View
221
Download
4
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
IDENTIFICATION OF VEHICLE ROLLOVER CONDITIONS AND
ACTIVE ROLL CONTROL STRATEGIES
AMRIK SINGH A/L PHUMAN SINGH
UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA
IDENTIFICATION OF VEHICLE ROLLOVER CONDITIONS AND ACTIVE
ROLL CONTROL STRATEGIES
AMRIK SINGH A/L PHUMAN SINGH
A project report submitted in partial fulfilment of the
requirements for the award of the degree of
Master of Engineering (Mechanical Engineering)
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
JANUARY 2012
iii
To my beloved mum and family
Thank you for all kindness and sacrifices you made for me.
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First and foremost, I would like to express my deep gratitude to my project
supervisor Associate Professor Dr. Intan Zaurah Mat Darus for her guidance,
advices, and valuable comments. It has been an honor and a privilege to have the
opportunity carry out research work under her guidance. I also want to thank Dr.
Shirish Padmakar Patil for sharing his knowledge and providing guidance in vehicle
dynamics.
This study was fully supported by Ministry of Higher Education (MoHE)
under Skim Latihan Akademik IPTA (SLAI) and Universiti Teknikal Malaysia
Melaka (UTeM). Indeed, this research project gave me a valuable experience and an
excellent insight into vehicle dynamics and control field.
Special appreciation goes to my mum for her continuous support and
encouragement. Without her I cannot be where I am today. I am also grateful to my
fellow postgraduate friends for their contributing ideas and assistance.
v
ABSTRACT
This research presents the development of active roll control strategies to
prevent vehicle rollover. The dynamic model representing the vehicle behaviour was
first developed and then modelled in Matlab/SIMULINK environment. The tire
model integrated to the vehicle model was represented using look up table method.
The validity of the vehicle model was verified using CarSim software for double lane
change and fishhook manoeuvres. The validation results show strong agreement
between the vehicle model and CarSim software. Parametric study was done to
investigate the effect of the driver inputs and vehicle parameters on the roll behavior
of the vehicle. The effect of the variation of these properties on the vehicle roll angle
and load transfer ratio was discussed. Two fuzzy logic based active roll control
schemes were developed using active suspension and active front steering. For active
roll control using active suspension, the effectiveness of feedforward fuzzy and
combination of feedback and feedforward fuzzy in reducing the rollover propensity
were evaluated. For active front steering, feedback fuzzy control was incorporated
with the vehicle model to assess the performance of the active front steering in
reducing vehicle rollover propensity for fishhook and step steer manoeuvres. Both of
the proposed control strategies had shown significant enhancement in avoiding
vehicle rollover and hence improving the safety of vehicle occupants.
vi
ABSTRAK
Kajian ini membentangkan pembangunan strategi kawalan gulingan aktif untuk
mengelakkan golekan kenderaan. Pada permulaan kajian, model dinamik yang
mewakili kelakuan kenderaan dibangunkan dan kemudian dimodelkan dalam
pperisian Matlab/ SIMULINK. Model tayar digabungkan dengan model kenderaan
diwakili dengan menggunakan kaedah jadual carian. Model kenderaan disahkan
dengan menggunakan perisian CarSim untuk gerakan perubahan lorong dua kali dan
gerakan mata kail. Keputusan pengesahan menunjukkan persetujuan yang kuat antara
model kenderaan dan perisian CarSim. Kajian parametrik dilakukan untuk mengkaji
kesan input pemandu dan parameter kenderaan ke atas kelakuan gulingan kenderaan.
