2017 5th International Conference on Mechanical, Automotive and Materials Engineering

Research on Adaptive Cruise Control Systems and Performance Analysis Using

Matlab and Carsim

Yang Ying, Ogunleye Odunayo Solomon

School of Mechanical Engineering and Automation
Northeastern University
Shenyang, China
e-mail: yangyang@mail.neu.edu.cn

Abstract—An application of mathematical control techniques
to the longitudinal dynamics of a vehicle equipped with an
adaptive cruise control (ACC) system is presented. This study
is carried out for the detailed understanding of a complex ACC
vehicle model under critical transitional maneuvers (TMs) in
order to establish safe inter-vehicle distance with zero range-
rate behind a preceding vehicle. The ACC vehicle is based on a
nonlinear longitudinal model that includes vehicle inertial and
power train dynamics. The lower-level controller computes the
desired acceleration and deceleration commands for the upper-
level controller which then provides the throttle/brake
commands for the complex vehicle model. An application of a
PI controller algorithm to control the longitudinal dynamics of
an adaptive cruise control system equipped vehicle is presented
in this paper using Simulink to simulate the system. The
simulation results show that the adaptive cruise control system
can decrease the number of accidents and to reduce the impact
of accidents.
Keywords- adptive cruise control; simulink; proportional-
integral controller
I. INTRODUCTION
As the traveling demand increased over the years, the
highway networks were also expanded to meet the
requirements. In order to overcome these problems an
efficient infrastructure for the highway network is required.
The concept of Automated Highway System (AHS) is one of
the approaches which are under considerable research to
overcome the problems. In the last few years the research
work has been focused to investigate how safety measures
and comfort level in urban areas and highway transportation
networks can be improved by means of on-board intelligent
driver assistance systems[1]. The main objectives for an
ACC vehicle to achieve are to reduce the number of
accidents by executing the higher deceleration or transitional
maneuvers[2,3,4]. A survey reported a need for improvement
in the current ACC system especially during the
unsafe/uncomfortable reduction in speed which should take
in account the physical limitations of the ACC-system
equipped vehicles in order to avoid the collision or severity
of the collision. An ACC system is the first step for collision
avoidance systems and can be beneficial to reduce
significantly the number of accidents or their severity.
Before reviewing the relevant research work conducted in
the field of ACC systems, it is necessary to understand the
nature of the control model presented and the effects
generated by difference sources on the performance of an
ACC system.
II. THE ADAPTIVE CRUISE CONTROL SYSTEM
The task of ACC is to make the vehicle follow its
predecessor at a safe distance, and, in absence of an
obstructing predecessor, to drive with a predetermined
velocity[5]. While accomplishing this main task, ACC
should be able to achieve string stability. ACC should also
make sure that the acceleration and deceleration stay within a
comfort zone. Furthermore, frequent switching between
applying throttle and brakes should be avoided
The ACC controls the position and velocity of the
vehicle. It aims to make the velocity error and the position
error zero. The reference signal in the figure consists of the
desired position, velocity, and possibly acceleration. The
desired velocity is often equal to the velocity of the
predecessor. If following the other vehicle requires a desired
velocity that is higher than the preset velocity for free driving,
this preset velocity becomes the desired velocity. The desired
position is usually derived from a desired distance to the
predecessor. If there is no preceding vehicle to follow, there
is no reference position, and only the velocity is
controlled[6]. If information from vehicles further along is
received through communication and used, this can be used
to adapt the desired state values. An ACC vehicle in a
platoon is shown in Fig. 1.
Figure 1. ACC vehicle in a platoon.
Vehicles can use wireless communication to inform other
vehicles about their states and possibly send information
about their expected states and (upcoming) throttle brake
actions.
III. VEHICLE MODEL
The model includes engine dynamic control system,
automatic transmission dynamic control system, and drive
train dynamic control system. The combination of all these
sub-systems forms a dynamic model of a complete vehicle

