International Journal of Control

Vol. 79, No. 2, February 2006, 162169

Integrated vehicle control using steering and brakes

G. BURGIO* and P. ZEGELAAR
Ford Motor Company/Research & Advanced Engineering, Aachen, Germany
(Received 20 October 2005; in nal form 1 December 2005)
The integration of brakes and steering actuators in vehicle lateral dynamics control
is of primary relevance due to the high control authority these actuators insure. Moreover
this is a challenging control problem as it is MIMO, intrinsically non-linear due to tyres
characteristic and with high plant uncertainty due to variations of major parameters.
This paper presents the application of state feedback linearization technique to the problem
and shows some vehicle test results. The controller results globally stable, smooth and eective
with the steering actuator and uses the braking correction only in critical cases.

1. Introduction
The vehicle motion control problem has been broadly
addressed in the literature and established solutions
are already in the market.
In the brakes stand-alone case, the most common
control approach is linear Proportional and
Proportional Derivative controller (P/PD) like with
gain-scheduling, which guarantees simplicity of design,
aordable in vehicle tuning and robustness, but the
extension of these controllers for the integrated case is
dicult due to their local validity in the neighbourhood
of instability points (van Zanten et al. 1995, 1998). Brake
stand-alone vehicle controllers are at the moment the
most robust solution for improving vehicle stability.
The status for steering stand-alone vehicle controllers
is less consolidated.
Market available vehicle steering controls are feed
forward like variable gear ratio (where the steering
ratio is changed to higher values for higher vehicle
speed) and
-split braking (compensate with the steering
the yawing coming from the dierent leftright braking
force) are examples, but the car manufacturers are
clearly interested in steering feedback controllers to
improve handling and stability (Koehn and Eckrich
1998). Plenty of solutions are instead proposed in the
literature, like yaw control with yaw rate-lateral
velocity decoupling (Marino and Conili 2004), or with

*Corresponding author. Email: gburgio1@ford.com

***

2005 style

[21.12.20051:58pm]

[Invalid folder]

[162169]

[Page No. 162]

yaw rate-lateral acceleration decoupling (Ackermann

1990, 1996), or PD based approaches (Kojo et al. 2005).
Vehicle control with steering actuator needs a globally
valid controller, as it can be continuously active and in
case of heavy over/understeering manoeuvres, the steering actuator should correct with heavy countersteering
angles (Koehn and Eckrich 1998).
Regarding integrated control solutions for steering
and brakes (traction), some architecture concepts have
been studied, like Intelligent Vehicle Dynamics
Control (IVDC) (Busch et al. 2003, Weber and Busch
2003) or Intelligent Vehicle Motion Control (IVMC)
(Crolla et al. 2002) and some heuristic control solution
have been proposed for the steer-brakes integration
(He et al. 2004), but the result was more the sum of
the stand-alone controllers then a concept integrated
control.
The next generation of vehicle controls will focus on
the integration of the stand-alones and the challenge
for control systems designers is to propose compact
new solutions for the MIMO control problems resulting
from the integration of two or more stand-alone controllers. The resulting integrated controller will be
more complex than the sum of stand alones, but will
guarantee increased performance and robustness.
In this paper the feedback linearization technique is
proposed for the design of the base integrated vehicle
controller, with steering (AFS, SBW) and brakes (or
equivalently traction) actuators. The solution is then
shaped in order to satisfy general system requirements
and actuator characteristics, resulting then in a steering
controller continuously active, on conditions supported

F:/T&F UK/Tcon/TCON_I_79_02/TCON_A_148880.3d

(TCON)

TCON_A_148880

163

Integrated vehicle control

by the brakes controller (i.e. in heavy understeer
situations or when too high oversteering brings the
vehicle close to instability).
The input signals to the controller are standard,
except for the lateral velocity and road friction, which
need to be estimated. The description of the state
estimator utilized in the project will be addressed in a
separate publication.

kij
Fzij
D
C
MB

2. Vehicle and actuators modelling

The vehicle motion can be in general described as a rigid
body moving in the free space, therefore with 6 dof,
connected with the ground surface through tyres and
complaints, which give to the complete model high
non-linear behaviour and high coupling eects.
The actuators for this application are

and where the
-normalized tyres lateral forces Fyf, Fyr

are functions of tyres slip angles (f, r), tyre vertical
forces and longitudinal slips, dened as sum of the
leftright components, according to