Dua skim kawalan gulingan aktif berasaskan logik kabur telah dibangunkan dengan
menggunakan sistem gantungan aktif dan sistem kemudi depan yang aktif. Untuk
kawalan guling yang aktif menggunakan sistem gantungan aktif, keberkesanan logik
kabur suapan ke hadapan dan gabungan logik kabur maklum balas dan logik kabur
suapan ke hadapan dalam mengurangkan kecenderungan golekan dinilai. Untuk
sistem kemudi depan yang aktif, kawalan logik kabur maklum balas telah
diperbadankan dengan model kenderaan untuk menilai prestasi sistem kemudi depan
yang aktif dalam mencegah golekan kenderaan. Kedua-dua strategi kawalan yang
dicadangkan telah menunjukkan peningkatan yang ketara dalam mengelakkan
golekkan kenderaan dan dengan itu meningkatkan keselamatan pengguna kenderaan.
vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER TITLE PAGE
DECLARATION ii
DEDICATION iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iv
ABSTRACT v
ABSTRAK vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS vii
LIST OF TABLES x
LIST OF FIGURES xi
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS xvi
LIST OF SYMBOLS xvii
1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Background 1
1.2 Problem Statement 2
1.3 Objectives of the Research 3
1.4 Scope of the Research 3
1.5 Research Methodology 4
1.6 Organization of the Thesis 6
2 LITERATURE REVIEW 8
2.1 Vehicle Rollover 8
2.2 Rollover Resistance Rating 8
2.3 Vehicle Rollover Avoidance System 9
2.3.1 Passive Vehicle Rollover Avoidance System 9
2.3.2 Active Vehicle Rollover Avoidance System 10
viii
2.3.2.1 Active Suspension 10
2.3.2.2 Active Front Steering 11
2.3.2.3 Active Brake 13
2.4 Vehicle Rollover Detection and Performance Criteria 14
2.5 Vehicle Handling and Rollover Test 15
2.6 Control System for Active Roll Control 17
2.7 Fuzzy Logic Control 17
3 METHODOLOGY 20
3.1 Vehicle Modelling 20
3.1.1 Full Vehicle Model 20
3.1.2 Vehicle Modelling Assumptions 21
3.1.3 Development of Mathematical Modelling 22
3.1.4 Tire Model 29
3.1.5 Vehicle Model Subsystem Interactions 29
3.2 Validation of Vehicle Model 30
3.2.1 Validation for Double Lane Change at 80 km/h
and Fishhook at 50 km/h
32
3.3 Test to Evaluate Vehicle Rollover Propensity 33
3.3.1 Fishhook Manoeuvre 33
3.4 Development of Active Roll Control System 35
3.4.1 Basic of Fuzzy Logic Control 35
3.4.2 Active Roll Avoidance System based on Fuzzy
Logic Control via Active Suspension
39
3.4.2.1 Feedforward Fuzzy Control 40
3.4.2.2 Relationship between Roll Motion and
Road Steering Wheel Angle and Vehicle
Longitudinal Velocity
40
3.4.2.3 Active Suspension 41
3.4.2.4 Feedforward Fuzzy Logic Control 42
3.4.2.5 Feedback Fuzzy Logic Control 45
3.5 Active Roll Avoidance System based on Fuzzy Logic
Control via Active Front Steering
48
3.5.1 Load Transfer Ratio 50
3.5.2 Reference Vehicle Model 51
ix
4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 52
4.1 Validation for Double Lane Change Test at 80 km/h 51
4.2 Validation for Fishhook Test at 50 km/h 55
4.3 Parametric Studies 58
4.4 Performance Evaluation of Active Roll Control using
Active Suspension
63
4.5 Performance Evaluation of Active Roll Control using
Active Front Steering
71
4.5.1 Active Roll Control Performance for Fishhook
Test at 72.4 km/h
71
4.5.2 Active Roll Control Performance for 140 Deg
Step Steer Test at 60 km/h
77
5 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 82
5.1 Conclusion 82
5.2 Recommendations 83
REFERENCES 84
x
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE NO. TITLE PAGE
2.1 Vehicle handling test 15
3.1 SUV parameters 31
3.2 Rule table for fuzzy logic control 37
3.3 Rule table for feedforward fuzzy control 44
3.4 Rule table for feedback fuzzy control 47
