robust controller for vehicle stability

According to the established vehicle dynamics model, the state variable of the control system is taken as x ¼ ½b; rT , and
 
the control input is u ¼ ½d. In additions, the interference input is w ¼ F yw , and the state equation can be written as:

x_ ¼ Ax þ B1 w þ B2 u
ð26Þ
y ¼ Cx þ D1 w þ D2 u
2 3 " k #
kf þkr akf bkr  
1 1 f

where A ¼ 4 mu mu2 5; B1 ¼ mu ; B2 ¼ ak

mu
; C ¼ ½0 1 ; D1 ¼ ½0; D2 ¼ ½0.
akf bkr a2 kf þb2 kr e f
Iz Iz
Iz Iz u
The stability control structure of the SBW vehicle is shown in Fig. 9. As shown in Fig. 9, G0(s) is the transfer function from
the additional front wheel angle 4df to the yaw rate r; G1(s) is the transfer function from the lateral wind interference input
Fyw to the yaw rate r; r* is the ideal yaw rate; ns is the sensor noise; z1 is the tracking error of the yaw rate; z2 represents the
robust stability and noise suppression performance of the system; z3 means the output size of the controller; W1(s), W2(s)
and W3(s) are weighting functions.
According to the vehicle stability control structure shown in Fig. 9, the generalized control system can be expressed as:
2 3
W1 W 1 G1 0 W 1 G0
6 0 W 2 G1 0 W 2 G0 7
6 7
PðsÞ ¼ 6 7 ð27Þ
4 0 0 0 W3 5
I G1 I G0
Therefore, the yaw rate control problem of SBW system can be given as:
2 3 2 32
3
z1 W1 W 1 G1 0 W 1 G0 r
6z 7 6 0 W 2 G0 7 6 7
6 27 6 W 2 G1 0 76 F yw 7
6 7¼6 76 7 ð28Þ
4 z3 5 4 0 0 0 W3 5 4 ns 5
e I G1 I G0 Ddf

Ddf ¼ KðsÞe ð29Þ

The vehicle stability mixed H2/H1 robust control is to design the controller K(s) to stabilize the closed-loop system and
satisfy the following requirement:
10 S. Zou, W. Zhao / Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 145 (2020) 106925

Fig. 9. Vehicle stability control structure.

8
< Minimize :k T xz3 k2
>
T xz1 ð30Þ
>
: Subject to : k k <1
T xz2 1

where T xz1 , T xz2 , T xz3 are the transfer functions from ½ r F yw ns T to z1, z2 and z3, respectively.

4. Dual-motor synchronization control

4.1. Synchronization control strategy

This section is mainly related to the lower layer control of the hierarchical control strategy proposed in this paper, which
is responsible for tracking the output of the upper layer stability controller and the input of the steering wheel. The signal
tracking mainly involves the executive module of the dual-motor SBW system, which relies on the dual-motor to jointly
drive the wheel to complete the turning function. Therefore, the tracking performance of dual-motor in the executive mod-
ule is closely related to the vehicle stability. Compared with the traditional single motor SBW system, the reliability, fault
tolerance and safety of the dual-motor SBW system have been significantly improved. However, the dual-motor SBW system
involves two steering actuator motors, and its response becomes more complicated. The inconsistent motor parameters, load
interference and current mutation will lead to the asynchronous phenomenon of dual-motor, which will affect the signal
tracking ability and deteriorate the stability of the vehicle. Therefore, the dual-motor SBW system should not only take into
account the tracking performance of the system, but also ensure the synchronization performance.
The common control structures for dual-motor include parallel control and master–slave control. However, neither the
parallel control nor the master–slave control structure can share error information between the servo axes. On the contrary,
the cross-coupled control structure can share the information of the disturbed axis with the other servo axis participating in
synchronous motion through the coupling of error signal, so that each servo axis can balance the reference control amount
and improve the synchronization performance. In addition, the dual-motor synchronous control system is a nonlinear and
strongly coupled multivariable system, which requires the control algorithm to possess strong nonlinear processing and
anti-interference performance. The sliding mode variable structure control is a kind of special nonlinear control strategy.
Its nonlinearity is reflected in the control discontinuity, which is essentially the switching action caused by the switch func-
tion. The switching action can force the system to move continuously with small amplitude and high frequency along the
sliding surface of the system, which is the so-called sliding mode motion. The sliding mode motion can make the system
state reach the sliding mode surface in a limited time through design control law, and has nothing to do with the system
parameters and external interference. Therefore, the sliding mode variable structure control has become one of the effective
means to improve the synchronization performance of dual-motor control system due to its advantages such as fast dynamic
response, insensitivity to system parameter change and external interference. Furthermore, no need of system online iden-
tification and simple physical realization also contribute to the general using of it.
In order to improve the tracking and synchronization performance of the dual-motor SBW system, this paper proposes a
sliding mode speed synchronization control strategy, which is based on the cross-coupling control structure and sliding
mode control algorithm. As shown in Fig. 10, each motor adopts three closed-loop PID control, so that the motor has good
tracking performance. Then, a sliding mode speed synchronization controller is designed to compensate the current loop of
the dual-motor system, so that the dual-motor can achieve synchronization as soon as possible. The basic principle of the
speed synchronization controller is as follows: when the actual speed of dual-motor is different due to the interference, a
difference signal is obtained by comparing the speed of dual-motor, which is the input signal of the sliding mode synchro-
nization controller. Because the response of the current loop is much faster than that of the speed loop, the asynchronous
 S. Zou, W. Zhao / Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 145 (2020) 106925 11