8

Fyf x, D C , Fzf: , kf: Fyf f , Fzf: , kf:
>
>
>
>


>
>
>
vy l f v
>
>
, Fzfl , kfl
Fyfl D C

>
>
vx
>
>
>
>


>
>
>
vy l f v
>
>
Fyfr D C

, Fzfr , kfr
>
<
vx

active front steer (AFS) or steer by wire (SBW): these

actuators can force an incremental steer angle on top
of the drivers input, independently from this. The
control force is then actuated through the front axle
tyres characteristic,
. active brakes, where negative longitudinal forces can
be commanded in each of the four wheels (without
the sign assumption on the longitudinal forces,
traction control can be considered, too).
.

>
>
Fyr x, Fzr: , kr: Fyr r , Fzr: , kr:
>
>
>
>


>
>
vy
l f v
>
>
>


,
F
,
k

F
yrl
zrl rl
>
>
vx
>
>
>
>


>
>
vy
lf v
>
>
:
Fyrr

, Fzrr , krr :
vx

The plant complexity can be mitigated considering that

for vehicle handling/stability purposes the most
relevant dynamics are yaw rate (v ) and lateral
velocity (vy), therefore only 2 dof are considered,
. the brakes actuators are always used to create left
right braking forces dierences, therefore the dierential braking actuation results in an equivalent yaw
moment on the vehicle MB, around its z-axis, with
minor direct eect on the lateral velocity dynamics
(Nagai et al. 2002).
.

Therefore, the plant model is the following:

)

mv_y vx v
Fyf x,D C ,Fzf: ,kf: Fyr x, Fzr: ,kr:





Jv_
Fyf x,D C ,Fzf: ,kf: lf
Fyr x,Fz: ,kr: lr MB

3. Controller structure
Rewriting the plant equations in state space form, the
control problem can be stated as
CP: given the plant
v_y
vx v
v_

m
J
l f, l r
vx
vy
v
x [vy, v ]0

***

2005 style

vehicle mass (kg)

vehicle inertia momentum (kg m2)
front and rear vehicle length (m)
vehicle longitudinal velocity (m/s)
vehicle lateral velocity (m/s)
vehicle yaw velocity (rad/s)
compact vehicle state vector

[21.12.20051:58pm]

[Invalid folder]

[162169]

[Page No. 163]

Despite the only lateral force tyre model is considered,

the tyre x
y interaction is taken into account with
the parameterization of Fy, function of longitudinal slip.

1
where

maximum tyre-road friction coecient

tyres longitudinal slip (front left, front
right, rear left, rear right)
tyres vertical forces (front left, front
right, rear left, rear right) (N)
driver road wheel angle component
(rad)
controller road wheel angle component
(rad)
direct yaw moment, resulting from controllers active braking (Nm)

9





Fyf x,D C , Fzf: ,kf: Fyr x,Fzr: ,kr: >
>
=
m


 MB >




>
;
Fyf x,D ,C ,Fzf: , kf: lf
Fyr x, Fzr: ,kr: lr
J
J
3

and given a yaw rate target (v d), nd the control law

u(x) [c(x, v R), MB(x, v R)] to insure
1. global stability
2. yaw rate tracking: |v
3. comfort driving

d
v

| < tolerance

F:/T&F UK/Tcon/TCON_I_79_02/TCON_A_148880.3d

(TCON)

TCON_A_148880

164

G. Burgio and P. Zegelaar

The last requirement implies that the state variables

must satisfy smoothness conditions therefore the
braking actuators should be seldom activated as every
dierential wheel braking action (MB) has negative
eect on comfort.
Therefore the following assumptions are made:
A1.
A2.

4. Single output control only steering

Given the control problem CP with MB 0, the goal is
to nd the SISO controller u(x) [c(x)].
Since the plant is non-linear, state dimension two,
relative degree one and the control (u) is dimension
one, the situation is convenient for the application of
state feedback linearization method, without the
known drawback of obtaining too complex solutions.
The main diculty in the plant expression (3) is that
the steering control input (C) appears in a non-ane
form in the non-linear tyre model.
Instead of linearising Fyf(  ,c), that is the usual solution in known methodologies, this embodiment fully
treats the non-linear nature, with two design steps

as preferred solution the control uses only the

steering actuator;
in particular instances, when the steering actuator
is no more enough to control/stabilise the
vehicle according to the desired target, both steering and brakes actuators need to be managed in
parallel.