3.5 Rule table for feedback fuzzy control 50
4.1 Root mean square for fishhook test at 64.4 km/h 66
4.2 Root mean square for 140 deg step steer test at 60 km/h 68
4.3 Root mean square for double lane change manoeuvre at
80 km/h
71
xi
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE NO. TITLE PAGE
1.1 Rollover resistance rating 2
1.2 Research procedure flowchart 5
1.3 Project gantt chart 6
2.1 Static stability factor 9
2.2 Active front steering (Klier et al., 2004) 11
2.3 Active differential braking (Chen and Peng, 2001) 13
2.4 NHTSA fishhook test (Weimert) 16
2.5 Modified ISO 3888-2 course layout (Forkenbrock et al.,
2005)
17
2.6 Feedback fuzzy logic control strategy (March and Shim,
2006)
18
2.7 Feedforward fuzzy logic control strategy (Khajavi et al.,
2009)
19
2.8 Fuzzy tune PID control strategy (Xinpeng and
Xiaocheng, 2007)
19
3.1 Full vehicle model 21
3.2 Schematic diagram for quarter car model for front left
side
22
3.3 3 DOF vehicle handling model 24
3.4 Schematic diagram for forces acting on the front left
wheel
27
3.5 Tire lateral force depending on tire normal load and slip
angle
29
xii
3.6 Interaction between vehicle subsystems 30
3.7 CarSim software graphical user interface 31
3.8 Screen shot of the animation for double lane change
manoeuvre
32
3.9 NHTSA fishhook manoeuvre description (Boyd, 2004) 34
3.10 Hand wheel steer angle versus lateral acceleration 34
3.11 NHTSA fishhook hand wheel steering input 35
3.12 Basic control structure of fuzzy logic 35
3.13 Membership functions 37
3.14 Fuzzy control rules using Matlab environment 37
3.15 Fuzzy control design process 39
3.16 Feedforward roll control strategy 40
3.17 Active suspension 42
3.18 Road steering wheel angle membership functions for
feedforward fuzzy control
43
3.19 Vehicle longitudinal velocity membership functions for
feedforward fuzzy control
43
3.20 Normalised counter roll moment membership functions
for feedforward fuzzy control
44
3.21 Combination of feedback and feedforward roll control
strategy
45
3.22 Roll angle error membership functions for feedback
fuzzy control
46
3.23 Roll angle error rate membership functions for feedback
fuzzy control
46
3.24 Normalised counter roll moment membership functions
for feedback fuzzy control
47
3.25 Active front steering roll control strategy 48
3.26 Roll angle error membership functions 49
3.27 Roll angle error rate membership functions 49
3.28 Normalised road wheel steer angle membership
functions
49
xiii
3.29 Vehicle reference model 51
4.1 Road wheel steering angle for double lane change at 80
km/h
52
4.2 Yaw rate response for double lane change at 80 km/h 53
4.3 Lateral acceleration response for double lane change at
80 km/h
54
4.4 Roll angle response for double lane change at 80 km/h 54
4.5 Roll rate response for double lane change at 80 km/h 54
4.6 Y versus X trajectory for double lane change at 80 km/h 55
4.7 Road wheel steering angle for fishhook test at 50 km/h 56
4.8 Yaw rate response for fishhook test at 50 km/h 56
4.9 Lateral acceleration response for fishhook test at 50
km/h
57
4.10 Roll angle response for fishhook test at 50 km/h 57
4.11 Y versus X trajectory for fishhook test at 50 km/h 58
4.12 Roll angle response for fishhook test at different
longitudinal velocities
59
4.13 Load transfer ratio for fishhook test at different
longitudinal velocities
59
4.14 Roll angle response for fishhook test at different vehicle
center of gravity height
60
4.15 Load transfer ratio for fishhook test at different vehicle
center of gravity height
60
4.16 Roll angle response for fishhook test at different driver
steering input
61
4.17 Load transfer ratio for fishhook test at different driver
steering input
61
4.18 Roll angle response for fishhook test at different track
