test

© All Rights Reserved

8 visualizações

test

© All Rights Reserved

- Chung Autonomous 2006
- Liebherr A 900 C Litronic EDC Hydraulic Excavator Service Repair Manual SN24677 and up.pdf
- Automotive-electronics-2010-sample
- Sheriff's Report: June 22
- Hysteresis Vector Controller for Three Phase Induction Motor
- IJEET_06_08_005
- BCT-Module 04.pdf
- Active Guidance and Dynamic Flight Mechanics for Model Rockets
- JTM031101[1]
- Wave Drift Damping - Newman
- NON-DLE_Fuel_V2-1L
- Simulink Control Design
- ElctronicFaultFinding 79str
- Steering System(1)
- 30-86-1-SM(6)
- Full Text 15
- IJIRAE::Water Level Controller by Fuzzy Logic
- paper 19
- FCTM_A321_R(10SEP14).pdf
- Ada 493999

Você está na página 1de 56

R. Vos

DCT 2009.010

Traineeship report

Coach: Prof. J. McPhee

Supervisor: Prof.dr. H. Nijmeijer

Technische Universiteit Eindhoven

Department Mechanical Engineering

Dynamics and Control Group

Eindhoven, February, 2009

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank my supervisors, Prof. J. McPhee and Prof. A. Khajepour for the opportunity to do this internship at the University of Waterloo and for their support, guidance

and knowledge.

I would also like to thank A. Abdel-Rahman for all his help and support throughout the

internship and for the contribution he made to my work.

Finally, I would like to thank my family and all my friends for their support and encouragement to make this achievement possible.

Abstract

In this report the effect of a Pulsed Active Steering Control system (PASC) on a vehicle

trajectory and rollover is studied. Former studies have shown that this system is able to

prevent rollover better than the Active Steering Control system, the Direct Yaw Moment

Control system and the Integrated Control system. However, different pulse forms, frequencies

and amplitudes show different effects on the vehicle trajectory and rollover. These effects are

investigated in more detail in this report by simulating J-turn maneuvers using a standard

vehicle with the software program ADAMS. The vehicle trajectory is directly given by the

program, whereas the vehicle rollover is investigated by studying the rollover coefficient. The

primary goal of the PASS is to decrease the vehicle rollover and therefore, simulations are

performed using a steering wheel input with a subtracted pulse. The secondary goal is to use

the system for track following and therefore, the pulse is added to the steering wheel input.

The simulation results show that both the amplitude and the frequency of the pulse have

a big effect on the vehicle trajectory and rollover coefficient. A high frequency reduces the

rollover coefficient the most and gives the best combination of vehicle trajectory and rollover.

The amplitude of the pulse can be altered to find a specific vehicle trajectory and to reduce

the rollover coefficient below a certain threshold. A C 1 continuous non-symmetric pulse is

able to reduce the rollover coefficient the most compared to a symmetric pulse and a C 0

continuous non-symmetric pulse.

The results found with ADAMS are validated by comparing different simulation results

obtained by ADAMS with simulation results obtained by the software program Maple and

DynaFlexPro. The programs show different results due to the difference in the models used,

but these results are consistent for different pulse forms and frequencies.

A pulsed actuation system is designed to be built in a test setup. The system consists of

a gear-train assembly and a pulse actuator. The gear-train assembly comprises 4 spur gears

and a planetary gear-set. A worm-gear is taken as pulse actuator. All the gears of the system

are chosen such that a pulse with a maximum frequency can be applied to the steering wheel

column and such that they can handle the torque and power supplied by an available motor.

ii

List of Figures

3.1

3.2

3.3

3.4

3.5

3.6

3.7

3.8

3.9

3.10

3.11

3.12

3.13

. . . .

.

.

Nonlinear Vehicle Yaw Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nonlinear Vehicle Roll Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

.

.

.

.

.

The pulsed and un-pulsed steering wheel input s for the J-turn maneuver .

8

10

10

11

11

12

Vehicle trajectory for a pulse with an amplitude of 120 and 80 degrees for different frequencies 13

Rollover coefficients for a pulse with an amplitude of 120 and 80 degrees for different frequencies 14

Vehicle trajectories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

16

Rollover coefficient for the non-symmetric pulse with an amplitude of 120 degrees . . . . .

16

Vehicle trajectory and rollover coefficients for different pulse forms . . . . . . . . . . . .

17

Representation of the different pulse forms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

18

Vehicle motions defined according to the SAE convention

Representation of the used symmetric and non-symmetric pulse

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Rollover coefficient for inputs with different subtracted pulses and for an input with a constant

subtracted value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3.14 The un-pulsed and pulsed steering wheel angle input and vehicle trajectory . . . . . . . .

3.15 Rollover coefficient for different pulse forms and for the constant added value . . . . . . .

4.1

Self-aligning moment in ADAMS and Maple for a symmetric pulse with a frequency of 1 Hz

and 4 Hz

4.2

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . .

multiple-bar mechanisms . . . . . .

adjustable-amplitude mechanisms . .

Steering system . . . . . . . . . .

.

.

.

.

Torque versus steering wheel acceleration .

.

.

.

.

.

Torque and power versus the frequency for different pulse forms and peak-time values .

.

.

.

.

.

.

Torque and power versus the amplitude for the symmetric pulse for different frequencies .

Gear-train assembly design

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

25

28

30

31

33

34

35

35

Torque and power versus the amplitude for the C 0 continuous non-symmetric pulse for different frequencies

5.9

25

Self-aligning moment in ADAMS and Maple for a non-symmetric pulse with a frequency of

1 Hz and 4 Hz

5.1

5.2

5.3

5.4

5.5

5.6

5.7

5.8

19

20

20

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

36

Torque and power versus the amplitude for the C 1 continuous non-symmetric pulse for dif-

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

36

A.1 Rollover coefficient for a pulse with a frequency of 8 Hz and an amplitude of 120 degrees

between t = 1.5 - 5.5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

43

45

ferent frequencies

iii

iv

46

List of Tables

3.1

5.1

maximum frequency for each ratio based on the maximum rotational speed

and torque . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Planetary gear-set and worm gear data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

38

38

B.1 Values a, b and c for different frequencies used for the non-symmetric pulse .

44

45

5.2

Glossary

NHTSA

SUV

ASC

DYC

HC

ARS

PASC

s

is

L

R

ay

g

A

f

t

a

b

c

R0

Fz,R

Fz,L

ms

M

Tr

h

e

ay,s

v y

u

r

Sports Utility Vehicle

Active Steering Control

Direct Yaw Moment Control

Hybrid Control

Active Rear wheel Steering

Pulsed Active Steering Control

steering wheel angle

steering angle of the front wheels

steer ratio

wheelbase

corner radius

lateral acceleration

understeer coefficient

gravity constant

pulse amplitude

pulse frequency

time

pulse peak-time value

falling slope value

rising slope value

rollover coefficient

vertical tire load on the vehicles right hand side

vertical tire load on the vehicles left hand side

vehicle sprung mass

total vehicle mass

track width

height of CG above ground

distance between CG and roll axis

lateral acceleration of sprung mass

lateral acceleration of total mass

longitudinal velocity

yaw rate

vi

T

Mz

Ri

i

z

Ti

N

P

D

Ts

Ieq

beq

keq

s

s

s

Mz

r

Tps

Ps

R

sun

A

f

t

sun

sun,max

Tsun

Tsun,max

vibration time

self-aligning moment

radius of gear i

rotational speed of gear i

ratio between ring-gear and sun-gear

torque on gear i

number of teeth on gear

diametral pitch of gear

pitch diameter of gear

torque on steering wheel

equivalent inertia of steering system

equivalent damping of steering system

equivalent stiffness of steering system

acceleration of steering wheel

angular velocity of steering wheel

angle of steering wheel

self-aligning moment

scale factor

torque delivered by power steering system

power on steering wheel

ratio between worm-gear and ring-gear

angle of sun-gear

pulse amplitude

pulse frequency

time

rotational speed of sun-gear

maximum rotational speed of sun-gear

torque on sun-gear

maximum torque on sun-gear

vii

Contents

1 Introduction

1.1 Research goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1.2 Report Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1

1

2

2 Literature Review

3.1 ADAMS simulations . . . . . . . . . . .

3.2 Vehicle dynamics with pulse subtraction

3.2.1 Symmetric pulse input . . . . . .

3.2.2 Non-symmetric pulse input . . .

3.2.3 Optimal subtraction method . .

3.3 Vehicle dynamics with pulse addition . .

3.4 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

7

7

12

12

15

17

19

21

4 Results validation

4.1 DFP and Maple simulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4.2 Simulation results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4.3 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

23

23

24

24

5.1 Gear-train assembly . . .

5.2 Pulse actuator . . . . . .

5.3 Power/Torque calculation

5.4 Worm-gear design . . . .

5.5 Discussion . . . . . . . . .

.

.

.

.

.

27

27

30

32

37

39

6.1 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

6.2 Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

40

40

41

Bibliography

41

43

44

C Motor characteristics

45

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

viii

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

46

ix

Chapter 1

Introduction

Statistics from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) show that 9,362

of the total of 30,521 traffic fatalities in the United States in 2006 are due to rollover of the

vehicle. Sport Utility Vehicles (SUVs) had the highest rollover involvement rate of any vehicle

type in fatal crashes: 35 % for SUVs, 28% for pickups, 17 % for vans and 17 % for passenger

cars. In 1996 8,318 fatalities occurred due to rollover of the vehicle, so the amount of rollover

crashes is increasing [1]. To decrease the amount of accidents due to rollover of the vehicle,

a strategy needs to be designed to control the vehicle (dynamics) to improve the safety and

ride comfort of the vehicle.