Fig. 10. Synchronization control strategy of dual-motor.

phenomenon of the dual-motor can be eliminated as soon as possible by compensating the output of the speed difference
control to the current loop. Therefore, the synchronization controller output is fed back to the current loops of the dual-
motor, so that the system can suppress the asynchronous speed of the dual-motor as soon as possible, improve the dynamic
response capability of the system, reduce the possibility of differential oscillation and obtain good synchronization
performance.
In Fig. 10, h* is the ideal motor angle calculated from the upper stability controller output and steering wheel input; APR,
ASR, ACR are the angle, speed and current PID controllers of the motor, respectively; h1, h2 are the actual angle of the dual-
motor, respectively;x1 , x2 are the reference speed output by the angle controller of the dual-motor, respectively; x1, x2 are
the actual speed of the dual-motor, respectively; 4x is the speed difference of the dual-motor; Di is the compensation cur-
0 0
rent of the dual-motor; i1, i2 are the actual current of the dual-motor, respectively;i1 , i2 are the reference current output by
0 0
the speed controller of the dual-motor, respectively;i1 , i1 are the reference current of the dual-motor compensated by the
speed synchronization controller, respectively; u1, u2 are the voltage of the dual-motor, respectively.

4.2. Design of sliding mode speed synchronization controller

The design process of the sliding mode speed synchronization controller of the dual-motor SBW system is as follows.
Firstly, the dynamic model of permanent magnet brushless DC motor can be expressed as:
8 x1
>
> T e1 ¼ J ddt þ Bx1 þ T l1
>
<
T e1 ¼ K t i1
ð31Þ
> T e2 ¼ J dx2 þ Bx2 þ T l2
>
>
: dt
T e2 ¼ K t i2
where Te1, Te2 are the electromagnetic torques of the dual-motor, respectively; x1, x2 are the angular speeds of the dual-
motor, respectively; i1, i2 are the phase currents of the dual-motor, respectively; Tl1, Tl2 are the load torques of the dual-
motor, respectively; Kt is the torque coefficient; J is the moment of inertia; B is the viscosity friction coefficient.
According to Eq. (31), it can be concluded that:
8
< dx1 ¼ 1 ðK t i1  Bx1  T l1 Þ
dt J
ð32Þ
: dx2 ¼ 1 ðK t i2  Bx2  T l2 Þ
dt J

Then, the state variable of the motor can be expressed as:


x1 ¼ x1  x2
ð33Þ
_ 1x
x2 ¼ x_ 1 ¼ x _2

Based on Eqs. (12) and (13), the following equation can be obtained:
(
_ 1x
x_ 1 ¼ x _ 2 ¼ KJt ði1  i2 Þ  BJ ðx1 þ x2 Þ  1J ðT l1  T l2 Þ
ð34Þ
€1 x
x_ 2 ¼ x € 2 ¼ KJt ðdidt1  didt2 Þ  BJ ðddt
x1 x2
 ddt Þ