width
62
4.19 Load transfer ratio for fishhook test at different track
width
62
4.20 Roll angle response for fishhook test at different spring
stiffness
63
4.21 Load transfer ratio for fishhook test at different spring
stiffness
63
xiv
4.22 Roll angle response for fishhook test at 64.4 km/h 64
4.23 Roll rate response for fishhook test at 64.4 km/h 64
4.24 Vehicle body vertical acceleration response for
fishhook test at 64.4 km/h
65
4.25 Vehicle body vertical acceleration response for
fishhook test at 64.4 km/h
65
4.26 Roll angle response for 140 deg step steer test at 60
km/h
66
4.27 Roll rate response for 140 deg step steer test at 60 km/h 67
4.28 Vehicle body vertical acceleration response for 140 deg
step steer test at 60 km/h
67
4.29 Vehicle body vertical displacement response for 140
deg step steer test at 60 km/h
68
4.30 Roll angle response for double lane change manoeuvre
at 80 km/h
69
4.31 Roll rate response for double lane change manoeuvre at
80 km/h
69
4.32 Vehicle body vertical acceleration response for double
lane change manoeuvre at 80 km/h
70
4.33 Vehicle body vertical displacement response for double
lane change manoeuvre at 80 km/h
70
4.34 Road wheel steer angle for fishhook test at 72.4 km/h 72
4.35 Roll angle response for fishhook test at 72.4 km/h 72
4.36 Load transfer ratio for fishhook test at 72.4 km/h 72
4.37 Front left tire normal load for fishhook test 72.4 km/h 73
4.38 Front right tire normal load for fishhook test at 72.4
km/h
73
4.39 Rear left tire normal load for fishhook test at 72.4 km/h 74
4.40 Rear right tire normal load for fishhook test at 72.4
km/h
74
4.41 Lateral velocity response for fishhook test at 72.4 km/h 75
4.42 Yaw rate response for fishhook test at 72.4 km/h 75
4.43 Sideslip angle response for fishhook test at 72.4 km/h 76
4.44 Vehicle trajectory response for fishhook test at 72.4
km/h
76
xv
4.45 Road wheel steer angle for 140 deg step steer test at 60
km/h
77
4.46 Roll angle response for 140 deg step steer test at 60
km/h
77
4.47 Load transfer ratio for 140 deg step steer test at 60 km/h 78
4.48 Front left tire normal load for 140 deg step steer test at
60 km/h
78
4.49 Front right tire normal load for 140 deg step steer test at
60 km/h
79
4.50 Lateral velocity response for 140 deg step steer test at
60 km/h
79
4.51 Yaw rate response for 140 deg step steer test at 60 km/h 80
4.52 Sideslip angle response for 140 deg step steer test at 60
km/h
80
4.53 Vehicle trajectory response for 140 deg step steer test at
60 km/h
81
xvi
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
ARC - Active Roll Control
AFS - Active Front Steering
DOF - Degree of Freedom
ISO - International Organization for Standardization
NCAP - New Car Assessment Program
NHTSA - National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
PD - Proportional Derivative
PI - Proportional Integral
PID - Proportional Integral Derivative
SSF - Static Stability Factor
SUV - Sport Utility Vehicle
xvii
LIST OF SYMBOLS
a - Distance of sprung mass C.G. from front axle
ay - Lateral acceleration at C.G
Csfl - Front left suspension damping coefficient
Csfr - Front right suspension damping coefficient
Csrl - Rear left suspension damping coefficient
Csrr - Rear right suspension damping coefficient
Fafl - Front left actuator force
Fafr - Front right actuator force
Farl - Rear left actuator force
Farr - Rear right actuator force
Fsfl - Front left suspension force
Fsfr - Front right suspension force
Fsrl - Rear left suspension force
Fsrr - Rear right suspension force
Ftfl - Front left tire force
Ftfr - Front right tire force
Ftrl - Rear left tire force
Ftrr - Rear right tire force
Fxfl - Front left tire longitudinal force