Much research has already been performed in the vehicle motion control area to control the

vehicle (dynamics). Four main control techniques have been studied widely. One technique

focusses on controlling the steering angle of the front wheels (Active Steering Control, ASC),

one focusses on controlling the braking force distribution on all the four wheels (Direct Yaw

Moment Control, DYC), one focusses on controlling both the front wheels and the braking

force distribution (Hybrid Control, HC) and one technique focusses on controlling the steering

angle of the rear wheels (Active Rear Wheel Steering, ARS).

1.1

Research goals

Kuo [8] has investigated if the ASC system, the DYC system and the HC system are able

to prevent vehicle rollover. He claims to have shown that none of these systems are efficient

enough to decrease the rollover of the vehicle. Therefore, he has proposed the Pulsed Active

Steering Control System. He states that this new system is able to lower the chance of vehicle

rollover efficiently. However, different pulse forms, frequencies and amplitudes show different

effects on the vehicle rollover and on the vehicle trajectory. Since rollover crashes can occur for

example by avoiding an obstacle on the road, it is also important that the vehicle trajectory

is not changed too much due to the anti-rollover system. The exact effects of the Pulsed

Active Steering Control system on both the rollover as the vehicle trajectory have not been

studied into detail by Kuo, so more investigation needs to be performed. To study mechanical

effects of this Pulsed Active Steering System on the total steering system and to validate the

simulation results experimentally, a test setup needs to be build as well.

The goals of this project, based on the work done by Kuo, are therefore:

Investigate the effect of the PASC system on the vehicle rollover and trajectory

Design and optimize a pulse actuation system for a test setup.

1.2

Report Overview

Chapter 2 presents information about the four main control techniques used to control the

vehicle dynamics and will describe if these systems are able to control the vehicle trajectory

and rollover for different driving maneuvers and circumstances.

Chapter 3 gives information about the simulations performed to investigate the effect of

different pulse forms, amplitudes and frequencies on the vehicle trajectory and rollover and

shows the simulation results. The effects are investigated for a steering wheel input with a

subtracted pulse and with an added pulse. The effects are compared to a steering wheel input

with a constant subtracted or added value to see if the Pulsed Active Steering System is able

to reduce the vehicle rollover more than the Active Steering System.

Chapter 4 describes the validation of the simulation results described in Chapter 3. This

is done by comparing the self-aligning moment obtained by the software program ADAMS

with the self-aligning moment obtained by the software program Maple and DynaFlexPro.

Chapter 5 shows the proposed pulse actuation system, consisting of a gear-train assembly

and a pulse actuator. Upon given constraints the gears of the gear-train assembly are chosen.

A worm-gear is chosen as pulse actuator and is further designed to be able to apply an

optimized maximum frequency to the steering wheel input. For this the maximum torque

and power needed on the steering wheel column are calculated using an analytical model.

Chapter 6 presents the conclusions made upon the simulations performed in this report

and discusses some possible future research to improve the Pulsed Active Steering System.

Chapter 2

Literature Review

This section will give information about the four main control techniques used to control the

vehicle dynamics and will describe if these systems are able to control the vehicle trajectory

and rollover for different driving maneuvers and circumstances. Different controllers have

been designed for the same control technique and some are therefore also addressed in this

section.

Advantages of active steering for vehicle dynamics control

Ackermann et al. [2] have discussed the potential of DYC and ASC for yaw disturbance

attenuation in terms of physical limits. They state that ASC only requires one fourth of the

front wheel tire force compared to DYC. They also claim that ASC is better to generate a

corrective torque to compensate torques caused by asymmetric braking and still have braking

force left for acceleration. Asymmetric braking can arise due to a so called -split braking

situation; the contact surface for wheels on the right hand side of the vehicle is dry, while the

contact surface for wheels on the left hand side of the wheels is icy. If the DYC system generates a corrective torque, no braking force for deceleration is available anymore. Furthermore,

the ASC gives more driving comfort and higher safety.

Two vehicle dynamics control concepts have been summarized. The first concept focusses

on the control of the yaw motion and consists of decoupling of the vehicles yaw and lateral

motion as first presented in [3]. They state that this concept separates two basic tasks

which have been the responsibility of the driver up until now: path following and disturbance

attenuation. The first task is still left to the driver, but the disturbance attenuation can be

controlled by the active steering system, making driving a vehicle easier and safer. Simulations

have shown excellent disturbance rejection in -split braking and side-wind maneuvers.

The second concept focusses on vehicle rollover avoidance by active steering and braking

as first proposed in [4]. The presented controller consists of 3 feedback loops: emergency

steering control, emergency braking control and continuous operation steering control. If the

rollover coefficient (defined in [5]) reaches e.g. a value of 0.9 (rollover limit: |R| = 1) due

to a high drivers steering wheel input, the emergency steering control comes into action,

the front wheel steering angle is reduced and rollover of the vehicle is avoided. At the same

time vehicle deceleration occurs through braking and the chance of vehicle rollover is further

reduced. By controlling the braking pressure the vehicle trajectory is maintained according to

the drivers steering command. The continuous operation steering control is added to improve

the vehicles roll-damping and roll-disturbance attenuation. Simulations have shown that this

3

control setup is able to prevent rollover and is able to maintain practically the same vehicle

trajectory as an uncontrolled vehicle.

Study on integrated control of active front steer angle and direct yaw moment

Nagai et al. [6] have proposed a HCS. By using a model-matching control technique, the

system is designed such that the the performance of the actual vehicle model follows that of

an ideal vehicle model. The actual vehicle model is described as a bicycle model including

direct yaw moment input. The desired vehicle model has been derived by the control law of

ARS in which the rear wheels are steered such that the vehicle body sideslip is zero. The

proposed model-matching controller consists of the desired model and a feed-forward and

feedback compensator. The feed-forward compensator decides the control inputs; the front

wheel steering angle and the direct yaw moment generated from braking forces. The feedback

compensator is designed to suppress the vehicle body sideslip angle and the yaw rate response.

Simulating different driving events show that the yaw motion and the sideslip motion of

the vehicle is improved by this system compared to these motions when only a DYC system

is used. The simulations also show that the system has a robust performance to make the

actual vehicle response follow the desired vehicle response.

Evaluation of an Active Steering System

Orozco has investigated the stability and robustness of an ASC system (see [7] and references

therein) and evaluated this system by simulating different driving events. The inputs of the

vehicle model are the steering angle set by the driver and a side wind force. A steering angle

contribution is derived using the yaw rate and the steering wheel angle and this contribution

is added to the drivers command. For controller analysis the linear single-track model is used,

whereas for the simulations a non-linear two-track model is used.

Different simulations show that a wind force disturbance is reduced by the control system,

that the control system is able to react almost twice as fast as a human driver to wind force

disturbances,that the controlled vehicle is harder to make unstable than the uncontrolled

vehicle and that the system is robust and stable.

Sports Utility Vehicle Rollover Control with Pulsed Active Steering Control

Strategy

Kuo [8] has investigated if the ASC system, the DYC system and the HCS are able to prevent

vehicle rollover. A nonlinear 4 degree of freedom vehicle yaw/roll model as well as a complex

nonlinear tire model have been derived and used for these simulations. He claims that this

new model represents the real-world vehicle to a good degree of accuracy. Using an ASC

system, the results show that the rollover coefficient is reduced to a small proportion of the

original magnitude, but the system is not able to fully reduce the vehicle rollover below a

certain threshold when the rollover is too high due to an extreme drivers steering input. The

DYC system also seems to be unable to prevent rollover at high vehicle speeds and extreme

driver steering inputs. This is because the high braking forces needed to decrease the rollover

result in a significant shift in vertical tire load to one of the front tires, causing abnormal tire

lateral forces. This results in vehicle instability. The HCS shows better results compared to

the other two controllers, but since it also includes the differential braking mechanism, it is

sensitive to vertical tire load shift and would therefore also fail to prevent rollover.

4

Therefore, Kuo has designed and tested a slightly new vehicle rollover control strategy, the

Pulsed Active Steering Control (PASC) system. The difference between the Active Steering

Control system and the Pulsed Active Steering Control system is that, instead of a constant

value, a pulse with a certain amplitude and frequency is added or subtracted to the steering

wheel input given by the driver. The only input of the designed controller is the steering

wheel input given by the driver. By calculating different variables the rollover coefficient

is calculated. If this exceeds a designated threshold a pulse is subtracted from the original

driver steering input. Simulations show that using a symmetric pulse results in a rollover

with sudden bumps higher than the rollover obtained for the un-controlled vehicle. Using a

non-symmetric pulse results in a vehicle rollover lower than for the un-controlled vehicle is.

Therefore, the non-symmetric pulse can best be used to decrease the vehicle rollover. The

non-symmetric pulse used consists of a smooth curve with a sharp, gradually decreasing slope

combined with a smooth, gradually increasing slope. Compared to a symmetric pulse and

a square pulse, this pulse shows a smaller reduction of the rollover coefficient in its total

amount, but it is able to eliminate a sudden bump experienced by using the other two pulses.

Results from several driving maneuver simulations show that this new controller is able

to prevent rollover. However, it is also visible that the controlled vehicle trajectory is different from the uncontrolled trajectory. Simulating at different frequencies shows that if the

frequency is either too high or too low, the efficiency of the controller is reduced. It is also

visible that different pulse frequencies result in different vehicle trajectories. Overall, the simulations show that the pulse amplitude, the pulse frequency and the threshold of the rollover

coefficient to trigger the controller are the three important control variables essential for a

well-designed PASC system.