Assuming v ¼ didt  didt , then the state equation of the system can be written as:
1 2
12 S. Zou, W. Zhao / Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 145 (2020) 106925

  " #  " #
x_ 1 0 1 x1 0
¼
0  BJ
þ v ð35Þ
x_ 2
Kt
x2 J

The sliding surface function of the system is defined as:

s ¼ cx1 þ x2 ð36Þ
The asymptotic law of sliding mode control selected in this paper is exponential asymptotic law, and it can be expressed
as:

s_ ¼ esgnðsÞ  qs ð37Þ
The derivation of Eq. (36) can be depicted as:
B Kt
s_ ¼ cx_ 1 þ x_ 2 ¼ cx2 þ x2 þ v ð38Þ
J J
The following equation can be obtained by combining Eqs. (37) and (38):
 
J B
v¼ esgnðsÞ  qs  ðc  Þx2 ð39Þ
Kt J
Thus, the compensation current of the current loop can be written as:
Z t 
J B
Di ¼ esgnðsÞ  qs  ðc  Þx2 dt ð40Þ
Kt 0 J
According to the sliding mode reaching condition ss_ < 0, it is easy to verify that the system is asymptotically stable under
the action of the controller. Based on the above derivation, the structure of the sliding mode speed synchronization controller
is shown in Fig. 11.

5. Simulation analysis and hardware-in-the-loop experiment

5.1. Simulation analysis of vehicle stability

In order to verify the effectiveness of the vehicle stability control strategy proposed in this paper, the simulations are per-
formed under steering wheel angle step input and double-lane change condition. In addition, the simulation results of mixed
H2/H1 robust control and H1 mixed sensitivity control are compared to verify the tracking performance and robust perfor-
mance of the designed controller.
In this paper, the vehicle speed is 60 km/h and the steering wheel angle is 90 deg during the steering wheel angle step
input simulation. As shown in Fig. 12(a), the amplitudes of sideslip angle under both control methods are less than 0.03 rad,
and the sideslip angles obtained by H2/H1 control and H1 control are 0.022 rad and 0.025 rad, respectively. Compared with
the H1 control, the sideslip angle under H2/H1 control is reduced by 12%. Fig. 12(b) shows the yaw rate response, compared
with the ideal yaw rate, the overshoot of H2/H1 control is 0.07 rad/s and that of H1 control is 0.05 rad/s. Therefore, the two
controllers can track the ideal value well and the control effect is almost the same. Fig. 12(c) shows the front wheel angle
value under the steering wheel angle step input, it can be seen from Fig. 12(c) that the front wheel angle amplitudes under
H2/H1 control and H1 control are 6.7 deg and 7.3 deg, respectively. Since the H2/H1 control increases the optimization of the
control output, the front wheel angle of the H2/H1 control is reduced by 8.2% compared with that of the H1 control. In con-
clusion, compared with H1 control, H2/H1 control has better control performance.
In order to verify the path tracking ability of the robust controller designed in this paper, a double-lane change simulation
is carried out, and the simulation speed is 60 km/h. Fig. 13 show the path tracking performance and yaw rate response of the

Fig. 11. Structure of sliding mode speed synchronization controller.

 S. Zou, W. Zhao / Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 145 (2020) 106925 13

Fig. 12. Simulation results of steering wheel angle step input.

Fig. 13. Simulation results of double-lane change.

vehicle under double-lane change simulation, respectively. It can be seen from Fig. 13(a) that both the mixed H2/H1 control
and the H1 control can track the target trajectory, but the H1 control has greater fluctuation in the middle and the last seg-
ments. Therefore, compared with H1 control, H2/H1 control has better path tracking performance and stability performance.
Fig. 13(b) shows the yaw rate response of the vehicle under two different control methods, and it can be seen from Fig. 13(b)
that the yaw rate amplitudes of H1 control and H2/H1 control are 0.58 rad/s and 0.6 rad/s, respectively. Compared with H1
control, the yaw rate amplitude of H2/H1 control increase slightly, but they are almost the same.
To sum up, compared with the H1 control, the designed yaw rate controller based on the mixed H2/h1 robust control
theory can better improve the stability, tracking performance and control output performance.

