2018
DOI: 10.21595/jve.2017.18264
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Passive fault-tolerant control for vehicle active suspension system based on H2/H∞ approach

Abstract: Abstract. In this paper, a robust passive fault-tolerant control (RPFTC) strategy based on / approach and an integral sliding mode passive fault tolerant control (ISMPFTC) strategy based on / approach for vehicle active suspension are presented with considering model uncertainties, loss of actuator effectiveness and time-domain hard constraints of the suspension system. performance index less than and performance index is minimized as the design objective, avoid choosing weighting coefficient. The half-car mod… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The suspension robust fault-tolerant control can be divided into two categories: First, “knowledge-driven control” based on mechanism model, empirical rules, and domain knowledge, including H∞ control based on state feedback or output feedback 6 – 8 , and H2/H∞ control 9 , 10 , fault-tolerant control based on state observer for estimation and fault reconstruction 11 , 12 , quantized non-fragile feedback control based on dynamic quantizer to deal with faults with or without actuators 13 , adaptive backstep control for the random fault of actuator 14 , and the sky-hook control, acceleration control, power drive control, and hybrid control with a certain passive fault tolerance ability 15 – 19 , a L-function is presented to avoid an effect of model uncertainties and the external disturbances 20 , etc. These control methods have perfect theoretical support, strong interpretability, and high execution efficiency, and are the beginning of the research on controllable suspension systems.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The suspension robust fault-tolerant control can be divided into two categories: First, “knowledge-driven control” based on mechanism model, empirical rules, and domain knowledge, including H∞ control based on state feedback or output feedback 6 – 8 , and H2/H∞ control 9 , 10 , fault-tolerant control based on state observer for estimation and fault reconstruction 11 , 12 , quantized non-fragile feedback control based on dynamic quantizer to deal with faults with or without actuators 13 , adaptive backstep control for the random fault of actuator 14 , and the sky-hook control, acceleration control, power drive control, and hybrid control with a certain passive fault tolerance ability 15 – 19 , a L-function is presented to avoid an effect of model uncertainties and the external disturbances 20 , etc. These control methods have perfect theoretical support, strong interpretability, and high execution efficiency, and are the beginning of the research on controllable suspension systems.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In order to make the system insensitive to such perturbation uncertainties and faults, a robust fault-tolerant control is needed. Considering this, extensive research has been carried out on topics such as state feedback passive robust fault-tolerant control [6,7], adaptive robust fault-tolerant control [8], sky-hook fault-tolerant control [9], linear variable parameter control (LPV) [10,11], linear variable parameter model predictive control (LPV-MPC) [12], adaptive fault-tolerant control via the T-S fuzzy method [13], H2/H∞ passive robust fault-tolerant control [14], hybrid control of state feedback compensation and nominal state feedback [15], constrained adaptive backstep tracking controllers [16], H∞ passive robust fault-tolerant control based on output feedback [17], adaptive state feedback robust fault-tolerant control [18], and fault-tolerant prescribed performance control [19]. The above-mentioned research has achieved excellent results.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A time delay can cause the actuator output control force to be out of sync with the control force required by the system, possibly resulting in system instability or performance deterioration [21]. However, the above studies on robust fault-tolerant control of suspension systems do not consider the influence of input time delay [6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19]. Moreover, there is a wealth of existing research on the time delay control of suspension systems, including adaptive backward-step time delay control [21], H∞ state feedback time delay control [22,23], H∞ output feedback time delay control [24], and fuzzy static output feedback (SOF) time delay control based on parallel distributed compensation (PDC) [25].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Therefore, an adaptive neuro fuzzy inference system was designed by Senthil et al (2018) to handle actuator dynamics and parameter uncertainty in hydraulic actuator. Zhang and Gong (2018) designed a robust passive fault tolerant control scheme based on 𝐻 2 /𝐻 ∞ and integral sliding mode passive fault tolerant control scheme based on 𝐻 2 /𝐻 ∞ to improve the ride comfort of the active suspension system. In another study, Riaz and Khan (2017) presented a nonlinear full car active suspension system with seated driver biodynamics.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%