Improving Yaw Dynamics by Feed-forward Rear Wheel Steering

Besselink et al. [9] have discussed two control systems for ARS to improve the vehicle yaw

dynamics. The results of these controllers have been compared with a simulation model

based on an enhanced bicycle model. In this model the tire relaxation length and suspension

steering compliance have been taken into account. The first controller, the yaw rate feedback

controller, consists of a reference model and a rear wheel steering controller. The controller

is designed to minimize the yaw rate overshoot, since this overshoot is undesirable and leads

to an increased workload for the driver. The reference model provides the reference yaw rate

and is compared to the actual vehicle yaw rate. The difference is fed back to the steering

controller. Simulations show that this active rear wheel steering control system is able to

suppress the undesired yaw rate overshoot.

The disadvantage of this controller is that on a real vehicle an accurate yaw rate signal

is needed, but the yaw rate signal given by an ESP sensor does not meet the requirements.

Simulations also show that the required rear wheel steering angle needed to eliminate the

yaw velocity oscillation is not related to the frequency of the original yaw oscillation. This

means that it is not necessary to apply counter steering at the rear wheels depending on the

yaw velocity oscillation. Therefore, a feed-forward rear wheel steering controller has been

designed. Using the relation between the step response of the rear wheel steering angle and

the front steering angle, as found for the feedback controller, a transfer function is proposed

to relate the steering angle of the rear wheels to the steering angle of the front wheels.

For this controller only the front wheel steering angle and the vehicle forward velocity are

necessary. Simulations show that this controller is able to eliminate the yaw velocity overshoot

5

and oscillations without the need of an accurate yaw rate sensor. The performances of this

system are almost the same as for the feedback controller.

Chapter 3

To investigate the effect of a Pulsed Active Steering Control system (PASC) on the vehicle

trajectory and rollover, simulations are performed using a steering wheel input with different

subtracted or added pulse forms, frequencies and amplitudes. The simulations are performed

with the mechanical system simulation software program MSC.ADAMS.

The first goal of the PASC is to decrease the vehicle rollover as much as possible without

changing the vehicle trajectory too much. This can be done by decreasing the drivers steering

input. Therefore, the effects of a steering wheel input with a subtracted pulse is investigated

first. The second goal of the PASC is to use the system for track following. The deviation

from a desired trajectory due to understeer for example can be decreased by increasing the

drivers steering input. Therefore, the effects of a steering wheel input with an added pulse

is investigated second. Some of the results are compared to a steering wheel input with a

constant (un-pulsed) subtracted or added value. This is done to investigate if the PASC

system works better than the ASC.

3.1

ADAMS simulations

The software program MSC.ADAMS makes it possible to simulate the full-motion behavior

of a complex mechanical system and to analyze multiple design variations or motion inputs

in a fast way. All the simulations are made using the non-linear demo vehicle model provided

by the program. The tire-model used is Pacejka 2002 consisting of the Magic Formula for

both longitudinal and lateral tire forces, the transient response to friction changes and the

slip dependent relaxation effect. Parameters of the demo vehicle model are shown in Table

3.1. The vehicle motions are defined according to the SAE sign convention, as indicated in

Figure 3.1.

The steering wheel angle (s ) given by the driver is chosen as input for all simulations.

The resulting steering angle of the front wheels () can be found by dividing the steering

wheel angle by the steer ratio (is ). The steer ratio of the vehicle model used can be found by

simulating steady-state cornering. For steady-state cornering the steering angle of the front

wheels can be found by the equation:

L ay

+

R

g

(3.1)

Definition

Total vehicle mass

Vehicle sprung mass

Wheel base

Track width front

Track width rear

Distance from center of gravity to front axle

Distance from center of gravity to rear axle

Height of center of gravity above ground

Spring stiffness

Vehicle moment of inertia w.r.t. x-axis

Vehicle moment of inertia w.r.t. y-axis

Vehicle moment of inertia w.r.t. z-axis

Symbol

m

ms

L

wf

wr

Lf

Lm

h

K

Ixx

Iyy

Izz

Unit

kg

kg

m

m

m

m

m

m

N/m

kgm2

kgm2

kgm2

Value

1530

1430

2.56

1.52

1.59

1.48

1.077

0.432

1.25e5

584

6129

6022

With L the wheelbase, R the corner radius, ay the lateral acceleration and the understeer

coefficient of the vehicle and g the gravity constant. The understeer coefficient determines

whether the steering angle needs to be changed to remain a certain constant radius R if the

forward speed of the vehicle is increased. For a neutral vehicle the understeer coefficient is

zero and the steering angle can remain the same, for a understeered vehicle the understeer

coefficient is higher than zero and the steering angle needs to be increased and for an oversteered vehicle the understeer coefficient is lower than zero and the steering angle needs to

be decreased. Simulating steady-state cornering at different vehicle speeds shows that the

vehicle model used in ADAMS has understeer. The exact understeer coefficient has not been

determined, since it is not important for the investigation performed in this report. To calculate the steer ratio the steady-state cornering needs to be simulated at a low vehicle speed. At

low speeds the lateral acceleration of the vehicle is very low and the effect of the understeer

coefficient can therefore be neglected. The equation of the steer ratio than becomes:

is =

s

=

L

R

s

s R

=

ay

L

+ g

(3.2)

Using a steering wheel input of 300 degrees for the steady-state cornering simulation a resulting corner radius of 11.5 meters is found. These values result in a steer ratio of 23.5 for the

demo vehicle model.

The driving maneuver and the different pulse forms used for the simulations and a way

to investigate the vehicle rollover are described next.

Driving maneuver

It is expected that the influence of different pulse forms, frequencies and amplitudes on the

vehicle trajectory and rollover is higher when the vehicle is rolling or skidding. Therefore,

a relatively extreme driving maneuver, the J-turn maneuver, is chosen to be simulated. A

representation of the simulation input for this maneuver can be found in Figure 3.6. As can

be seen, after one second the steering input gradually increases to a maximum within one

second and stays here from the 2nd to the 5th second. From the 5th to the 6th second the

steering input gradually decreases back to 0 degrees.

Pulse forms

The effect of two different pulse forms are investigated: a symmetric pulse and a nonsymmetric pulse. The symmetric pulse is given by the following equation:

y(t, f ) = A(1 cos(2f t))

(3.3)

with A the pulse amplitude, f the pulse frequency and t the time. A representation of this

symmetric pulse is shown in Figure 3.3. The non-symmetric pulse is the one recommended

by Kuo. According to his findings, this special pulse form is more useful in reducing the

rollover coefficient than the symmetric pulse is. The pulse form consist of a sharp, gradually

decreasing slope (given by y1 ) combined with a smooth, gradually increasing slope (given by

y2 ):

y1 (t) = 2Ae

y2 (t) = 2Ae

(ta)2

b

for

0ta

(3.4)

(ta)2

c

for

at

(3.5)

9

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0

0

10

time [s]

With A the amplitude of the pulse and t the time. The value a represents the time where

the pulse reaches its peak value and the values b and c give the shape of the falling and rising

slope, respectively. A representation of the shape of this non-symmetric pulse with a = 0.25,

b = 0.005 and c = 0.045 is also shown in Figure 3.3.

0

symmetric pulse

nonsymmetric pulse

0.2

Amplitude

0.4

0.6

0.8

a

1

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

Time [s]

To determine the effects of different frequencies on the vehicle trajectory and rollover, all

the investigations are performed for pulses with a frequency of 1, 2, 4 and 8 Hz.

Vehicle rollover

The effects of the PASC system on the vehicle trajectory can be given directly by the software

program. The effects on the vehicle rollover is investigated by calculating the rollover coefficient, which is a measure for the rollover risk [8]. The coefficient is given by the following

equation:

Ro

Fz,R Fz,L

Fz,R + Fz,L

2ms

ay,s

{((h e) + e cos )

+ e sin }

M Tr

g

(3.6)

With Fz,R and Fz,L the vertical tire load on the right hand side and the left hand side

respectively, ms the vehicle sprung mass, M the total vehicle mass, T the track width, h the

10

height of the center of gravity above the ground, e the distance between the center of gravity

and the roll axis, the roll angle and g the gravity constant. ay,s is the lateral acceleration

of the sprung mass and is given by the equation:

ay,s

vy + ur e

(3.7)

with vy the lateral acceleration of the total mass, u the longitudinal velocity, r the yaw rate

and the roll acceleration of the vehicle. The non-linear vehicle model and all the parameters

and variables used are shown in figures 3.4 and 3.5. The vehicle is about to rollover if the

tire loads on one side of the vehicle become zero. At that moment the absolute value of the

rollover coefficient equals 1.

First the effects of subtracting different pulse forms, frequencies and amplitudes from the

steering wheel input are given, followed by the effects of adding these pulses to the steering

wheel input.

11

3.2

The primary goal of the PASC is to lower the rollover coefficient, but the vehicle trajectory

intended by the driver can not be changed too much by the anti-rollover system if an obstacle

on the road needs to be avoided. Therefore, the results of the simulations made for a steering

wheel input with a subtracted pulse are compared to an un-pulsed input, since this gives the

drivers intended uncontrolled vehicle trajectory. The steering wheel angle used for the J-turn

maneuver for the un-pulsed input and for the input with a subtracted pulse can be found

in Figure 3.6. As can be seen, the maximum angle of the steering wheel input is chosen to

be 320 degrees. Taking the steer ratio of 23.5, the total wheel angle becomes 13.6 degrees.