The design choice is to rst focus on the solution of the

steer only SISO problem, because it will give anyway the
control conguration more often active, therefore most
relevant. A good design of SISO will then lead to the
minimization of the time instances where the multiple
actuator solution is needed.
The controller structure is shown in gure 1, according to commonly used vehicle control architecture. In
particular, the functions involved are

1. consider Fyf ( ) to be a direct actuation,

2. compute the steering actuation C inverting the function Fyf ( ) for all the points with positive tyre gradient
and saturating the inverse function when the tyre
saturates.
Statement (Feedback linearization application):
hyp.1: invertibility condition


vy l f v
Fyf C D

, Fzf: , kf:
vx

DE, driver evaluator, to shape the yaw rate target

(v d),
. VSO, vehicle state observer, to estimate non-measured
signals, which in this case are
. lateral velocity (vy),
. tyres vertical forces (Fzij),
. friction coecient (
),
. VC, vehicle feedback controller, over which is the
focus of the paper.
.

If

is D invertible for every feasible value of yaw rate, lateral velocity, longitudinal velocity, vertical forces (left
and right) and longitudinal slips (left and right);
hyp.2: zero dynamics stability
dened the new state variable

The measurements are yaw rate, lateral acceleration,

steering angle, inline with commercial vehicle control
solutions.

vyNS vy
lNS v ,

lNS

J
mlf

Driver

SWA

Limit targets
DE

Targets

VC

CT

Measurements
Vehicle

MzBrakes

VSO

Estimations

Plant
Controller

Figure 1.

***

2005 style

[21.12.20051:58pm]

[Invalid folder]

[162169]

Overall control scheme block diagram.

[Page No. 164]

F:/T&F UK/Tcon/TCON_I_79_02/TCON_A_148880.3d

(TCON)

TCON_A_148880

165

Integrated vehicle control

the solution vyNS(t) of the dierential equation

8
vyNS lNS
lr v
lf lr
>
>
_
m
v

F


>
yNS
yr
>
lf
vx
<
>
>
>
>
:

mvx v

a typical case


, Fzr: , kr:

vyNS 0 0
6

is bounded and uniformly asymptotically stable for

every feasible value of the target yaw rate, longitudinal
velocity, vertical forces (left and right) and longitudinal
slips (left and right);
then
state feedback linearization (SFL) steering control law
C
D

 

vy l f v
1
J
Fyf
1
lr Fyr r , : v
lf


vx
v v_

v

v

7
8

is applicable to the problem CP and guarantees stability

and reference tracking.
v d is the target yaw rate, smooth and bounded
function, and  > 0.
Proof: From Isidori (1989), SFL steering control law,
assuming Fyf be the steering control variable, is
Fyf

lr
1
Fyr
Jv

lf
lf

which, under Hip.1, gives equations (7) and (8) for the
steering control variable C and guarantees asymptotic
stability for the yaw rate tracking error.
Moreover, using the new dened state variable vyNS,
the lateral velocity equation in (3) is substituted by
mv_yNS

m 1961;
J 3700;
. lf 1.36;
. lr 1.54;
.
.

it results lNS 1.387, therefore PNS is very close to the

rear axle.
The controller functionally splits in two parts
one non-linear, containing all vehicle information,
which de facto transforms the original non-linear
plant P into the simpler 1st order linear one (7);
. one linear, which imposes the desired performance
with a PD like term (8).
.

Figure 3 shows the controlled vehicle model, which is

transformed by the above non-linear feedback in two
parts, one contributing to the I/O chain and the other,
the zero dynamics, not steer controllable and made
non-observable from the yaw rate by the controller (7).
Comments:
1. Hypothesis 1 in the above statement is not always
true, as the tyre characteristic saturates for high
values of tyre slip angle and the invertibility property
is locally lost.
In these cases (so-called understeering situations,
the vehicle cannot steer enough) the best the steering
controller can do is to saturate the inverse front
tyre characteristic, that is equivalent to keeping
the front tyre slip angle to its minimum value still
supplying the maximum available lateral force. The
yaw rate target tracking cannot be achieved, but the
vehicle behaviour is stable.

mvx v :

lNS

9
Figure 2.

Condition (6) and the asymptotic stability of the yaw

rate error insure that the above non-controlled dynamic
is stable, too.