978-1-5386-0432-8/17/$31.00 ©2017 IEEE 249

which can be used to analyze and improve the response of
the real vehicle [7]. Furthermore, this complex vehicle
longitudinal control model, shown in Fig. 2, will be
analyzed in this study using the automotive vehicle
following systems.
Figure 2. The Vehicle Power train using Simulink.
The models are built using the Simulink block then the
vehicle model will be validated by comparing simulation
results with experimental test data. The vehicle equipped
with the cruise control is a CARSIM model of a b-Class
Sedan, which weighs 1650 kg. The physical layer of our
design is assumed to follow a given vehicle dynamic
model[8,9]. CARSIM is commercially available vehicle
dynamics simulation software. It has a large database made
up of more than 150 libraries of datasets linked together.
Basically, two different types of model have been developed
for the purpose of controller synthesis.
IV. PI CONTROLLER FOR THE ACC SYSTEM
The cruise control system of a car is a common feedback
system encountered in everyday life. The system attempts to
maintain a constant velocity in the presence of disturbances
primarily caused by changes in the slope of a road. The
controller compensates for these unknowns by measuring the
speed of the car and adjusting the throttle appropriately.
K p S  Ki
Y s
U S mS 2  b  K p S  Ki
Now considering Proportional control and integral
control, the closed loop transfer function of the cruise control
system with PI controller is obtained, as in Eqn. (1).
Figure 3. Block diagram of a cruise control system for an automobile.
To model the system we start with the block diagram in
Fig. 3. Let Q be the speed of the car and Q r the desired
(Target) speed. The controller, which typically is of the
proportional-integral (PI) type, receives the signals Q and
Q r generates a control signal u that is sent to an actuator
that controls the throttle position. The throttle in turn controls
the torque T delivered by the engine, which is transmitted
through the gears and the wheels, generating a force F that
moves the car. There are disturbance forces Fd due to
variations in the slope of the road, the rolling resistance and
aerodynamic forces. The cruise controller also has a human–
machine interface that allows the driver to set and modify the
desired speed[10]. There are also functions that disconnect
the cruise control when the brake is touched.
To develop a mathematical model we start with a force
balance for the car body. Let Q be the speed of the car, m
the total mass (including passengers), F the force generated
by the contact of the wheels with the road, and Fd the
disturbance force due to gravity, friction and aerodynamic
drag. The equation of motion of the car is simply.
F  Fd
dv
m (2)
dt
The force F is generated by the engine, whose torque is
proportional to the rate of fuel injection, which is itself
proportional to a control signal 0 ≤ u ≤ 1 that controls the
throttle position. The torque also depends on engine speed.
We add to this model a feedback controller that attempts
to regulate the speed of the car in the presence of
disturbances. We shall use a proportional-integral controller,
which has the form
ut K pe t  Ki ³ e W dWt 0 (3)
This controller can itself be realized as an input/output
dynamical system by defining a controller state z and
(1)
implementing the differential equation.
dzdt vr  v, u K p vr  v  Ki z (4)
where Q r is the desired speed. the integrator (represented by
the state z ) ensures that in steady state the error will be
driven to zero, even when there are disturbances or modeling
errors.
A. Upper Level Controller
The main functionality of the upper level controller is to
compute the desired acceleration for the ACC-equipped
vehicle that achieves the desired spacing or velocity. The
upper level controller, using the driver inputs, the radar
measurements, and the current distance and velocity of the
ACC-equipped vehicle relative to a leading vehicle,
computes the desired acceleration that is required to achieve
the desired spacing or velocity[11]. The computed
acceleration command is sent to the lower level controller to
250
compute and implement the corresponding actuation
commands as needed. The upper level controller can operate
in two main control modes.
(a) Velocity Control: In this mode, the radar does not
detect any vehicle in the path of the ACC-equipped vehicle.
In this mode, the ACC essentially acts like the conventional
cruise controller. Therefore, the ACC equipped vehicle’s
velocity is maintained at the target velocity set by the driver.
The control law for computing the acceleration command is
a proportional controller.
(b) Spacing Control: The spacing control mode is