The maneuver is performed at a relatively low vehicle velocity of 40 km/h. One might be

expecting that the maneuver is simulated at a lower maximum input and a higher velocity,

but it is found that the rollover coefficient for higher velocities shows too much oscillation

and the effect of pulse subtraction is therefore less easy to investigate. The used input has

shown to work well for the investigation.

Steering wheel input vs time

350

pulsed input

unpulsed input

300

Pulse amplitude

250

200

150

100

50

0

0

10

time [s]

Figure 3.6: The pulsed and un-pulsed steering wheel input s for the J-turn maneuver

First the results of subtracting a symmetric pulse will be given in section 3.2.1, followed

by subtracting a non-symmetric pulse in section 3.2.2. In section 3.2.3 the rollover coefficient

of both pulses will be compared to a steering wheel input with a subtracted constant value.

3.2.1

The effects of different frequencies using a symmetric pulse is investigated for two pulse

amplitudes. In [8] the ratio between the maximum steering angle of the front wheels of the

uncontrolled vehicle and the pulse amplitude for the J-turn maneuver is around 5:2. For ease

of comparison this ratio is used for the first simulation, resulting in a pulse amplitude of 120

degrees. For the second simulation the amplitude is decreased to an arbitrary 80 degrees.

The resulting vehicle trajectory for both amplitudes at different frequencies is shown in

figures 3.7 (a) and (b), respectively. The un-pulsed vehicle trajectory is also shown in both

figures. The following conclusions can be drawn from these figures:

Increasing the frequency from 1 to 4 Hz results in a larger path deviation with respect

to the un-pulsed input, independent of the pulse amplitude.

12

frequency.

A higher pulse amplitude results in a larger path deviation with respect to the un-pulsed

input for all frequencies.

The difference in the vehicle trajectory between the frequencies depends on the pulse

amplitude.

Vehicle trajectory

0

10

10

20

20

30

30

y [m]

y [m]

Vehicle trajectory

0

40

50

50

unpulsed

sym. pulse 1 Hz

sym. pulse 2 Hz

sym. pulse 4 Hz

sym. pulse 8 Hz

60

70

80

40

40

30

20

10

10

20

30

70

80

40

40

x [m]

unpulsed

sym. pulse 1 Hz

sym. pulse 2 Hz

sym. pulse 4 Hz

sym. pulse 8 Hz

60

30

20

10

10

20

30

40

x [m]

Figure 3.7: Vehicle trajectory for a pulse with an amplitude of 120 and 80 degrees for different frequencies

It is clear that the vehicle trajectory depends on the frequency, but most of all on the pulse

amplitude. This is due to the fact that the pulse amplitude is the biggest factor determining the overall average input, since the pulse amplitude determines the amount of degrees

subtracted from the steering wheel input.

Note that the vehicle trajectory for pulses with an amplitude of 120 degrees and with a

frequency of 1 and 2 Hz are almost the same, but this is not the case for the pulse with the lower

amplitude. Hence, it might be concluded that high amplitude pulses with a small frequency

have almost the same effect on the vehicle trajectory. More investigation is necessary to

confirm this conclusion.

The rollover coefficient for both simulations are shown in figures 3.8 (a) and (b), respectively. The following conclusions can be drawn from these figures if one looks at the results

during the time the pulse is being subtracted:

Pulses with a frequency of 1 and 2 Hz result in a higher rollover coefficient compared

to the un-pulsed input, independent of the size of the amplitude.

Pulses with a frequency of 4 and 8 Hz result in a lower rollover coefficient compared to

the un-pulsed input and the lowest rollover coefficient is found for the highest frequency,

independent of the size of the amplitude.

A higher amplitude results in a lower rollover coefficient for pulses with a frequency of

4 and 8 Hz.

13

The difference in the rollover coefficient between the frequencies depends on the pulse

amplitude.

Rollover coefficient vs time

unpulsed

sym. pulse 1 Hz

sym. pulse 2 Hz

sym. pulse 4 Hz

sym. pulse 8 Hz

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0.1

unpulsed

sym. pulse 1 Hz

sym. pulse 2 Hz

sym. pulse 4 Hz

sym. pulse 8 Hz

0.5

Rollover coefficient

0.5

Rollover coefficient

10

Time [s]

10

Time [s]

Figure 3.8: Rollover coefficients for a pulse with an amplitude of 120 and 80 degrees for different frequencies

A possible explanation of the fact that low frequencies result in a high rollover coefficient

is that these frequencies are close to the eigenfrequency of the suspended vehicle body. The

fact that a higher pulse amplitude results in a lower rollover coefficient is due to the fact

that for high amplitudes more degrees are subtracted from the steering wheel input. This

results in a lower overall average steering wheel input and therefore in a less extreme J-turn

maneuver. This causes a lower rollover coefficient.

Based on all previous results, the following conclusions can be drawn:

The PASC system seems to have good potential to decrease the rollover coefficient,

which is in line with the findings of the study done by Kuo.

The rollover coefficient is only decreased for pulses with a specific high frequency.

A pulse with a frequency of 8 hz results in a lower path deviation and in a lower rollover

coefficient compared to a pulse with a frequency of 4 Hz.

The general effects of different frequencies on the vehicle trajectory and rollover coefficient do not depend on the amplitude of the pulse.

Note that the maximum rollover coefficient does not reach the critical value of 1. This is

due to the input used for the simulations and due to the fact that the demo vehicle used in

the software program has a low center of gravity, which makes rollover more difficult. It is

also important to note that the rollover coefficient is only decreased for frequencies above the

4 Hz during the time the pulse is being subtracted. To make sure that the rollover coefficient

stays beneath a certain threshold, the pulse needs to be applied during a longer period.

The exact begin and and time of the pulse subtraction needs to be controlled by a control

system. One simulation is performed to study the effect of a longer pulse subtraction time.

More information about the performed simulation and the simulation result can be found

in Appendix A. From this result it can be concluded that an increased pulse subtraction

14

time results in a lower rollover coefficient compared to the un-pulsed input during the total

maneuver time. The differences with the simulation with the shorter pulse-subtraction-time

are very small during this interval. Hence, it appears that the conclusions drawn based on

the previous results do not depend on the time the pulse is subtracted.

3.2.2

Studying the effect of the non-symmetric pulse as described in section 3.1 is done by first

researching the effect of different frequencies and secondly, by researching the effect of an

increased pulse peak-time value a for a constant frequency. This last research is performed

since it is expected that the peak-time value also has a big effect on the vehicle trajectory

and rollover.

The amplitude for all simulations is chosen to be 120 degrees (also used for the symmetric

pulse), since at this amplitude the rollover coefficient is being reduced the most. It can be

expected that the conclusions drawn from these simulation also hold for smaller or bigger

amplitudes.

Frequency modulation

To investigate the effect of different frequencies, the peak-time value a (as function of the

vibration time T) must be kept constant. For this investigation the value is chosen to be 14 of

the vibration time. The begin and end points of each pulse need to be the same and almost

equal to 0. Therefore, the values b and c as used in (3.4) and (3.5) need to be determined by

the following equation:

f1,i (t = 0) = f2,i (t = T ) = constant 0

for

i = 1, 2, 4, 8

Hz

(3.8)

Note that this equation only holds for one pulse starting at time t = 0. For a pulse with a

frequency of 1 Hz, the value b is chosen to be 0.005. Using this combination of values for a

and b the constant value in equation 2.5 is found (3.7267e6 ) and the value c can now also

be determined using the same equation. Using (3.4), (3.5) and (3.8), the values b and c as

function of the frequency can be calculated by:

b =

c =

a2

=

12.5

(T a)2

b =

a2

1

200f 2

9

200f 2

(3.9)

(3.10)

Using these equations a combination of values a, b and c is found for each frequency (see

Appendix B). These combinations are used for the simulations.

The resulting vehicle trajectories at each frequency are shown in Figure 3.9 (a). The

conclusions drawn from this figure are the same as for the symmetric pulse (see section 3.2.1).

The average vehicle trajectories of all the frequencies for the symmetric pulse and for the

non-symmetric pulse are shown in Figure 3.9 (b). It can be seen that the non-symmetric

pulse results in a smaller path deviation. This is as expected, since the area above the pulse

is lower for the non-symmetric pulse. This means that less is subtracted from the steering

wheel input, causing a higher average steering input and a lower path deviation.

15

Vehicle trajectory

0

10

10

20

20

30

30

y [m]

y [m]

Vehicle trajectory

0

40

50

50

unpulsed

nonsym. pulse 1 Hz

nonsym. pulse 2 Hz

nonsym. pulse 4 Hz

nonsym. pulse 8 Hz

60

70

80

40

40

30

20

10

10

20

30

60

unpulsed

average symmetric pulse

average nonsymmetric pulse

70

80

40

40

30

20

10

x [m]

10

20

30

40

x [m]

with different frequencies

and non-symmetric pulse

The rollover coefficient at each frequency can be found in Figure 3.10 (a). Figure 3.10 (b)

shows a zoomed area for clarity. As can be seen, the coefficient is increased for all frequencies.

So the non-symmetric pulse results in a lower path deviation with respect to the symmetric

pulse, but this specific non-symmetric pulse seems to be unable to decrease the rollover with

respect to the uncontrolled input.