The newly introduced constant lNS xes the neutral

steer point on the vehicle longitudinal axis whose lateral
velocity variation, according to equation (6), is independent from the front tyre lateral force (gure 2).
This point is on the back of the vehicle centre of mass,
at a distance of exactly lNS (equation (5)). Considering

***

2005 style

[21.12.20051:58pm]

COG

PNS



vyNS lNS
lr v
lf lr


Fyr

, Fzr: , kr:
lf
vx

[Invalid folder]

[162169]

[Page No. 165]

Neutral steer point denition.

v
vy dynamics

vyNS (zero)
dymamics

Figure 3.

vy

vyNS

Feedback linearization state space partitioning.

F:/T&F UK/Tcon/TCON_I_79_02/TCON_A_148880.3d

(TCON)

TCON_A_148880

166

G. Burgio and P. Zegelaar

2. Hypothesis 2 is valid if the rear tyres are not saturating, as Fyr is a monotonically increasing function of
vyNS, but if saturation occurs and
lFyr  <
lf mvx v , then the state vyNS integrally diverges.
This shows a physical limit of the system, independent from the adopted steering control. From the
vehicle dynamics point of view, it means that the
equilibrium of the state vyNS is obtained only when
the force generated by the rear tyres balances the centrifugal force. But the centrifugal force grows with
the yaw rate and the vehicle longitudinal speed, is
unbounded, while tyre force is limited by the tyre
characteristic; therefore if the yaw rate or the longitudinal speed are too high, the lateral velocity in the
point PNS will integral like diverge. This event
needs to be avoided either limiting the longitudinal
speed or limiting the target yaw rate, otherwise the
vehicle will spin.
3. The available friction coecient
is used in the feedback loop to divide the target yaw moment, therefore
resulting in higher feedback gain for low
values.
This is not in line with the fact that, in slippery
surfaces, the experienced driver gives smoother
steering corrections. Therefore the above division
is avoided, resulting then in a lower controller
bandwidth for low
.
Both hypotheses for applicability of SFL steering controller are related to the saturation of front or rear
tyre, in particular the saturation of the front tyre is
related to the performance of the yaw tracking (loss of
controllability) while the saturation of the rear tyre is
related to stability. These are properties well known to
vehicle dynamics experts.

5. Multiple output control steering and brakes

The active steering control law c(x) is chosen according to (7), (8) in all the cases the steering actuator can
provide good yaw rate tracking and vehicle stability,
i.e. when the front and rear tyres are not saturating.
This is in line with the previously stated steering
priority assumption.
. If the front tyres saturate and the yaw control system
is still asking for higher lateral forces, then the braking
.

2005 style

[21.12.20051:58pm]

[Invalid folder]

[162169]

A simple controller to stabilize vyNS in (9) is

IF (REAR TYRE SATURATES)



MB OV
lf mvx v
lf lr Fyr  KPvy  vyNS




lf mvx lNS KPvy v KPvy vy
lf lr Fyr 
10a
ELSE
MB

OV

ENDIF
where KPvy > 0 is a tuning parameter regulating a
proportional term on vyNS.
The previously proposed steering controller is then
modied to include the brake stability correction in
the following way:
v v_
FyfT

 v

[Page No. 166]

v

lr
1
Fyr r , Fzr: , kr:
Jv
MB

lf
lf

C
D

The multiple output control approach extends the proposed SISO design with the objective of obtaining a
full state control which properly integrates the brakes
action on the dened steering controller, still satisfying
the assumptions A1, A2.
A natural choice for the integrated controller is
that the additional brakes actuator action in
u(x) [c(x), MB(x)] is chosen to support the cases
when the applicability hypothesis 1, 2 are not valid.

***

actuator MB in (3) is used to deliver the residual yaw

moment not feasible for the steering (under-steer-like
brakes correction, typically braking on the rear inner
wheel).
. If the rear tyres are saturating and the rear axle cannot
balance the centrifugal force, then the braking
actuator in (3) is activated in a stabilising action on
the equation (9), independently from the yaw rate
tracking performance (over-steer brakes correction,
braking on the front outer wheel).