entered when the radar detects a leading vehicle in the ACC
equipped vehicle’s path, and the ACC system controls the
vehicle to maintain a desired distance based on the velocity
of the host vehicle and a user-specified time gap. This
desired distance can be defined as
Sd '  vht gap (5)
Figure 4. Adaptive Cruise control System.
where Δ is the desired distance to be maintained in the case
where the leading vehicle comes to a complete stop, and
t gap is the user-specified time gap with typical values in the
range of about 0.7–2 seconds.
B. Low Level Controller
The main objective of the low level controller is twofold.
First, using the desired acceleration command from the upper
level controller, the lower level controller determines
whether to apply braking control or throttle control[12].
Secondly, the required control command is applied to the
vehicle in order to achieve the desired acceleration. The
applied control command is either throttle angle command or
master cylinder pressure command.
Figure 5. Low level controller
Switching Logic: The switching logic component shown
in Fig. 4 and Fig. 5 determines, based on the desired
acceleration from the upper level controller, whether a brake
torque or engine torque is required to achieve the desired
acceleration. Typically, it is common to assume that a simple
logic for choosing between brake and engine control can be
based on the sign of the desired deceleration; that is, if the
deceleration is greater than zero, then engine control should
251
be applied. Here, engine control is set to zero i.e. cancel
throttle. It adds no input throttle when deceleration is greater
than desired distance and the brake control should be applied.
Otherwise, the throttle input is applied when deceleration is
less or equal to zero.
(b) Throttle Control: When engine control torque is
required, the throttle controller converts the computed
desired acceleration into a throttle command that is required
to achieve the acceleration. Fig. 6 gets input from the
acceleration output and into the vehicle power train which in
turn converts its value for Speed in km/h, RPM and Gear.
Brake Control: When braking control torque is required,
the brake controller converts the desired deceleration into
appropriate brake command. This output from the
deceleration is then read from CARSIM has master cylinder
pressure.
Figure 6. Block diagram of the Switch logic and the vehicle Power train.
V. SIMULATION RESULTS
In this experiment, the velocity of the leading vehicle
starts at an initial value of 80 km/h. The initial global
longitudinal positions of the leading vehicle and the host
vehicle are 200m and 1 m, respectively, which means that
the host vehicle radar is initially out of range. The host
vehicle initially starts at an initial velocity of 0 then quickly
accelerates with a driver set target velocity of 85 km/h. We
present three scenarios based on the driving behavior of the
leading vehicle. In addition, we compare the results obtained
during the control design stage using Matlab/Simulink with
those obtained from the experimental platform using
CARSIM. The modeled scenarios are described as Fig. 7.
Figure 7. The ACC System in Simulink.
A. Scenario 1: Spacing Control
In this scenario, the radar detects a slower leading vehicle
and transitions to the spacing control mode to control the
distance between the two vehicles to a driver-set time gap of
2 seconds. The desired gap distance is attained when the host
vehicle detects the lead vehicle. The desired gap distance
varies on the current speed of the host vehicle. This scenario
can be observed between the time segment 0–100 s in Fig. 8
and Fig. 9.
Figure 8. The speed of the lead and host car.
Fig. 8 compares the speeds of the host car and the
preceding car. The result showed that both the speeds of the
host and the preceding car were almost the same, indicating
that the host car could follow the preceding car with
allowable speed errors.
Figure 9. Desired gap distance of the host vehicle.
Fig. 9 shows, the host car safely followed the preceding
car. The result has been shown to be useful in automatically
driving the host car because the use of the opening of the
throttle and the position of the braking pedal is very close to
the driving strategy of human drivers.
B. Scenario 2: Leading Vehicle Speeds Up
In this scenario, while in spacing control mode, the
leading vehicle begins to speed up. As a result, the velocity
of the host vehicle also increases in order to maintain a
desired velocity.
Figure 10. Increasing lead vehicle speed and host vehicle
252
This scenario can be observed between the time segment
25–100 s in Fig. 10 and Fig. 11. From the plots, when the
leading vehicle reaches and a maintains a velocity of 120
