Coordination of active steering, driveline, and braking for integrated vehicle dynamics control

Abstract

An integrated vehicle dynamics control system which aims to improve vehicle handling and stability by coordinating active front steering (AFS) and dynamic stability control (DSC) subsystems is developed in this paper. The DSC subsystem includes drivelinebased, brake-based, and driveline plus brake-based DSC subsystems. The influence of varying forward speed and lateral acceleration on the lateral vehicle dynamics is investigated first. The AFS controller, which is used to improve vehicle steerability in the low to mid-range lateral acceleration, and the DSC controller, which manages to maintain vehicle stability during extreme driving situations, are then designed by using the sliding mode control (SMC) technique and phase plane method respectively. Based on the two independently developed controllers, a rule-based integration scheme is proposed to optimize the overall vehicle performance by minimizing interactions between the two subsystems and extending functionalities of individual subsystems. Computer simulation results confirm the effectiveness of the proposed control system and the overall improvements in vehicle handling and stability.the direct influence of the control action on the JAUTO265

Integrated vehicle dynamics control via coordination of active front steering and rear braking

“…This study mainly focusses on the most commonly used AFS approach. This latter may be formulated using disturbance observer control method [21,22], sliding mode control [23], predictive control [16], or other control techniques. Such active handling control usually serves a steering support system by applying an additional steering angle to the driver's steer command.…”

“…Advanced control methods have then been developed to solve this complex control problem for a MIMO system, such as optimal control [44], control allocation [43,39], Model Predictive Control [11], and robust control [22,20]. Some of the previous existing studies, such as [23,20], develop separately both DYC and AFS systems, and then propose a switching strategy between both stand-alone systems, according to the driving situations. However, for this strategy, the internal system stability may be in question due to the switching process.…”

“…Since vehicle stability is directly related to the sideslip motion of the vehicle, judging the vehicle stability region is derived from the phase-plane (β −β ) method. A stability bound defined in [23] is used here, and is formulated as:…”

“…Therefore, when the vehicle states move beyond the control boundaries and enter the unstable region, braking actuators will be involved to generate an additive corrective yaw moment, pulling the vehicle back into the stable region. According to [23], one of the significant benefits of this stability index, is that the reference region defined in (20) is largely independent of the road surface conditions and hence, the accurate estimation of the road surface coefficient of friction is not required.…”

Integrated Control of Vehicle System Dynamics: Theory and Experiment

“…It is indicated by the relatively small volume of research publications (Gordon et al, 2003;Gordon, 1996;Rodic and Vukobratovie, 2000;Karbalaei et al, 2007;He et al, 2006;Chang and Gordon, 2007;Trächtler, 2004). In the studies, there are two types of hierarchical control architecture: twolayer architecture (Gordon et al, 2003;Gordon, 1996;Rodic and Vukobratovie, 2000;Karbalaei et al, 2007;He et al, 2006) and three-layer architecture (Chang and Gordon, 2007;Trächtler, 2004). For instance in (Chang and Gordon, 2007), a three-layer model-based hierarchical control structure was proposed to achieve modular design of the control systems: an upper layer for reference vehicle motions, an intermediate layer for actuator apportionment, and a lower layer for stand-alone actuator control.…”