Fxfr - Front right tire longitudinal force
xviii
Fxrl - Rear left tire longitudinal force
Fxrr - Rear right tire longitudinal force
Fyfl - Front left tire lateral force
Fyfr - Front right tire lateral force
Fyrl - Rear left tire lateral force
Fyrr - Rear right tire lateral force
Fzfl - Front left tire normal force
Fzfr - Front right tire normal force
Fzrl - Rear left tire normal force
Fzrr - Rear right tire normal force
g - Acceleration due to gravity
h - Height of vehicle C.G. from ground
Iw - Tire moment of inertia
Ix - Roll moment of inertia
Iy - Pitch moment of inertia
Iz - Yaw moment of inertia
Ksfl - Front left suspension stiffness
Ksfr - Front right suspension stiffness
Ksrl - Rear left suspension stiffness
Ksrr - Rear right suspension stiffness
Ktfl - Front left tire stiffness
Ktfr - Front right tire stiffness
Ktrl - Rear left tire stiffness
Ktrr - Rear right tire stiffness
m - Total mass of vehicle
ms - Sprung mass
xix
mufl - Front left unsprung mass
mufr - Front right unsprung mass
murl - Rear left unsprung mass
murr - Rear right unsprung mass
Mzfl - Front left tire aligning moment
Mzfr - Front right tire aligning moment
Mzrl - Rear left tire aligning moment
Mzrr - Rear right tire aligning moment
R - Tire radius
Sfl - Front left tire longitudinal slip
Sfr - Front right tire longitudinal slip
Srl - Rear left tire longitudinal slip
Srl - Rear right tire longitudinal slip
Tbfl - Front left wheel brake torque
Tbfr - Front right wheel brake torque
Tbrl - Rear left wheel brake torque
Tbrr - Rear right wheel brake torque
Tdfl - Front left wheel drive torque
Tdfr - Front right wheel drive torque
Tdrl - Rear left wheel drive torque
Tdrr - Rear right wheel drive torque
Vx - Vehicle longitudinal velocity at C.G
Vy - Vehicle lateral velocity at C.G
w - Track width
Zrfl - Front left road profile
Zrfr - Front right road profile
xx
Zrrl - Rear left road profile
Zrrr - Rear right road profile
Zs - Sprung mass vertical displacement at body C.G.
Zsfl - Front left sprung mass displacement
Zsfr - Front right sprung mass displacement
Zsrl - Rear left sprung mass displacement
Zsrr - Rear right sprung mass displacement
Zufl - Front left unsprung mass vertical displacement
Zufr - Front right unsprung mass vertical displacement
Zurl - Rear left unsprung mass vertical displacement
Zurr - Rear right unsprung mass vertical displacement
- Front left tire sideslip angle
- Front right tire sideslip angle
- Rear left tire sideslip angle
- Rear right tire sideslip angle
δ - Steering angle at road wheel
ωfl - Front left wheel angular velocity
ωfr - Front right wheel angular velocity
ωrl - Rear left wheel angular velocity
ωrr - Rear right wheel angular velocity
- Pitch angle at the body C.G.
- Roll angle at the body C.G.
- Yaw angle at body C.G.
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
Rollover is one of most life threatening crash incident compared to other type
of vehicle crashes. Vehicle roll motion occurs when there is normal load transfer
from the inner wheel to the outer wheel. The wheel normal load transfer is due to the
lateral force that comes from severe driving inputs especially in cornering with high
speed, from impact with other road vehicle, curbs, and from lamp post or sign
boards. Generally, vehicle rollover may be divided to two types, namely untripped
and tripped rollover. Tripped rollover takes place when the vehicle skid of the road
and make a contact with obstacles such as curb and guardrail or the wheel hitting a
port hole which yields a roll moment that may cause the vehicle to rollover. In
contrast, untripped rollover occurs on the road under severe driving condition such as
high speed obstacle avoidance test manoeuvre.