Rollover coefficient versus time

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0.55

Rollover coefficient

0.5

Rollover coefficient

unpulsed

nonsym. pulse 1 Hz

nonsym. pulse 2 Hz

nonsym. pulse 4 Hz

nonsym. pulse 8 Hz

unpulsed

nonsym. pulse 1 Hz

nonsym. pulse 2 Hz

nonsym. pulse 4 Hz

nonsym. pulse 8 Hz

0.5

0.45

0.4

0

1

0.35

2

Time [s]

2.5

3.5

4.5

Time [s]

(a) Unzoomed

(b) Zoomed

Figure 3.10: Rollover coefficient for the non-symmetric pulse with an amplitude of 120 degrees

To determine the effect of the peak-time value a, one simulation is made using a pulse with

a value of a = 34 T . This means that the pulse now consists of a smooth, gradually decreasing

slope combined with a sharp, gradually increasing slope. The simulation is performed for a

pulse with an amplitude of 120 degrees and a frequency of 8 Hz, since this high frequency

results in the lowest rollover coefficient. Note that changing the value a also implies a change

in the values of b and c.

16

The vehicle trajectory and the rollover coefficient for this simulation is shown in figures

3.11 (a) and (b), respectively. The vehicle trajectory and the rollover coefficient for the

symmetric pulse and for the non-symmetric pulse with the old value of a = 14 T are added

for comparison. As can be seen, a pulse with a high peak-time value results in a slightly

larger path deviation with respect to a pulse with a low peak-time value. However, the

rollover coefficient is significantly lower for the pulse with a high peak-time value. Hence, it

can be concluded that a pulse with a high a-value seems to have good potential to decrease

the rollover coefficient combined with a small path deviation. However, the symmetric pulse

shows the lowest rollover coefficient, although it also shows a larger path deviation.

Rollover coefficient versus time

Vehicle trajectory

0

Rollover coefficient

20

30

y [m]

unpulsed

nonsym. pulse, a = 1/4 T

nonsym. pulse, a = 3/4 T

sym. pulse

0.5

10

40

50

60

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

70

80

40

30

20

10

10

20

30

40

x [m]

10

Time [s]

Figure 3.11: Vehicle trajectory and rollover coefficients for different pulse forms

So far the effects of different pulse forms on the vehicle trajectory and rollover are investigated separately. The next step is to combine the two and to investigate which pulse form

can best be subtracted from the steering wheel input to decrease the rollover coefficient the

most. This investigation is performed next.

3.2.3

For a good comparison between the rollover coefficient of each pulse form the vehicle trajectory

needs to be the same for all. The same vehicle trajectory can be obtained by modifying the

amplitude of each pulse. The investigation is only performed for pulses with a frequency of

8 Hz, since this high frequency decreases the rollover coefficient the most. It is found that

decreasing the amplitude of the symmetric pulse from 120 to 76 degrees gives the same vehicle

trajectory as the non-symmetric pulse with an amplitude of 120 degrees and a peak-time value

of 34 T (see section 3.2.2). The simulation results are also compared to the rollover coefficient

obtained from a steering wheel input with a constant (un-pulsed) subtracted value. This

makes it possible to investigate if the PASC system is better able to decrease the vehicle

rollover than the ASC system.

Before a proper comparison can be ensured it needs be noted that one of the reasons

the non-symmetric pulse used in section 3.2.2 results in a relatively high rollover coefficient

can be that the falling and rising slope of the pulse are too sharp. A second reason can be

that the non-symmetric pulse used is C 0 continuous. ADAMS might not be able to work

well with a C 0 continuous pulse, probably due to interpolation problems. A C 0 continuous

17

pulse can also be difficult to produce by the pulse actuation design as described in Chapter 5.

Therefore, a simulation is made for a steering wheel input with a subtracted C 1 continuous

non-symmetric pulse with a slightly less sharp falling and rising slope. This new pulse is given

by the following equation:

f (t, T ) =

A

n

(1 cos(eq(T mod(t,T ) ) 1))

2

(3.11)

with A the amplitude of the pulse, T the vibration time of the pulse, t the time and

ln(2 + 1)

Tn

b

n = 0.335 ( + 0.46)

a

q =

(3.12)

(3.13)

The peak-time value is given by the factor ab . A representation of this pulse with a peaktime value of 34 T can be found in Figure 3.12. The C 0 continuous non-symmetric pulse with

the same peak-time value and the symmetric pulse are also shown for comparison.

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

symmetric pulse

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

time

For the simulation the peak-time value of this new pulse form is chosen at 34 T , since this

peak-time value results in the lowest rollover coefficient for the C 0 continuous non-symmetric

pulse (see section 3.2.2.). The amplitude of the pulse is chosen such that the vehicle trajectory

is the same as the inputs with the two other subtracted pulse forms and the same as the input

with the constant subtracted value.

The resulting rollover coefficients for the different inputs are given in Figure 3.13. As

can be seen in this figure, the new non-symmetric pulse results in a significant decrease in

the rollover coefficient with respect to the other non-symmetric pulse and even shows a lower

coefficient than the symmetric pulse. So the new non-symmetric pulse studied so far has the

highest potential to decrease the rollover coefficient compared to other pulses. However, the

lowest rollover coefficient is found for the input with the constant subtraction.

It can be seen that all pulse forms oscillate around the input with a constant subtracted

value. Increasing the peak-time value of the non-symmetric pulses or increasing the pulse

18

unpulsed

nonsym. pulse, a = 3/4 T

sym. pulse, amp 76

new nsp, amp 72

constant subtraction

0.5

Rollover coefficient

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0

0

10

Time [s]

Figure 3.13: Rollover coefficient for inputs with different subtracted pulses and for an input with a constant

subtracted value

frequency even more than 8 Hz can possibly result in a decreased rollover coefficient, but it

will always be higher than the input with the constant subtracted value. This means that it is

best to subtract a constant value instead of a pulse from the steering wheel input to decrease

the chance of rollover of the vehicle. Hence, the ASC system works better than the PASC.

The effect of adding the different pulse forms to the steering wheel angle is investigated

next.

3.3

Due to understeer or wind disturbance for example, the vehicle can deviate from a desired

trajectory. In section 3.2 it is found that modifying the amplitude of each different subtracted

pulse results in a specific vehicle trajectory. This means that for a steering wheel input with

an added pulse a specific vehicle trajectory can also be obtained by modifying the amplitude.

Hence, adding a pulse with a specific amplitude can decrease or even delete a path deviation.

Therefore, the PASC system can be used for track following. Section 3.2 shows furthermore

that subtracting different pulse forms with a certain frequency results in a lower rollover

coefficient compared to the uncontrolled input. So, adding the pulse will consequently result

in a higher rollover coefficient.

Two questions arise from above observations: First, which pulse form can best be used for

track following without increasing the rollover coefficient too much and second, if adding a

pulse to the steering wheel is better than adding a constant (un-pulsed) value to the steering

wheel input.

To investigate these questions the effect of adding different pulse forms on the rollover

coefficient is analyzed and compared to the steering wheel input with a constant added value.

It is not expected that the results change significantly with respect to subtracting the pulse

and therefore only the different pulses at 8 Hz are being compared. The simulated driving

maneuver is again the J-turn maneuver. A representation of the vehicle steering wheel input

used for this maneuver can be found in Figure 3.14 (a). The vehicle speed is chosen to be 40

km/h, as is used for all earlier performed simulations. As already noted, the vehicle model

used in ADAMS has understeer and therefore the un-pulsed trajectory is not the desired

19

trajectory. The desired vehicle trajectory is determined at a speed of 3.6 km/h, since at

low vehicle speeds the influence of the understeer coefficient on the vehicle trajectory can be

neglected. The maximum uncontrolled steering wheel input is chosen to be 120 degrees. The

desired vehicle trajectory and the un-pulsed vehicle trajectory are shown in Figure 3.14 (b).

Steering wheel input vs time

Vehicle trajectory

0

pulsed input

unpulsed input

160

140

20

120

30

y [m]

100

80

40

50

60

60

40

70

20

0

0

desired trajectory

unpulsed trajectory

10

Pulse amplitude

180

80

10

10

10

20

30

40

50

60

x [m]

time [s]

Figure 3.14: The un-pulsed and pulsed steering wheel angle input and vehicle trajectory

The amplitude of each different pulse form is now determined such that the steering wheel

input with the added pulse gives the desired trajectory. It is found that the amplitude of the

symmetric pulse needs to be 25 degrees, the amplitude of the C 0 continuous non-symmetric

pulse 51 degrees and the amplitude of the C 1 continuous non-symmetric pulse needs to be

23 degrees to get the desired trajectory. So using these pulses with these amplitudes results

in the black line visible in figure 3.14 (b). Note that the peak-time value is 34 T for both

non-symmetric pulses. The rollover coefficient for the different pulse forms and for the input

with a constant added value are shown in Figure 3.15.

Rollover coefficient versus time

0.3

unpulsed

C0 cont. nonsym. pulse

C1 cont. nonsym. pulse

symmetric pulse

averaged unpulsed

Rollover coefficient

0.25

0.2

0.15

0.1

0.05

0

0.05

0

10

Time [s]

Figure 3.15: Rollover coefficient for different pulse forms and for the constant added value

Comparing the different pulse forms shows that the rollover coefficient is the lowest for the

symmetric pulse, closely followed by the C 1 continuous non-symmetric pulse. The steering

wheel input with a constant added value results in the lowest rollover coefficient. The rollover

20

coefficient obtained from the steering wheel input with the different added pulses oscillates

again around the steering wheel input with the constant added value. So changing the peaktime of the C 1 continuous non-symmetric pulse or increasing the frequency will result in a

different rollover coefficient (as can also be seen in section 3.2.2), but the rollover coefficient

will not be lower than the steering wheel input with a constant added value.

Note that, although the rollover coefficient in this case does not reach the value of 1, the

pulse can not always be added. If, due to a certain input, the rollover coefficient reaches a

value close to 1 and a pulse with a certain high amplitude is added, the vehicle will roll over.