5.2. Simulation analysis of dual-motor synchronization performance

Theoretically, the output response of two identical motors of the dual-motor intelligent SBW system should be the same
given equal control amount. However, due to the inconsistent structural parameters of the motor system, load disturbance,
current mutation, etc, the response between the dual-motor is not synchronized. In order to verify the effectiveness of the
synchronization control strategy proposed in this paper, a joint simulation of dual-motor SBW system is carried out in Car-
sim/Simulink. The simulated vehicle speed is set to 60 km/h, and the steering wheel angle is a sinusoidal input with an
amplitude of 90 deg. Then, the synchronization performance of the dual-motor under the conditions of different resistance
and inductance parameters and load disturbance is verified, respectively.
14 S. Zou, W. Zhao / Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 145 (2020) 106925

In order to verify the synchronization performance of the dual-motor with different resistance parameters, the resistance
parameters of the dual-motor are set to 0.42 X and 0.62 X, respectively. It should be emphasized that the parameters of the
dual-motor are the same except for the resistance parameter. Fig. 14(a) shows the angle difference of dual-motor, and it can
be seen from Fig. 12(a) that the angle difference amplitudes of dual-motor are 1.02 deg and 0.76 deg with parallel control
and cross-coupling control, respectively. Compared with the parallel control, the angle difference of the cross-coupling con-
trol is reduced by 25.5%. Fig. 14(b) shows the speed difference between the dual-motor, and it can be seen from Fig. 14(b)
that the speed difference amplitude of the dual-motor under parallel control is 49r/min, while that under cross-coupling
control is only 30.2r/min. Compared with the parallel control, the speed difference amplitude of the dual-motor under
cross-coupling control is decreased by 18.8r/min.
In order to verify the synchronization performance of the dual-motor with different inductance parameters, the induc-
tance parameters of the dual-motor are set to 0.00034H and 0.00054H, respectively. It should be emphasized that the param-
eters of the dual-motor are the same except for the inductance parameter. Fig. 15(a) shows the angle difference of dual-
motor, and it can be seen from Fig. 15(a) that the angle difference amplitudes of dual-motor are 0.26 deg and 0.19 deg with
parallel control and cross-coupling control, respectively. Compared with the parallel control, the angle difference of the
cross-coupling control is reduced by 27%. Fig. 15(b) shows the speed difference between the dual-motor, and it can be seen
from Fig. 15(b) that the speed difference amplitude of the dual-motor under parallel control is 19r/min, while that under
cross-coupling control is only 13.8r/min. Compared with the parallel control, the speed difference amplitude of the dual-
motor under cross-coupling control is decreased by 5.2r/min.
This paper further verifies the synchronization performance of the dual-motor under load disturbance, and a disturbance
load of 0.01 N.m is applied to one of the motors at 0.2 s after the start of simulation. Fig. 16(a) shows the angle difference of
the dual-motor under load disturbance, and the angle difference amplitudes of the dual-motor under parallel control and
cross-coupling control are 0.29 deg and 0.2 deg, respectively. Compared with the parallel control, the angle difference under
cross-coupling control is reduced by 31%. Fig. 16(b) shows the speed difference of the dual-motor, and it can be seen from
Fig. 16(b) that the speed difference amplitude of the dual-motor under parallel control is 35r/min, while that under cross-
coupling control is 23.7r/min. Compared with the parallel control, the speed difference amplitude of the dual-motor under
cross-coupling control is 11.3r/min lower than the former.
In summary, compared with parallel control, the control strategy based on cross-coupling control structure and sliding
mode control algorithm proposed in this paper can effectively reduce the speed difference and angle difference between
dual-motor, which is caused by inconsistent motor parameters and load disturbance. Thus, the synchronization performance
of the dual-motor SBW system is significantly improved.