In the assessment of vehicle safety in terms of rollover resistance, the vehicle
type is the plays important role. In Figure 1.1, the rollover resistance rating for
different types of vehicles given that the vehicle is involved in single vehicle crash
by the NCAP are presented. It can be seen that vehicles with higher center of gravity
such as sport utility vehicles have lower rollover resistance rating and hence this type
of vehicles are more prone to rollover. Although, the vehicle type plays main
contribution in rollover, other factors such as the driver behaviour, road condition,
and environment should not be neglected.
2
Figure 1.1 Rollover resistance rating
In an effort to avoid vehicle rollover, passive rollover avoidance system was
introduced at first. Passive rollover avoidance system is the when the vehicle detects
the possibility of vehicle rollover and gives warning to the driver so that the driver
could take corrective action to prevent vehicle rollover. Some of the passive rollover
avoidance systems are early warning safety device (Rakheja and Piche, 1990),
dynamic rollover threshold (Dahlberg, 2000), and time to rollover metric (Chen and
Peng, 1999). The passive rollover avoidance system was still driver dependent. As an
improvement to this, active roll control system was introduced. Active roll control
system is where the vehicle detects the possibility to vehicle rollover and the vehicle
itself takes the corrective to avoid the impending vehicle rollover. Various types of
control system have been developed to enhance vehicle roll dynamics and prevent
rollover. Active suspension (Hudha et al., 2008; Sorniotti and D’Alfio, 2007), active
steering (Shim, T. et al., 2008; Ackerman et al., 1999), and active braking
(Wielenga, 1999; Solmaz et al., 2006) are among the control strategies that have
been investigated by the researchers to enhance the vehicle rollover resistance.
1.2 Problem Statement
It is important that the vehicle roll motion is reduced to avoid rollover risk
and hence increase the safety of the vehicle occupant. There is possibility that the
vehicle rollover can be recovered if the driver is skilful enough but it is more than
3
impossible for a normal driver to avoid rollover when the vehicle is driven at its
handling limits. For example, stunt drivers are enable to maintain the vehicle on two
wheels without allowing the vehicle to rollover but this is not possible for a normal
driver. For this reason, the active roll control system should be incorporated during
the development phase in automotive industry. In this thesis, two types of active roll
control system, namely active suspension control and active front wheel steering will
be implemented on a vehicle dynamics model to evaluate their capabilities to prevent
vehicle rollover.
1.3 Objectives of the Research
This research focuses on the development of the vehicle roll control
strategies. The two objectives of this thesis are as follows:
To develop vehicle model and identify the conditions that cause the vehicle
to rollover.
To develop active roll control strategies based on active suspension and
active front steering using fuzzy control scheme.
1.4 Scope of the Research
The scope of this thesis is as follow:
Development of the vehicle model in Matlab/SIMULINK to represent the
rollover behavior of the vehicle.
4
Validation of vehicle model with CarSim software for double lane change
and fishhook maneuvers.
Identify the causes that lead to vehicle rollover, e.g., the driver steering wheel
angle, vehicle speed, vehicle and suspension properties.
Development of active roll control strategies:
o Active roll control system based on active suspension using
feedforward fuzzy control, and combination of feedback and
feedforward fuzzy control schemes.
o Active roll control system based on active front steering using
feedback fuzzy control scheme.
1.5 Research Methodology
The research methodology considered in this thesis is described in Figure 1.2.
First, the literature study of previous works is done on vehicle rollover, vehicle
modeling, active roll control strategies and fuzzy logic control schemes. A vehicle
model that is capable in accurately predicting the vehicle roll behavior is developed
in Matlab/SIMULINK. The vehicle model is then validated CarSim software for
double lane change and fishhook maneuvers. The vehicle responses in terms of the
vehicle roll angle, roll rate, lateral acceleration, yaw rate and vehicle trajectory for
both simulation of the vehicle model and CarSim software were compared to present
the validity of the vehicle model used in this thesis. Parametric studies are done using
the validated vehicle model to indentify the conditions that may lead to vehicle
rollover. The parameters that investigated are stiffness of the suspension spring,
height of vehicle center of gravity, track width, vehicle longitudinal speed, and driver
steering wheel angle input. Two active roll control strategies were developed based
on active suspension system and active front wheel steering using fuzzy logic control
scheme. The proposed control strategies are implemented on the vehicle model and
5
simulation test were done. The performance evaluation was carried out for both
proposed control strategies.