The path deviation can possibly still be decreased slightly, but can not be deleted. The input

with a constant added value will be able to decrease the path deviation the most, since it

increases the rollover coefficient the least.

3.4

Discussion

All the simulation results lead to the conclusion that the PASC system is able to decrease the

rollover coefficient by subtracting a pulse and is able to decrease or even delete a path deviation

by adding the pulse to the steering wheel input. A C 1 continuous non-symmetric pulse with a

peak-time value of 3( )(4)T has the best potential to decrease the rollover coefficient compared

to other pulses. The exact vehicle trajectory and rollover coefficient depend on the form,

frequency and amplitude of the pulse. Subtracting a pulse with a high frequency seems to

result in the best combination of rollover coefficient and vehicle trajectory. However, the best

input is found to be the one with a subtracted or added constant value, since this results in

the lowest rollover coefficient. This means that the ASC system works better than the PASC

system.

For the purpose of the study described in this report a J-turn maneuver is performed,

whereas different driving maneuvers might have different reactions. Therefore more research

can be conducted to shed light on the effects of different driving maneuvers.

The vehicle model used for the simulations does not resemble a SUV. Since the major goal

of the PASC system is to decrease the vehicle rollover of especially SUV, further research can

be performed using a vehicle model which resembles a SUV more.

C.C. Kuo [8] has shown that a steering wheel input with a subtracted symmetric pulse

results in a rollover coefficient with some bumps higher than the uncontrolled vehicle rollover

coefficient. The bumps found can be due to the fact that the symmetric pulse used has a

C 0 continuity at the beginning and end of each pulse. He has shown that the C 0 continuous

non-symmetric pulse is able to eliminate these bumps and to decrease the vehicle rollover,

but the results given in this report show that the non-symmetric pulse is not able to decrease

the rollover coefficient below the uncontrolled vehicle rollover coefficient. This can be due

too a too sharp falling and rising slope of the pulse or due too interpolation problems in

the ADAMS software. More research can be performed upon this subject. Kuo also states

that the overal reduction in its total amount is smaller for the C 0 continuous non-symmetric

pulse with respect to the symmetric pulse, which matches the findings of this report more.

From the results given in this chapter it is clear that the pulse presented in [8] is not able to

reduce the rollover coefficient as much as the new non-symmetric pulse proposed or even the

symmetric pulse.

Since different pulse forms give different results, it might be possible that there is a certain

form which is able to decrease the rollover coefficient even more than the different forms used

21

in this report. It might also be that there is a certain pulse form which is able to decrease

the rollover coefficient even more than subtracting a constant value. However, this is not

expected since the rollover coefficient of all the pulses oscillate around the rollover coefficient

given by the input with a constant added or subtracted value.

Since the tyres are moving sideways over the ground, it is expected that the PASC system

will result in excessive wear of the tyres. It is also expected that the system has a negative

effect on the ride comfort, since rolling of the vehicle with a certain frequency can be annoying

for the passengers.

To make sure the found results are acceptable, the simulation results need to be validated.

This validation is described in the next chapter.

22

Chapter 4

Results validation

To check whether the results obtained with the software program ADAMS as shown in Chapter

3 are acceptable, the simulation results are validated by comparing simulation results from

ADAMS with simulation results obtained using the software program Maple in combination

with DynaFlexPro (DFP).

First information about the new software programs and about the performed simulations

is given, followed by the simulation results. At the end a conclusion based upon these results

is given.

4.1

The sofware program Maple is able to compute and manipulate symbolic expressions. The

symbolic expressions, the kinematics and dynamic equations of a system, can be automatically

generated by the program DFP wherein the studied system model is built. The model has

fourteen degrees of freedom: six for the chassis (three translational and three rotational), one

for the spin of each tire and one for the vertical prismatic joint of each suspension link. The

input used in this program is given by the steer angle of the front wheels.

One of the goals of the PASC is to reduce the vehicle rollover of (especially) SUVs.

Therefore, the pulse actuation system, as described in Chapter 4, needs to be designed for

a SUV. For the design it needs to be known what the maximum amount of wheel angle of

the front wheels is before a SUV starts to rollover. As already noted, for the simulations

performed in Chapter 3 a vehicle model is used which does not resemble a SUV. However,

the parameters of the vehicle model already implemented in DFP are parameters from the

Chevrolet Equinox, which is a SUV. Therefore, DFP in combination with Maple is first used

to determine this maximum amount of wheel angle input. This information will also be used

for the validation of the ADAMS vehicle model.

For this first investigation the J-turn maneuver as described in section 2.1 is simulated at

a vehicle velocity of 80 km/h. This velocity is chosen since it is more likely that the vehicle

rolls over at this high velocity compared to the relatively low velocity of 40 km/h used for

the simulations in Chapter 3. It is found that an input on the front wheels above 3 degrees

results in rollover of the Equinox model. This maximum steer angle of the front wheels is

chosen as input for the simulations in Maple. Using the steer ratio of 23.5 found in section

2.1, the maximum steering wheel input for the ADAMS simulations becomes 70.5 degrees.

Simulations are performed using a steering wheel input with a subtracted symmetric pulse

23

and a subtracted C 0 continuous non-symmetric pulse with a frequency of 1 and 4 Hz. One

might expect a frequency of 8 Hz, because this results in the lowest rollover coefficient, but the

input for this simulation in Maple would be too extensive. The used frequencies are expected

to work well for the validations and it is expected that the results found also hold for other

frequencies. The pulse amplitude on the front wheels is in this case chosen to be 1.2 degrees.

This gives the same ratio (5:2) between the maximum wheel angle input and the amplitude

of the pulse as also used for the simulations in Chapter 3. Using the steer ratio of 23.5 this

results in a pulse amplitude on the steering wheel of 28.2 degrees.

The results validation consist of comparing the self-aligning moment of the front wheels

(Mz ). The self-aligning moment is caused by the lateral force of the tire produced by the slip

angle. The force acts through a point behind the center of the wheel, the pneumatic trail, in

a direction such that it attempts to re-align the tire. The total self-aligning moment of the

front wheels can be calculated by adding the self-aligning moment of the left wheel with the

self-aligning moment of the right wheel.

For a good comparison the vehicle parameters used in the program ADAMS (as given in

Table 2.1) are implemented in the vehicle model built in DFP. So the model used in DFP

resembles the vehicle model used in ADAMS as good as possible.

4.2

Simulation results

The self-aligning moment for the input with a subtracted symmetric pulse with a frequency

of 1 Hz and 4 Hz given by both programs are presented in figures 4.1 (a) and (b), respectively. The self-aligning moment for the input with a subtracted non-symmetric pulse with a

frequency of 1 Hz and 4 Hz are presented in figures 4.2 (a) and (b), respectively. As can be

seen in these figures, the self-aligning moment given by both software programs is negative.

This is due to the fact that the J-turn is performed to the right: the self-aligning moment acts

counterclockwise and since a moment clockwise is taken as positive, the resulting self-aligning

moment is negative. Furthermore it can be seen that the minimum of the self-aligning moment is lower for the DFP model than for the ADAMS model. This is due to the difference

in the models. The most important difference between the models is the difference in suspension: in DFP the model used has a (simplified) vertical suspension, while ADAMS uses a

McPherson suspension. This can also explain the fact that the self-aligning moment in the

ADAMS results go further back to zero during the pulse.

4.3

Discussion

The self-aligning moment is compared, because at first it was expected that this self-aligning

moment can be directly related to the applied torque on the steering wheel. The applied

torque on the steering wheel to turn the front wheels is information needed to design the

pulse actuation system proposed in Chapter 4. However, it is found that the torque on the

steering wheel depends on geometric parameters of the steering system [10]. These geometric

variables are unknown and therefore it is not possible to relate the self-aligning moment

directly to the torque on the steering wheel.

The results obtained by both software programs show a distinctive difference, but these

differences can be explained by the difference in the models used. The differences seem to be

24

20

ADAMS

Maple

20

20

Mz [Nm]

Mz [Nm]

20

40

40

60

60

80

80

100

0

100

0

ADAMS

Maple

Time [s]

Time [s]

(a) 1 Hz

(b) 4 Hz

Figure 4.1: Self-aligning moment in ADAMS and Maple for a symmetric pulse with a frequency of 1 Hz and

4 Hz

20

ADAMS

Maple

20

20

Mz [Nm]

Mz [Nm]

20

40

40

60

60

80

80

100

0

100

0

Time [s]

ADAMS

Maple

Time [s]

(a) 1 Hz

(b) 4 Hz

Figure 4.2: Self-aligning moment in ADAMS and Maple for a non-symmetric pulse with a frequency of 1 Hz

and 4 Hz

25

consistent for different pulse forms and for different frequencies. From this it can be concluded

that the results found in Chapter 3 can be accepted.

The information obtained in this chapter and in Chapter 3 can now be used to design the

pulse actuation system for the setup.

26

Chapter 5

The results of the performed simulations given in chapter 2 show that the PASC system has

good potential to lower the vehicle rollover. To study the mechanical effect of the PASC

system on the total mechanical steering system and to perform experiments for the validation

of the results found in Chapter 3 and 4 a test setup needs to be built. This setup will consists

of a steering column, steering rack, a set of wheels and a pulse actuation system. This pulse

actuation system adds or subtracts the pulse to the drivers steering wheel input and will be

placed between the steering wheel column and the steering pinion/rack. The design of the

pulse actuation system is described in this chapter.