5.3. Hardware-in-the-loop experiment

In order to verify the effectiveness of the proposed control strategy in practical application, a hardware-in-the-loop
experiment is conducted on the dual-motor SBW experimental station. The experimental principle is shown in Fig. 17,
and the specific experimental process is as follows: First, the designed control program is written into the controllers
through the U-MULTILINK-FX. Then, the resistance modules connected to the left and right sides of the rack are loaded to
simulate the steering resistance. Next, the equipment of the experimental station is powered on. Based on this, the target
angle signal is sent to the motor controllers through the host computer, and the real-time motor data is collected to the host
computer through the PCAN.
The target sinusoidal signal sent to the dual-motor through the host computer is shown in Fig. 18(a), the amplitude is
90 deg and the frequency is 0.2 Hz. Fig. 18(b) shows the angle difference of dual-motor under parallel control. It can be seen
from Fig. 18(b) that the angle difference between dual-motor fluctuates greatly, and the amplitude reaches 3.5 deg. Fig. 18(c)
shows the angle difference of the dual-motor under the control strategy based on cross-coupling control structure and slid-
ing mode control algorithm proposed in this paper. It can be seen from Fig. 18(c) that the angle difference between the dual-

Fig. 14. Simulation results of dual-motor with different resistance parameters.

 S. Zou, W. Zhao / Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 145 (2020) 106925 15

Fig. 15. Simulation results of dual-motor with different inductance parameters.

Fig. 16. Simulation results of dual-motor with load disturbance.

Resistance
module 2
Controller 2
Control U-MULTILINK-FX
program
Host
computer

Power supply

Control
signal
PCAN Controller 1
Dual-motor Resistance
module 1
Fig. 17. Overall control system.

motor fluctuates slightly, and the maximum amplitude is only 1.4 deg. Compared with the parallel control, the angle differ-
ence amplitude between the dual-motor under the proposed control strategy is reduced by 2.1 deg.
This paper further verifies the synchronization performance of the angle signal under the condition of double-lane
change, and the angle signal input to the dual-motor is shown in Fig. 19(a). The angle difference between the dual-motor
under parallel control and cross-coupling control are shown in Fig. 19(b) and (c), respectively. It can be seen from Fig. 19
(b) that the angle difference between the dual-motor under parallel control varies widely, and the maximum angle difference
reaches 2.9 deg. On the contrary, it can be seen from Fig. 19(c) that the variation range of the angle difference between the
16 S. Zou, W. Zhao / Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 145 (2020) 106925

Fig. 18. Experimental results of dual-motor under sinusoidal input.

Fig. 19. Experimental results of dual-motor under double-lane change angle signal input.

dual-motor under the proposed control strategy is smaller, and the maximum angle difference is only 1.2 deg. Compared
with the parallel control, the amplitude of the angle difference under the proposed control strategy is decreased by 1.7 deg.
From the above analysis, we can concluded that the proposed control strategy can significantly improve the synchroniza-
tion performance of the dual-motor, thus verifying the effectiveness of the proposed control strategy.
 S. Zou, W. Zhao / Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 145 (2020) 106925 17

6. Conclusion

In order to improve the safety of SBW system, a dual-motor SBW system is proposed to enhance the fault tolerance and
reliability of the system. Then, aiming at the problem that the stability of dual-motor SBW vehicle is often disturbed by the
external interference and the response between the dual-motor is not synchronized, a hierarchical control strategy is pro-
posed in this paper. In the upper layer, considering the influence of lateral wind, sensor noise and the limitation of control
output on vehicle performance, a yaw rate controller is designed based on mixed H2/H1 robust control theory. In the lower
layer, a synchronization control strategy based on cross-coupling control structure and sliding mode control algorithm is
proposed, and a sliding mode speed synchronization controller is designed. Finally, the combined simulation analysis and
hardware-in-the-loop experiment are carried out by Carsim/Simulink and dual-motor SBW experimental station,
respectively.
The simulation results show that compared with H1 control, mixed H2/H1 control not only possesses better path tracking
performance and robust performance, but also can reduced sideslip angle and controller output by 12% and 8.2%, respec-
tively. Besides, compared with the parallel control structure, the angle difference and speed difference between the dual-
motor under the proposed control strategy are reduced by more than 25.5% and 5.5r/min, respectively. Finally, the results
of hardware-in-the-loop experiment indicate that the angle difference between the dual-motor is reduced by 2.1 deg and
1.7 deg under the control strategy proposed in this paper, which further proves the effectiveness and good control perfor-
mance of the proposed control strategy.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

SongChun Zou: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Investigation, Data curation, Formal analysis. WanZhong
Zhao: Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Visualization, Investigation, Supervision.

