Embed
Email

Presentation

Document Sample

Shared by: niusheng11
Categories
Tags
Stats
views:
0
posted:
11/26/2011
language:
English
pages:
42
Stability at the Limits



Yung-Hsiang Judy Hsu

J. Christian Gerdes



Stanford University





2005 ASME IMECE November 10, 2005 Dynamic Design Laboratory

did you know…

 Every day in the US, 10 teenagers are killed in

teen-driven vehicles in crashes1

 Loss of control accounts for 30% of these deaths

 Inexperienced drivers make more driving errors,

exceed speed limits & run off roads at higher rates

 In 2002, motor vehicle traffic crashes were the

leading cause of death for ages 3-33.2



To understand how loss of control occurs, need

to know what determines vehicle motion

1 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Traffic safety facts (2002)

2 USA Today. Study of deadly crashes involving 16-19 year old drivers (2003)



2005 ASME IMECE 2 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

motion of a vehicle

SIDE VIEW



 Motion of a vehicle

is governed by tire

forces Contact Patch





 Tire forces result Ground





from deformation in BOTTOM VIEW



contact patch a

 Lateral tire force is

a function of tire

slip

Fy

2005 ASME IMECE 3 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

tire curve

maximum tire grip









Linear Saturation Loss of control







2005 ASME IMECE 4 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

vehicle response

 Normally, we operate in linear region

 Predictable vehicle response

 But during slick road conditions,

emergency maneuvers, or

aggressive/performance driving

 Enter nonlinear tire region

 Response unanticipated by driver







2005 ASME IMECE 5 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

loss of control

Imagine making an aggressive turn

 If front tires lose grip first, plow out of turn

(limit understeer)

 may go into oscillatory response

 driver loses ability to influence vehicle motion

 If rear tires saturate, rear end kicks out (limit

oversteer)

 may go into a unstable spin

 driver loses control

 Both can result in loss of control

2005 ASME IMECE 6 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

overall goals



We’d like to design a control system to

 Stabilize vehicle in nonlinear handling

region

 Make vehicle response consistent and

predictable for drivers

 Communicate to driver when limits of

handling are approaching





2005 ASME IMECE 7 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

Outline



1. Identify tire operating region

 Vehicle/Tire models

 Tire parameter estimation

2. Produce stable, predictable response

 Feedback linearizing controller

 Driver input saturation

 Simulation results



2005 ASME IMECE 8 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

vehicle model

Bicycle model

 2 states: β and r

 Nonlinear tire model

(Dugoff)

 Steer-by-wire

Assume

 Small angles

 Ux constant



2005 ASME IMECE 9 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

equations of motion

Sum forces and

moments:







Dugoff tire model:

-Ca









2005 ASME IMECE 10 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

tire estimation algorithm

 Find af: use GPS/INS

 Find Fyf: SBW motor

give steering torque





 Estimate Ca f and 

 LS fit to linear tire model

 NLS fit to Dugoff model

 Compare residual of fits to tell us if we’re in the

nonlinear region  estimate 

2005 ASME IMECE 11 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

tire parameter estimation

steering angle

0









 (deg)

-10



-20

26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42

front slip angle



15









a f (deg)

10

5

0

26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42

front lateral force

0

-2000

Fyf (N)





-4000

-6000

-8000

26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42

time (s)









2005 ASME IMECE 12 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

getting the data









2005 ASME IMECE 13 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

estimation technique

9000



8000



7000



6000

side force -Fyf (N)









5000



4000



3000



2000



1000



0



-1000

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

slip angle a f (deg)

2005 ASME IMECE 14 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

parameter estimates

 Begin estimating  after entering NL region

 Ca f estimate is steady

7

x 10 Incremental Fit Error

1.08

2.5 els

1.06

 estimate









2 enls









MSE (N2)

1.04 1.5

1

1.02

0.5

1

26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 0

26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42

4

x 10 7

Incremental Fit Error Difference

10 x 10



MSE difference (N2)