The pulse actuation system consists of a gear-train assembly1 and a pulse actuator. The

design of the gear-train assembly and the choice of gear teeth will be described first. Second,

different pulse actuators will be discussed and based upon the advantages and disadvantages

a pulse actuator will be chosen. Since a high frequency results in a lower rollover coefficient,

the chosen actuator needs to be further designed such that an optimized maximum pulse

frequency can be added or subtracted to the drivers steering wheel input. For the design it

is necessary to obtain the maximum torque and power needed to generate the pulse motions

of the front wheels as described in Chapter 3 and 4, so this is studied beforehand.

5.1

Gear-train assembly

The gear train assembly is designed taking into account the following constraints:

The driver does not feel the pulse on the steering wheel.

The ratio between the steering wheel input and output of the pulse actuation system is

1:1 if no pulse is applied.

The steering wheel input and output are co-linear, which means that the input and

output are aligned.

The rotational directions of the input and output are the same.

The added or subtracted pulse frequency (with a specific amplitude) needs to be as high

as possible.

1

A first setup of this assembly has been designed by Alexander Berlin, a student at the University of

Waterloo

27

Figure 5.1 (a) shows a 3-dimensional drawing and Figure 5.1 (b) shows the working scheme of

the assembly. As can be seen, the assembly consists of 4 spur gears and a planetary gear-set.

Gear 1 is connected to the steering wheel and is the input of the assembly. The gears 2 to 4

are necessary to make the steering wheel input versus the output of the total system 1:1, if

no pulse is applied. The planetary gear-set consists of the sun (gear 8), the ring (gear 7) and

three planets (gears 6) connected to the carrier (gear 5). The carrier is directly connected to

gear 4. The sun-gear is connected to the steer-rack and is the output of the assembly. The

pulse will be applied on the ring gear by the pulse actuator. Details about the pulse actuator

can be found in section 4.4.

Equations belonging to the system indicated in Figure 5.1 are:

R1 1 = R2 2

(5.1)

2 = 3

(5.2)

R3 3 = R4 4

(5.3)

4 = 5

(5.4)

8 = (z + 1)5 z7

(5.5)

R7 = R8 + 2R6

(5.6)

T7 = zT8

(5.7)

T5 = (z + 1)T8

(5.8)

With Ri the radius of gear i, i the rotational speed of gear i, z the ratio between the ring7

gear and sun-gear (z = R

R8 ) and Ti the torque on gear i.

When the ring gear is stationary (7 = 0), the input versus output (1 : 8 ) has to be 1:1.

Taking this into account the spur gears need to be chosen such that the following equation,

found by using equations (5.1) to (5.5), holds:

z+1=

R2 R4

R1 R3

(5.9)

To make the steering wheel input and planetary gear-set input co-linear, the following equation

has to hold as well:

R1 + R2 = R3 + R4

(5.10)

28

The number of teeth of each gear can now be chosen such that all the above equations

hold, but it needs to be taken into account that the gears of the gear train assembly need

to be provided by the company Boston Gears [11]. The system also has to be as cheap as

possible and as compact as possible and the gears need to be able to withstand the maximum

applied torque and power. These last two constraints depend on the pressure angle, number

of teeth and diametral pitch of the gears. These three are described below.

Pressure angle

The pressure angle is the angle at a pitch point between the line of pressure which is normal

to the tooth surface and the plane tangent to the pitch surface. The company supplies gears

with pressure angles of 14.5 and 20 . Gears with a higher pressure angle have a higher load

carrying capacity, but gears with a lower pressure angle are better for extensive use, have

less change in backlash and have a higher contact ratio and therefore a smoother and quieter

operation [11]. Because of this a pressure angle of the gears of 14.5 is chosen.

Number of teeth

The ratio between the ring-gear and the sun-gear (z) is chosen to be 1.5. A lower ratio will

result in a bigger total gear diameter and therefore violates the compact constraint. Taking

a ratio of 1.5 and using the gears provided by the company, the smallest diameter of gears is

found taking 48 teeth for the sun-gear, 12 teeth for the planets and 72 teeth for the ring-gear.

The number of teeth of gears 1 to 4 can be chosen such that equations 5.9 and 5.10 hold.

This results in 16 teeth for gear 1, 20 teeth for gear 2, 12 teeth for gear 3 and 24 teeth for

gear 4.

Diametral pitch

The gear supplier provides gears not only with different numbers of teeth (N), but also with

a a different diametral pitch (P). The diametral pitch is the number of teeth in the gear for

each inch of pitch diameter. Both variables determine the pitch diameter (D) of a gear by

the following equation:

D=

N

P

(5.11)

The diametral pitch is an important factor determining the maximum torque and power that

the gear can handle: the higher the diametral pitch, the lower the maximum torque and power

that the gear can withstand.

The maximum torque and power supplied to the gears depend on the motor driving the

pulse actuator. The pulse actuator will be driven by a motor available at the University of

Waterloo. This available motor is the Kollmorgen Seidel 6SM47L-3000. The rated speed of

this motor is 3000 rpm, the rated torque at this rated speed is 2.2 Nm and the rated power is

690 W. More motor characteristics can be found in Appendix C. Using the rated power and

the approximated horsepower and torque ratings provided by the gear supplier, it is found

that the diametral pitch of the gears has to be 12 or less, otherwise the smallest gears (the

planets on the planetary gear-set) will not be able to withstand the supplied power. Since a

smaller diametral pitch results in an undesired bigger diameter of the gears a diametral pitch

of 12 is chosen for now. The maximum torque and power that a gear can handle does not

29

only depend on the diametral pitch, but also on the rotational speed of the gear. At a lower

speed the gear can handle a lower power, but a higher torque. The rotational speed and the

maximum torque supplied to each gear depends on the pulse actuator described in the next

section. At the end of this chapter it will be proven that a diametral pitch of 12 for each of

the gears is big enough to withstand the torque and power supplied on each gear separately.

5.2

Pulse actuator

The results given in Chapter 3 show that the rollover coefficient and vehicle trajectory depend

on the frequency and the amplitude of the pulse. They also show that the rollover coefficient

can be decreased by subtracting the pulse and that a desired trajectory can be obtained by

adding the pulse to the steering wheel input. Taking this into account the pulse actuator must

be able to modulate both the frequency and the amplitude of the pulse and it must be able

to switch between adding and subtracting of the pulse from the steering wheel input. The

mechanism must be able to satisfy these constraints with as little motor control as possible.

First a study is performed using the books written by I. I. Artobolevsky [12] to see if there

is an existing mechanism able to satisfy the above constrains. Some of these mechanisms are

described below. Based on the found information a mechanism is chosen. This mechanism

is further designed (see section 4.4) to be able to apply a pulse with a frequency as high as

possible.

Mechanisms

A mechanism able to modulate the frequency relatively easily by changing the rotational speed

of the motor is the three-bar mechanism (see Figure 5.2 (a)) and the four-bar mechanism (see

Figure 5.2 (b)). In the three-bar mechanism link 1 rotates around fixed axis A, causing link

2 to oscillate around fixed axis B. In the four-bar mechanism link 1 rotates around fixed axis

A, causing link 3 to oscillate around fixed axis D.

[12]

[12]

One of the disadvantage of these multiple-bar mechanisms is that the angle of oscillation

can not be changed and therefore, the amplitude of the movement can not be adjusted without

30

motor control. There are some mechanisms that are able to change the angle of oscillation

without too much motor control. These are shown in Figure 5.3.

In the mechanism shown in Figure 5.3 (a), link 2 has collar b encircling eccentric 1, which

rotates around fixed axis A. The stroke of link 3 or the oscillation of link 2 can be changed

with screw 4 by adjusting the distances between axis A and the center of roller B.

In the mechanism shown in Figure 5.3 (b) the input is given by the disk rotating around

fixed axis A, causing link 1 to oscillate around fixed axis C. The length C-D of rocker arm 1

can be changed by turning screw 2, thereby changing the angle of oscillation of link 1.

In Figure 5.3 (c) the input of the mechanism is given by crank 1 rotating around fixed

axis C, causing link 4 to slide in guide c and causing rocker link 6 to oscillate around axis

E. The angle of rotation can be varied by changing the position of point B by screw a. Note

that in this figure a ratchet is drawn, but link 6 can also be connected directly to wheel 7.

The input of the mechanism shown in Figure 5.3 (d) is given by crank link 1, rotating

around fixed axis B and is connected to slotted link 5 at point C. The rocker link is link 2

and oscillates around fixed axis B when link 1 rotates. The angle of oscillation of link 2 can

be changed by changing the position of pin A by screw 3.

of oscillation adjustment [12]

variable length [12]

angular velocity of the ratchet wheel [12]

link stroke adjustment [12]

The frequency of the movements of these mechanisms can also be easily changed by

changing the rotational speed of the motor. The disadvantage of these systems is however

31

that a lot of motor control is required to change from adding to subtracting of the pulse from

the steering wheel input. Since a lot of motor control is necessary to make sure that all the

constraints are satisfied, a simple gear-mechanism is chosen for applying the pulse on the

ring-gear of the planetary gear-set.

Worm-gear mechanism

To drive the ring-gear one can take either a spur-gear or a worm-gear. A big disadvantage

of driving the ring-gear with a spur-gear is that the ring-gear will not be stationary when

the driver rotates the steering wheel, because the available motor is not equipped with a

brake. This is why it is chosen to drive the ring-gear with a worm-gear. Other advantages of

worm-gears are that they are smooth and quiet, have a high ratio speed reduction and require

limited space.

It needs to be taken into account that the gears shall not be expected to hold a load when

the worm-gear is at rest, but theoretically a worm-gear will not back drive if the friction angle

is larger than the worm lead angle [11].