Figure 1.2 Research procedure flowchart
The Gantt chart for Master Project 1 and Master Project 2 are presented in
Figure 1.3.
Yes
Start
Development of Vehicle Handling Model
Vehicle Model Verification with CarSim
Verified?
Parametric Study for Vehicle Rollover Condition Identification
Development of Active Roll Control System
Active Roll Control System Performance Evaluation
End
Literature Review
No
6
Figure 1.3 Project gantt chart
1.6 Organization of the Thesis
This thesis consists of five chapters. A brief outline of contents of the thesis is
as follows:
Chapter 1 presents the introduction to research which includes the background,
problem statement, objectives, scope, and brief research methodology. The research
procedure flowchart and gantt chart are also included in this chapter.
Chapter 2 focuses on literature study on vehicle rollover. Firstly, previous work and
passive and active rollover avoidance systems were discussed. This was followed by
the discussion on the vehicle rollover detection methods and performance criteria.
7
The vehicle handling tests were also addressed in this chapter. Literature study on the
type of control scheme implemented in active roll control strategies was included.
Chapter 3 is devoted to comprehensive vehicle modelling and proposed control
strategy description. Firstly, the assumptions made in developing the vehicle model
are stated. This is followed by mathematical modelling of the full vehicle including
non linear tire models. The vehicle dynamics tests used to evaluate vehicle rollover
propensity are described in this chapter. Last but not least, the proposed rollover
control strategies using active suspension and active front steering were described.
Chapter 4 focuses on the evaluation of the active roll control strategies using active
suspension and active front steering. Firstly, the validation of the vehicle model with
CarSim software for double lane change and fishhook tests. Then, the performance
evaluation was done on the for active roll control using active suspension and active
steering.
Chapter 5 provides summary of the research works which includes conclusion and
suggestions for future research works.
REFERENCES
Ackermann, J., and Odenthal, D. (1998). Robust Steering Control for Active
Rollover Avoidance of Vehicles with Elevated Center of Gravity. Proceedings
of International Conference on Advances in Vehicle Control and Safety. Amiens.
Ackermann, J., Odenthal, D., and Bunte, T. (1999). Advantages of Active Steering
for Vehicle Dynamics Control. 32nd International Symposium on Automotive
Technology and Automation, (pp. 263-270). Vienna.
Bedner, E., Fulk, D., and Hac, A. (2007). Exploring the Trade-Off of Handling
Stability and Responsiveness with Advanced Control Systems. SAE Paper No.
2007-01-0812.
Boyd, P. L. (2004). NHTSA’s NCAP Rollover Resistance Rating System. National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
Carlson, C. R., and Gerdes, J. C. (2003). Optimal Rollover Prevention with Steer by
Wire and Differential Braking. Proceedings of ASME International Mechanical
Engineering Congress and Exposition, (pp. 346-354). Washington, D.C. USA.
Chen, B. and Peng, H. (1999). Rollover Warning for Articulated Vehicles Based on a
Time-to-rollover Metric. Proceedings of ASME International Mechanical
Engineering Congress and Exposition. Nashville, TN.
Chen, B. and Peng, H. (2001). Differential-Braking-Based Rollover Prevention for
Sport Utility Vehicles with Human-in-the-loop Evaluations. Vehicle System
Dynamics. 36(4), 359-389.
Dahlberg, E. (2000). A Method Determining the Dynamic Rollover Threshold of
Commercial Vehicles. SAE Paper No. 2000-01-3492.