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

This study was supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of China, China (No.
2017YFB0103604), the Jiangsu Key Research and Development Plan, China (No. BE2018124), and the National Natural
Science Foundation of China, China (No. 51775268).

References

[1] C. Huang, F. Naghdy, H. Du, Fault tolerant sliding mode predictive control for uncertain steer-by-wire system, IEEE Trans. Cybern. 49 (1) (2019) 261–
272.
[2] Z. Sun, J. Zheng, Z. Man, et al, Nested adaptive super-twisting sliding mode control design for a vehicle steer-by-wire system, Mech. Syst. Sig. Process.
122 (2019) 658–672.
[3] A. Balachandran, J.C. Gerdes, Designing steering feel for steer-by-wire vehicles using objective measures, IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatron. 20 (1) (2015)
373–383.
[4] J. Nah, W. Kim, K. Yi, et al, Fault-tolerant driving control of a steer-by-wire system for six-wheel-driving-six-wheel-steering vehicles, Proc. Inst. Mech.
Eng. Part D J. Automobile Eng. 227 (4) (2013) 506–520.
[5] M.B.N. Shah, A.R. Husain, H. Aysan, et al, Error handling algorithm and probabilistic analysis under fault for can-based steer-by-wire system, IEEE
Trans. Ind. Inf. 12 (3) (2016) 1017–1034.
[6] R.A. Gupta, M.Y. Chow, Networked control system: overview and research trends, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 57 (7) (2010) 2527–2535.
[7] T. Chen, L. Chen, X. Xu, et al, Passive fault-tolerant path following control of autonomous distributed drive electric vehicle considering steering system
fault, Mech. Syst. Sig. Process. 123 (2019) 298–315.
[8] S. Haggag, A. Rosa, K. Huang, et al, Fault tolerant real time control system for steer-by-wire electro-hydraulic systems, Mechatronics 17 (2–3) (2007)
129–142.
[9] L. He, G.Y. Chen, H.Y. Zheng, Fault tolerant control method of dual steering actuator motors for steer-by-wire system, Int. J. Automot. Technol. 16 (6)
(2015) 977–987.
[10] Y.F. Hu, W.L. Gu, H. Zhang, et al, Adaptive robust triple-step control for compensating cogging torque and model uncertainty in a DC motor, IEEE Trans.
Syst. Man Cybernet. Syst. 49 (12) (2019) 1396–2405.
[11] A. Nguyen, T. Guerra, C. Sentouh, et al, Unknown input observers for simultaneous estimation of vehicle dynamics and driver torque: theoretical design
and hardware experiments, IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatron. 24 (6) (2019) 2508–2518.
[12] J. Guo, Y. Luo, K. Li, et al, Coordinated path-following and direct yaw-moment control of autonomous electric vehicles with sideslip angle estimation,
Mech. Syst. Sig. Process. 105 (2018) 183–199.
[13] W. Kong, Y. Luo, Z. Qin, et al, Comprehensive fault diagnosis and fault-tolerant protection of in-vehicle intelligent electric power supply network, IEEE
Trans. Veh. Technol. 68 (11) (2019) 10453–10464.
[14] S. Anwar, W. Niu, A nonlinear observer based analytical redundancy for predictive fault tolerant control of a steer by wire system, Asian J. Control 16
(2) (2014) 321–334.
[15] H. Zhang, Y. Shi, J.M. Wang, et al, A new delay-compensation scheme for networked control systems in controller area networks, IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron. 65 (9) (2018) 7239–7247.
[16] H. Zhang, J.M. Wang, Active steering actuator fault detection for an automatically-steered electric ground vehicle, IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 66 (5)
(2017) 3685–3702.
18 S. Zou, W. Zhao / Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 145 (2020) 106925