10b
OV

10c


vy l f v
Fyf
1 FyfT , Fzf: , kf:
vx

10d

where the idea is to subtract from the moment computed

to achieve the yaw rate tracking the yawing moment
necessary to stabilize the vehicle, to be delivered through
the braking actuator.
Finally, the brakes actuators can support the case
in which the controllability with the steering actuator
is lost
IF (FRONT TYRE SATURATES)






MB UN
lf sign FyfT  Fyf T 
FyfMAX Fzf: , kf:
10e
ELSE
MB

UN

ENDIF

F:/T&F UK/Tcon/TCON_I_79_02/TCON_A_148880.3d

(TCON)

TCON_A_148880

167

Integrated vehicle control

and this results in recovered vehicle controllability that
makes the vehicle more agile, in particular in slippery
surfaces where the front tyre saturation is easily reached.
The total brake correction will be then the sum of the
oversteer and understeer corrections
MB M B

UN

MB

10f

OV

The target front tyre force introduced in (10c) is

-normalized, like tyre forces in the entire article:
this makes the controller entirely dened parameterized
on
, and this makes easy the integration with a

estimator to enhance the performance on slippery
surfaces.
Despite the proposed controller requiring the knowledge of the friction coecient, the required accuracy is
not high, as
in the steering controller (7) the dependency on

aects the only linear part, in particular a lower

results in higher P controller gain. This division can
be avoided, resulting in lower controller bandwidth
for slippery surfaces,
. in the stability brakes controller (10a) one can
recognize a feedforward-like term
dependant,
where an underestimation can be used, plus a proportional term on the state vyNS to improve robustness of
the stability correction, which is
independent,
. the front tyre saturation brakes correction is proportional to
, but this correction (namely, understeering
correction) is less important then the others does not
aect stability and is an add on the FL solution to
enhance performance, therefore an underestimation
of
can be used.

The related full FL MIMO vehicle controller is:

u gx
1 v
f x
therefore


Fyf
MB

J
4
lf
0

2
31
30

lr
 
m
Fyr
B v1
6
7C
4
l J

5@
5A
v2


F

v
v

mlf
yr
x
mlf
12

which can be rewritten in the form

9
lr
1
Fyr
Jv1
MB =

lf
lf
;
MB
lFyr
mlf vx v
mlf v2
Fyf

13

The same controller can be found applying MIMO feedback linearization design method to the vehicle model
and slightly modifying the brakes control law, according
to assumption A2.
The vehicle model (3) is written in the form
x_ f x gxu
with
"

"
;

vyNS
2

Ffy

lr
Fyr
J

6
6
fx 6
4
l
Fyr
vx v
mlf

MB
3
7
7
7;
5

lf
6 J
6
gx 6
4
0

1
J

9
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
3=

>
7>
>
7>
>
7>
>
1 5>
>
>


;
mlf
11

***

2005 style

[21.12.20051:58pm]

[Invalid folder]

[162169]

[Page No. 167]

with the linear tracking terms

)
v1 v_ d 1 v d
v



v2 v_yNSd 2 vyNSd
vyNS

14

The controller (13), (14) guarantees tracking of the

target [v d, vyNSd] and global asymptotic stability under
the assumption of front tyre invertibility (4) and braking
actuation eectiveness.
The equations of the controlled vehicle are in this case
9

v e >
=
KPvy


vyNS >
;
mlf
v_

v_yNS

15

with both states asymptotically stable, i.e.

v ) v d,

vyNS ) vyNSd :

16

This controller isnt in line with the design assumptions

A1, A2, as it would require a continuous direct yaw
moment Mz activation (the actuator pair active steering
and active dierential would be a better choice for this
controller).
With the relaxed goal of only stabilizing instead of
tracking vyNS, the brakes control law (13), (14) can be
rewritten, assuming vyNSd 0, dvyNSd/dt 0, as
MB
lFyr
mlf vx v mlf 2 vyNS

17

which is equivalent to the already proposed form (10a).

The brakes controller should be only activated over limit
values of vyNS, to be dened in the tuning phase.

F:/T&F UK/Tcon/TCON_I_79_02/TCON_A_148880.3d

(TCON)

TCON_A_148880

168

G. Burgio and P. Zegelaar

gure 6 results in two main stabilization correction
from the front outer wheels.