85
Forkenbrock, G. J., Elsasser, D., and O’Harra, B. (2005). NHTSA’s Light Vehicle
Handling and ESC Effectiveness Research Program. Paper Number 05-0221.
Gaspar P., Szaszi, I., and Bokor, J. (2003). Rollover Avoidance for Steer-by-Wire
Vehicles by Using Linear Parameter Varying Methods. Mediterranean
Conference on Control and Automation. Rhodes, Greece.
Gillespie, T. D. (1993). Fundamental of Vehicle Dynamics. Warrendale, PA: SAE.
Hudha, K., Kadir, Z., Said, M. R., and Jamaluddin, H. (2008). Modeling, Validation,
and Roll Moment Rejection Control of Pneumatically Actuated Active Roll
Control for Improving Vehicle Lateral Dynamics Performance. Int. J.
Engineering System Modelling and Simulation. 1(2), 122-136.
Kamal, M. and Shim, T. (2007). Development of Active Suspension Control for
Combined Handling and Rollover Propensity Enhancement. SAE Paper No.
2007-01-0826.
Khajavi, M. N., Hemmati, V., and Shouredeli, S. (2009). A Novel Approach to
Enhance Roll Stability of SUVs by a Fuzzy Logic Controller. World Academy of
Science, Engineering and Technology 49.
Klier, W., Reimann, G., and Reinelt, W. (2004). Concept and Functionality of the
Active Front Steering System. SAE Paper 2004-21-0073.
Lee, A., Marriott, A., and Le, N. (1997). Variable Dynamic Testbed Vehicle:
Dynamics Analyses. SAE Paper 970560.
Mammar, S. and Koening, D. (2002). Vehicle Handling Improvement by Active
Steering. Vehicle System Dynamics. 38(3), 211-242.
March, C., & Shim, T. (2007). Integrated Control of Suspension and Front Steering
to Enhance Vehicle Handling. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical
Engineers, Part D: Journal of Automobile Engineering. 221(4), 377-391.
Pacejka, H. (2002). Tire and Vehicle Dynamics. (1st ed.). Warrandale, PA: Society of
Automotive Engineering Inc.
Patrick, L. B. NHTSA’s NCAP Rollover Resistance Rating System.
86
Rajamani, R. (2005). Vehicle Dynamics and Control. New York: Springer.
Rakheja, S. and Pichè, A. (1990). Development of Directional Stability Criteria for
an Early Warning Safety Device. SAE Paper No.902265.
Reznik, L. (1997). Fuzzy Controllers. (1st ed.). Oxford, UK: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Shim, T., Toomey, D., Ghike, C., and Sardar, H. M. (2008). Vehicle Rollover
Recovery using Active Steering/Wheel Torque Control. Int. J. Vehicle Design.
46(1), 51-71.
Solmaz, S., Corless, M., and Shorten, R. (2006). A Methodology for the Design of
Robust Rollover Prevention Controllers for Automotive Vehicles: Part 1-
Differential Braking. Proceedings of the Conference on Decision and Control.
San Diego.
Solmaz, S., Corless, M., and Shorten, R. (2007). A Methodology for the Design of
Robust Rollover Prevention Controllers for Automotive Vehicles: Part 2-Active
Steering. American Control Conference. New York, USA.
Sorniotti, A. and D’Alfio, N. (2007). Vehicle Dynamics Simulation to Develop an
Active Roll Control System. SAE Paper No. 2007-01-0828.
Sveneson, A. L. and Hac, A. Influence of Chassis Control Systems on Vehicle
Handling and Rollover Stability.
Wielenga, T. J. (1999). Method for Reducing On-Road Rollovers: Anti-Rollover
Braking. SAE paper No. 1999-01-0123.
Xinpeng, T. and Xiaocheng, D. (2007). Simulation and Study of SUV Active Roll
Control Based on Fuzzy PID. SAE paper No. 2007-01-3570.
Weimert, C. Fishhook Test. Corrsys Daytron.
Recommended