km/h after 60 s, the host vehicle maintains its velocity at the
driver-set velocity of 85 km/h, since the driver-set velocity is
the maximum achievable velocity of the host vehicle based
on the ACC algorithm.
Figure 11. Radar range and desired gap distance of the host vehicle
From Fig. 11, it can be seen from the distance plots that
the safe gap distance for the host vehicle remained the same
after 38 s. This is due to the host vehicle out of radar range
with the lead vehicle. Basically, after 40 s, the host car is on
a conventional cruise.
C. Scenario 3: Leading Vehicle Slows Down
In this scenario, the leading vehicle slows down, and as a
result, the host vehicle also starts to decrease its velocity in
order to maintain the desired spacing between the vehicles.
This scenario can be observed between the time segment 10–
100 s in Fig. 12 and Fig. 13. At approximately 125s, the host
vehicle starts slow down. At 55-60 s, the two vehicles starts
to travel at almost the same velocity.
Figure 12. The speed of the host car and the decreasing velocity of the Lead car.
Figure 13. Radar range and desired gap distance of the host vehicle
As depicted in Fig. 13, it can be seen from the distance plots
that the distance between the two vehicles reduces as the
speed of the lead car reduces and the desired gap distance
shortens after 30 s. This is because to the host vehicle’s
radar detects the lead vehicle. Basically, after 26 s, the host
car is ACC is turned on again.
VI. CONCLUSIONS
This simulation results for the Velocity and Spacing
control mode showed the ACC system model gives a
realistic feature in a real-life traffic condition. The two-
vehicle system is analyzed under different encounter
scenarios to perform the evaluation for the PI controller ACC
System model. The simulation results are produced to
evaluate the performance of MPC based upper-level spacing-
control laws under these critical conditions. The causes for
differences in some vehicle response parameters were
explained in detail. A car-following vehicle scenario was
created for evaluating the Velocity and spacing control of the
ACC system model. The ACC system was seen to prevent
the Host car from crashing in the preceding vehicle in case of
any emergency from the preceding vehicle. This results show
that the ACC system model improves both safety of the
occupants of the vehicle as well as smooth and quick traffic
flow on a free highway.
REFERENCES
[1] Masao Nagai. “The Perspective of Research for Enhancing Active
Safety Based on Advanced Control Technology”. Vehicle System
Dynamics. Vol. 45, May, 2007, pp. 413-431.
[2] Seungwuk Moon, Kyongsu Yi. “Design Tuning and Evaluation of a
Full-range Adaptive Cruise Control System with Collision
253
Avoidance”. Control Engineering Practice. Vol. 17, Feb, 2009, pp.
442-455.
[3] K.Yi, J Hong, Y.D.Kwon. “A vehicle control algorithm for stop-and-
go cruise control”. Journal of Automobile Engineering. Vol. 25. Oct.
2001, pp. 1099-1115.
[4] Venhovens P, Naab K, Adiprasito B. “Stop and go cruise control”.
International Journal of Automotive Technology. Vol. 1, Feb, 2000,
pp. 61-69.
[5] Ding Y S, Ying H, Shao H. “PI and PD fuzzy controllers analytical
structures and stability analysis”. Information Sciences. Vol. 151,
May, 2003, pp.245-262.
[6] Ganguli, A. and Rajamani, R. "Tractable model development and
system identification for longitudinal vehicle dynamics." Proc. Instn
Mech. Engrs Part D Automobile Engineering. Vol. 218, 2004, pp.
1077-1084.
[7] Gerdes, J.C. and Hedrick, J.K. "Vehicle speed and spacing control via
coordinated throttle and brake actuation." Control Eng. Practice. Vol.
5, Nov. 1997, pp. 1607-1614.
[8] Xiao, L. and Gao, F. “A comprehensive review of the development of
adaptive cruise control systems”. Vehicle System Dynamics. Vol. 48,
Oct. 2010, pp. 1167-1192.
[9] A. Vahidi and A. Eskandarian. “Research advances in intelligent
collision avoidance and adaptive cruise control”. IEEE Transactions
on Intelligent Transportation Systems, vol. 4,Mar, 2003, pp.143–153.
[10] Martinez, J.-J. and Canudas-de Wit, C. “A safe longitudinal control
for adaptive cruise control and stop-and-go scenarios”. Control
Systems Technology, IEEE Transactions. Vol. 15, Feb. 2007, pp.
246-258.
[11] V.L. Bageshwar, W.L. Garrard, and R. Rajamani. “Model predictive
control of transitional maneuvers for adaptive cruise control vehicles”.
IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems. Vol. 53,
May, 2004, pp. 1573–1585.
[12] A. González-Villase nor, A.C. Renfrew, and P.J. Brunn. “A controller
design methodology for close headway spacing strategies for
automated vehicles”. International Journal of Control. Vol. 80, Feb,
2007, pp. 179–189.