Ca f estimate









9.5 2



9

1

8.5



26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 0

26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42

time (s)

time (s)



2005 ASME IMECE 15 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

controller design



 Desired vehicle response

 Track response of bicycle model with linear tires

 Be consistent with what driver expects

 When tires saturate, compensate for

decreasing forces with steer-by-wire input

 One input f; two states ,r

 Could compromise between the two

 Or, track one state exactly



2005 ASME IMECE 16 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

feedback linearization (FBL)



 Nonlinear control technique

Applicable to systems that look like:





 Use input to cancel system nonlinearities.

In our case,





 Apply linear control theory to track desired

trajectory:



2005 ASME IMECE 17 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

FBL in action

 Ramp steer from 0 to 4o at 20 m/s (45 mph) in 1 s

 Controller results in exact tracking of linear tire model yaw

rate trajectory









2005 ASME IMECE 18 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

FBL in action

 Ramp steer from 0 to 6o at 20 m/s (45 mph) in 1 s

 FBL works well up to physical capabilities of tires









2005 ASME IMECE 19 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

driver input saturation

 Road naturally saturates driver’s steering

capability often unexpectedly

 Here, we safely limit steering capability in

a predictable, safe manner

 Why do we need it?

 Prevents vehicle from needing more side

force than is available

 Keeps vehicle in linearizable handling region

 Saturation algorithm

 If a < ath, driver commands are OK

 If a ¸ ath, gradually saturate driver’s steering

capability

2005 ASME IMECE 20 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

overall control system

 Ramp steer from 0 to 6° at 20 m/s (45 mph) in 1 s









 Tracks linear model yaw rate, then saturates input

 Reduced sideslip

2005 ASME IMECE 21 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

design considerations

 Relative importance of  vs. r

 Which produces a more predictable

response?

 Could add additional input to track 

and r

 differential drive

 rear steering



2005 ASME IMECE 22 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

conclusions

 Overall approach

1. Sense tire saturation and actively compensate

for them with SBW inputs

 Algorithm can characterize tires (Ca, ) using GPS-

based af and estimates of Fyf,

2. Make vehicle response more predictable

 Up to capabilities of tires, controller tracks linear yaw

rate trajectory

 Reduces sideslip

 Current work

 Estimate Ca,  on board in real-time

 Implement overall controller on research vehicle



2005 ASME IMECE 23 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

2005 ASME IMECE 24 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

controller validation

 Simulate control system on more complete

vehicle model









2005 ASME IMECE 25 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

validation results II

 input: ramp steer from 0 to 5° at 45 mph in 0.5 s









2005 ASME IMECE 26 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

4 cases

Case 1: Both tires are linear (f ¸ 1 and r ¸ 1)

  Caf  Car  Car b  Caf a   Caf Car 

 1 

 

    



  



mV  mV 2  mV

 C a mV   f 

   Car b   r 



r  Car b  Caf a  Caf a 2  Car b 2   r   af

   

   Iz Iz 



 Iz I zV 

  





Case 2: Both tires saturating (f < 1 and r < 1)

   f Fnf Car C b    2 Fnf

f

2

Car 

    mV

    ar 2 r  r   

mV   v1 

   a2f 2

4C mV

    a F mV mV

 

 r  

 bCar Car b 2   a f Fnf Car b   r 

 

f nf



r   

 Iz Iz I zV   4Caf I z

  Iz  



2005 ASME IMECE 27 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

4 cases

Case 3: front is nonlinear, rear is linear (f ¸ 1 and r < 1)

   r Fnr Caf C af a   Caf  r2 Fnr 

2

  r  r  

    mV

 2

4Car mV   f 

    b F

mV mV    mV

b r2 Fnr   v 2 

2

r   C a

r   af

 aCaf C af a 2

 