6. Vehicle results
The following experiment was conducted on dry asphalt
with an instrumented prototype vehicle.
The manoeuvre is a lane change, conducted at
constant 100 kph longitudinal speed. This manoeuvre
leads the passive vehicle to spinning, while the
controlled vehicle is stable and tracks the target.
The lateral velocity used in the controller was
estimated via state observer.
Figure 4 shows the yaw rate tracking, which is not
ideal mainly due to model inaccuracies and to limitations from physics (one can see from gure 7 that the
lateral acceleration reaches its maximum). The yaw
rate is stable and regulated to the target.
The steering control action is shown in gure 5, it
results mainly in reducing the driver input to the front
tyre saturation value, while the brakes control action

7. Conclusion
A compact integrated steer and brakes vehicle controller, resulting from the application of state feedback
linearization technique and from additional vehicle
dynamics based choices was proposed, whose state
properties can be proved. The nal solution results
quite simple and reasonable from a vehicle dynamics
point of view.
The rst experimentation data showed that the controller was able to stabilize the vehicle in main working
conditions, allowing higher slip angle then with brakes
stand-alone systems.
FL
FR
RL
RR

target
meas

20

20

Brakes Pressure (bar)

yaw rate (deg/s)

10
0
10
20

10

30
17

15

18

19

20

Figure 4.

21

22 23
time (s)

24

25

26

27

0
17

18

Yaw rate tracking.

19

20

Figure 6.

21
22
time (s)

23

24

25

ay
beta

8
6
Lat Acc (m/s2), beta (deg)

5
Road Angle (deg)

27

Brake pressures.

10
meas
driver/VGR
ctrl

26

4
2
0
2
4
6
8

10
17

10

18

Figure 5.

***

2005 style

19

20

21
22
time (s)

23

24

25

26

27

[Invalid folder]

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

time (s)

Road wheel angle, with its components.

[21.12.20051:58pm]

17

[162169]

[Page No. 168]

Figure 7.

Lateral acceleration and side slip angle.

F:/T&F UK/Tcon/TCON_I_79_02/TCON_A_148880.3d

(TCON)

TCON_A_148880

169

Integrated vehicle control

Acknowledgements
This work was developed within IVDC project activities
in FFA. The authors would like to thank the complete
IVDC3 team for the interesting discussions on the
vehicle dynamics aspects and for all the additional
parallel teamwork, which made possible writing this
paper.

References
J. Ackermann, Robust car steering by yaw rate control, CDC,
1990.
J. Ackermann, Robust control prevents car skidding, Bode Prize,
1996.
R. Busch, Seibertiz and P. Schmitz, IVDC the development of integrated vehicle dynamics control, VDI, 2003.

***

2005 style

[21.12.20051:58pm]

[Invalid folder]

[162169]

[Page No. 169]

J. He, D.A. Crolla, M.C. Levesley and W.J. Manning, Integrated

active steering and variable torque distribution control for improving vehicle handling and stability, SAE, 2004.
A. Isidori, Nonlinear Control Systems, 2nd ed., Heidelberg, SpringerVerlag.
P. Koehn and M. Eckrich, Active steering the bmw approach
towards modern steering technology, 1989.
T. Kojo, M. Suzumura and Y. Tsuchiya, Development of active front
steering control system, SAE, 2005.
W.J. Manning, M. Selby, D.A. Crolla and M.D. Brown, IVMC:
intelligent vehicle motion control, 2002.
R. Marino and F. Cinili, Yaw rate decoupling control in active
steering vehilces, IFAC, 2004.
M. Nagai, M. Shino and F. Gao, Study on integrated control
of active front steer angle and direct yaw moment, SAE,
Japan, 2002.
A. van Zanten, R. Erhardt and G. Pfaff, VDC, the vehicle dynamics
control system of bosch, SAE, 1995.
A. van Zanten, R. Erhardt, K. Landesfeind and G. Pfaff, VDC
system development and perspective, SAE, 1998.
K. Webers and R. Busch, Ford Integrated Vehicle Dynamics Control:
Concept, Munchen: TuV, Fahrwerk. Tech., 2003.

F:/T&F UK/Tcon/TCON_I_79_02/TCON_A_148880.3d

(TCON)

TCON_A_148880