[17] W. Zhao, X. Ren, L. Li, Synchronization and tracking control for dual-motor driving servo systems with friction compensation, Asian J. Control 21 (2)
(2018) 674–685.
[18] X. Liu, Z. Ji, Y. Wang, Speed regulation of dual-PMSM system under disturbances by composite sliding mode control, Mod. Phys. Lett. B 32 (34–36)
(2018) 1–7.
[19] H.R. Jin, X.C. Lu, H. Zhang, et al, Research on synchronization control of dual-motor driving for large rotary car dumper, Appl. Mech. Mater. 229–231
(2012) 2166–2169.
[20] Z.P. Wu, X.L. Chen, Design of coarse-fine combined synchronization control system for lithography based on cross-coupled sliding mode control, Adv.
Mater. Res. 383–390 (2011) 2126–2131.
[21] Y.Q. Liu, X.F. Liu, H.X. Wang, Strategic analysis and experimental research on synchronization control of dual-motor in crane, Appl. Mech. Mater. 644–
650 (2014) 836–839.
[22] J.N. Sun, Y. Xiao, X.Y. Ge, et al, Cross-coupling synchronization control of high precision permanent magnet linear motors, Adv. Mater. Res. 301–303
(2011) 1422–1427.
[23] S.L. Chen, W.M. Lin, T.H. Chang, Tracking control for a synchronized dual parallel linear motor machine tool, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part I: J. Syst. Control
Eng. 222 (2008) 851–862.
[24] C.C. Sun, G.F. Gong, H.Y. Yang, et al, Fuzzy sliding mode control for synchronization of multiple induction motors drive, Trans. Inst. Meas. Control 41
(11) (2019) 3223–3234.
[25] X.L. Feng, Q.Q. Zhuo, X.B. Liu, et al, Development of multi-motor synchronous control system based on network-on-chip, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part I J.
Syst. Control Eng. doi: 10.1177/0959651819901032.
[26] K. Nam, S. Oh, H. Fujimoto, et al, Robust yaw stability control for electric vehicles based on active front steering control through a steer-by-wire system,
Int. J. Automot. Technol. 13 (7) (2012) 1169–1176.
[27] J.M. Duan, R. Wang, Y.C. Yu, Research on Control Strategies of Steer-by-Wire System, 2010 International Conference on Intelligent Computation
Technology & Automation. DOI:10.1109/ICICTA.2010.238.
[28] S. Krishna, S. Narayanan, S. Denis Ashok, Fuzzy logic based yaw stability control for active front steering of a vehicle, J. Mech. Sci. Technol. 28 (12)
(2014) 5169–5174.
[29] B. Zheng, S. Anwar, Yaw stability control of a steer-by-wire equipped vehicle via active front wheel steering, Mechatronics 19 (6) (2009) 799–804.
[30] B. Wang, X. Chen, H. Zhao, Application study of active front steering with integrated feedback control for steering-by-wire system, Int. J. Mech. Syst.
Eng. 3 (4) (2013) 148–153.
[31] W.Z. Zhao, X.X. Qin, C.Y. Wang, Yaw and lateral stability control for four-wheel steer-by-wire system, IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatron. doi: 10.1109/
TMECH.2018.2812220.
[32] C.R. Liu, W.C. Sun, J.H. Zhang, Adaptive sliding mode control for 4-wheel SBW system with Ackerman geometry, ISA Trans. 96 (2020) 103–115.
[33] C.W. Chuang, C.L. Haung, C.D. Lee, et al, Synchronization and tension control of dual motor systems via MIMO discrete pseudo model following integral
variable structure control, Mech. Mach. Theory 44 (2) (2009) 499–510.
[34] C. Li, C. Li, Z. Chen, et al, Advanced synchronization control of a dual-linear-motor-driven gantry with rotational dynamics, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 65
(9) (2018) 7526–7535.
[35] S.K. Tseng, T.H. Liu, J.W. Hsu, et al, Implementation of online maximum efficiency tracking control for a dual-motor drive system, IET Electr. Power
Appl. 9 (7) (2015) 449–458.
[36] Z. Sun, J.C. Zheng, Z.H. Man, et al, Robust control of a vehicle steer-by-wire system using adaptive sliding mode, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 63 (4) (2016)
2251–2262.
[37] Y. Yamaguchi, T. Murakami, Adaptive control for virtual steering characteristics on electric vehicle using steer-by-wire system, IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron. 56 (5) (2009) 1585–1594.