 I

r nr

    

 z Iz I zV   Iz 4Car I z 



Case 4: front is linear, rear is nonlinear (f ¸ 1 and r < 1)



   2 Fnf

  f Fnf   r Fnr f

2

 r2 Fnr 

2



  r  

  

 4Car mV   v1 

  a F  b F    a2f 2

mV 4C mV

   a f Fnf 2  

r   

 f nf r nr  b r2 Fnr  v 2 

   4C I  

 Iz  

 af z 4Car I z 



2005 ASME IMECE 28 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

new inputs



 Define new inputs v1 and v2

   

 1   1 

v1    v2   

   ra        

rb

   r 

   

f

V V



to represent system as

x  f ( x)  g ( x)  u









2005 ASME IMECE 29 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

More general form of FBL

h h

y

 f ( x)  g ( x)u

x  x 



    

SISO algorithm: L f h( x) Lg h ( x )



if L g h( x)   ,

x  f ( x)  g ( x)u



y  h( x )

u

1

L g h( x )



 L f h( x )  w 

if L g h( x)  0,

L f h L g h

 

y f ( x)  g ( x)u

x 

   x

 

L2f h ( x ) Lg L f h ( x )





if L g L f h( x)   ,



u

1

L g L f h( x )



 L2f h( x)  w 

2005 ASME IMECE

 30 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

driver saturation algorithm









2005 ASME IMECE 31 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

Front steering only approach

 Model Fyf as:

 Substitute into system equations:









2005 ASME IMECE 32 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

Tracking yaw rate

 Choose new input



cr = 200

c = 50









2005 ASME IMECE 33 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

Estimating Caf

1. Find af: Use GPS/INS to measure r and f and estimate 



2. Find Fyf: Estimate tm from steering geometry, model tp as



and use disturbance torque estimate from SBW system to

find Fyf



3. Estimate :

 Using least squares









2005 ASME IMECE 34 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

Experimental Tire Curve

 P1: Ramp steer from 0 to 9° in 24 s at V = 31 mph









shad_2004-12-11_l.mat









2005 ASME IMECE 35 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

questions?









2005 ASME IMECE 36 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

overview



 Motivation

 Background

 Controller design

 Feedback linearization

 Driver input saturation

 Validation on complex model

 Conclusions

2005 ASME IMECE 37 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

steer-by-wire

Removes mechanical linkage between steering wheel and road

wheels

 electronically actuate steering system separately from

driver’s commands

 decouple underlying dynamics from driver force feedback



Conventional steering Steer-by-wire









2005 ASME IMECE 38 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

Linear tire model









2005 ASME IMECE 39 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

Nonlinear tire model









2005 ASME IMECE 40 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

comparing vehicle responses

 Ramp steer to from 0 to 4o at 45 mph in 0.5 s









2005 ASME IMECE 41 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory

tire estimation algorithm



 Find af: GPS/INS measures , r, V



 Find Fyf: SBW motor give steering

torque 



 Estimate Ca f and  from (Fyf, af) data

 LS fit to line Compare fit errors to tell us

if in nonlinear region

 NLS fit to Dugoff

2005 ASME IMECE 42 Stanford University

Dynamic Design Laboratory



Related docs
Other docs by niusheng11
TEXAS ADVANCED COMPUTING CENTER Safe Travels
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
The Trek
Views: 3  |  Downloads: 0
article-240637
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
work presentation 2A
Views: 2  |  Downloads: 0
snort_configure.docx - NEOHAPSIS
Views: 1  |  Downloads: 0
Southern Maine Dressage Association
Views: 1  |  Downloads: 0
Checklists for buying a used car
Views: 17  |  Downloads: 0
mis is riin The Office of Business Services
Views: 4  |  Downloads: 0
Assisted Living_6_
Views: 2  |  Downloads: 0
By registering with docstoc.com you agree to our
privacy policy

You are almost ready to download!

You are almost ready to download!