The ratio between the worm-gear and the ring-gear determines the maximum pulse frequency which can be applied to the steering wheel column. To choose the ratio it needs

to be known how much torque and power is necessary to generate a specific pulse motion.

Therefore, this is investigated next.

5.3

Power/Torque calculation

The torque and power needed to generate a specific pulse can be given directly by the software

program ADAMS, but most of these results are unreliable, because they do not converge. So

decreasing the integration tolerance of the software program gives different simulation results.

This is possibly due to interpolation problems. Therefore, an analytical model is used to

determine this maximum torque and power. The analytical model is described first, followed

by the analytical results.

Analytical model

The analytical model is derived using the simplified steering system as shown in Figure 5.4.

As can be seen, the steering system consist of a steering wheel and column, a pinion, a

rack and two tires. Ieq , beq , keq give the equivalent inertia, damping and stiffness of the total

steering system. The system can be described by the following differential equation:

1

Ts = Ieq s + beq s + keq s + Mz Tps

is

(5.12)

with Ts the torque needed to rotate the steering wheel, s the acceleration of the steering

wheel, s the angular velocity of the steering wheel and s the angle of the steering wheel,

r the scale factor to account for torque reduction by the steering gear and Tps the torque

delivered by the power steering system. The influence of the equivalent damping and stiffness

is found to be very small compared to the equivalent inertia and can therefore be neglected.

The self-aligning moment generated by the front tires is counteracted by the power steering.

The differential equation can now be reduced to the following equation:

Ts = Ieq s

(5.13)

32

The power needed to rotate the steering wheel can be calculated by the equation:

Ps = Ts s

(5.14)

To calculate the equivalent inertia of the system, some converged results from ADAMS

simulations are used. The simulations consist of the J-turn maneuver at a vehicle speed of

80 km/h. The maximum steering wheel angle input is taken to be 120 degrees from which a

symmetric pulse with an amplitude of 48 degrees is subtracted. The simulations are performed

using different frequencies. The results are:

1 Hz converges to a maximum torque on the steering wheel of 1.7 Nm

2 Hz converges to a maximum torque on the steering wheel of 6.78 Nm

3 Hz does not really converge, but shows an approximate maximum torque on the

steering wheel of 15 Nm

Using these converged results and (5.13) an equivalent inertia of the total system is found to

be 0.051 kgm2 .

To validate (5.13) with the found equivalent inertia, the torque on the steering wheel

during several repeated pulses given by the ADAMS simulations is set against the acceleration

of the steering wheel. The results are shown in Figure 5.5. As can be seen in this figure,

the simulation results are not exactly the same as the symbolic calculation, although they do

oscillate around it. The maximum and minimum torque on the steering wheel lie exactly on

the symbolic calculation line. Hence, (5.13) gives a good approximation of the needed torque

for the simulated pulse at these 3 frequencies and is thereby validated.

Analytical results

The maximum torque and power on the steering wheel needed to generate one pulse are

calculated for all three pulse forms as used in Chapter 3. For both non-symmetric pulses two

different peak-time values, 23 T and 34 T , are used. This is done to see if the peak-time value has

a big effect on the torque and power. First the torque and power are set against the frequency

33

acceleration vs torque

25

20

15

10

3 Hz

2 Hz

1 Hz

analytical

5

0

5

10

15

20

25

400

300

200

100

100

200

300

400

for each different pulse form with an amplitude of 28.2 degrees (as described in Chapter 3).

The results are shown in Figure 5.6. As can be seen, the maximum torque and power needed

to generate the non-symmetric pulses rise a lot faster compared to the symmetric pulse. The

highest needed torque and power are found for the C 0 continuous non-symmetric pulse with

the high peak-time value. The lowest needed torque and power are found for the symmetric

pulse. This can be explained by the fact that the acceleration of the symmetric pulse is lower

than for a non-symmetric pulse. Increasing the peak-time value of the non-symmetric pulses

results in a fair amount of increased torque and power, especially for higher frequencies.

The maximum needed torque and power do not only depend on the frequency but also

on the amplitude of the pulse. Therefore, the maximum needed torque and power have also

been plotted versus the amplitude for each different pulse form. This is done for a frequency

of 1, 2, 4 and 8 Hz as also used for the simulations in Chapter 3. For the non-symmetric

pulses this is done again for the two different peak-time values. The torque and power versus

the amplitude for the symmetric pulse, the C 1 continuous non-symmetric pulse and the C 0

continuous non-symmetric pulse are shown in Figures 5.7, 5.8 and 5.9, respectively. In all

the figures it can be seen that the maximum needed torque and power rise rapidly when the

amplitude is increased, especially for high frequencies.

All the above results show that the maximum torque and power needed for the pulse

depend strongly on the used pulse form, frequency and amplitude. In Chapter 3 it has

become clear that the rollover coefficient is slightly lower for the C 1 continuous non-symmetric

compared with the symmetric pulse at a frequency of 8 Hz, but the needed maximum torque

and power for this non-symmetric pulse is a lot higher. Because of this one might consider

using the symmetric pulse as input on the steering column instead of the C 1 continuous

non-symmetric pulse. Therefore, the symmetric pulse is used to further design the pulse

actuator.

34

Torque

1000

symmetric pulse

800

600

400

[Nm]

0

200

0

0

10

10

Power

10000

8000

[W]

6000

4000

2000

0

0

Frequency [Hz]

Figure 5.6: Torque and power versus the frequency for different pulse forms and peak-time values

Torque

100

f = 1 Hz

f = 2 Hz

f = 4 Hz

f = 8 Hz

[Nm]

80

60

40

20

0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

40

50

60

Power

2000

[W]

1500

1000

500

0

0

10

20

30

Amplitude [deg]

Figure 5.7: Torque and power versus the amplitude for the symmetric pulse for different frequencies

35

f = 1 Hz, peaktime = 2/3 T

f = 2 Hz, peaktime = 3/4 T

f = 2 Hz, peaktime = 2/3 T

f = 4 Hz, peaktime = 3/4 T

f = 4 Hz, peaktime = 2/3 T

f = 8 Hz, peaktime = 3/4 T

f = 8 Hz, peaktime = 2/3 T

Torque

100

[Nm]

80

60

40

20

0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

40

50

60

Power

2000

[W]

1500

1000

500

0

0

10

20

30

Amplitude [deg]

Figure 5.8: Torque and power versus the amplitude for the C 0 continuous non-symmetric pulse for different

frequencies

f = 1 Hz, peaktime = 2/3 T

f = 2 Hz, peaktime = 3/4 T

f = 2 Hz, peaktime = 2/3 T

f = 4 Hz, peaktime = 3/4 T

f = 4 Hz, peaktime = 2/3 T

f = 8 Hz, peaktime = 3/4 T

f = 8 Hz, peaktime = 2/3 T

Torque

100

[Nm]

80

60

40

20

0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

40

50

60

Power

2000

[W]

1500

1000

500

0

0

10

20

30

Amplitude [deg]

Figure 5.9: Torque and power versus the amplitude for the C 1 continuous non-symmetric pulse for different

frequencies

36

5.4

Worm-gear design

The further design of the worm gear consist of choosing the number of worm threads on

the gear. This number determines the ratio between the worm-gear and the ring-gear of the

planetary gear-set and needs to be chosen such that a maximum frequency can be applied to

the steering column.

After determining the best ratio, the exact maximum rotational speed and maximum

applied torque on each gear of the planetary gear-set can be calculated. Hereafter it can be

proven that the gears, as chosen in section 5.1, can withstand the maximum applied torque

and power.

The ratio between the worm-gear and the ring-gear can be calculated according to the

following equation:

R=

number of worm threads

(5.15)

The gear supplier provides worm-gears with single thread, double thread and quadruple

thread. So a choice can be made out of three different ratios. But before the ratios can

be calculated it is important to note that due to the design the ring-gear also needs teeth on

the outside. By choosing the amount of teeth on the outside it needs to be taken into account

that a certain space between the inside and outside teeth is necessary to be able to withstand

the forces acting on this gear. This thickness is chosen to be at least 15 mm. It also needs to

be taken into account that the gears with a diametral pitch of 12 (provided by the company)

have a face of 0.75 inch. The company provides worm-gears for this face only for gears with

a diametral pitch of 8. Therefore, the diametral pitch of the outside of the ring gear needs to

be 8. Taking this pitch and a thickness of 15 mm the number of teeth on the outside of the

ring gear is chosen to be 56. This results in a ring gear with a thickness between the teeth of

16.25 mm. Proof of this can be found in appendix D. Due to the design, this ring gear can

not be delivered by the company and therefore needs to be manufactured separately.

Using this number of teeth and the available number of worm threads, the possible gear

ratios become 56:1, 28:1 and 14:1. By choosing the ratio it is important to note that the

maximum frequency applied on the sun gear can be constrained by the maximum available

power, torque and rotational speed delivered by the motor. As already mentioned, the maximum available power of the motor is 690 W. Using the results from section 4.3 this means

that the maximum frequency which can be applied on the sun gear for a symmetric pulse

with an amplitude of 28.2 degrees is 7.67 Hz. The highest possible frequency for a symmetric

pulse based on the maximum rotational speed and maximum available torque can be found

using the following equations:

sun

sun (t, f ) =

= A 2f sin(2f t)

t

sun,max (f ) = A 2f

2 sun

Tsun (t, f ) = I

= 0.051 A (2f )2 cos(2f t)

t2

Tsun,max (f ) = 0.051 A (2f )2

37

(5.16)

(5.17)

(5.18)

(5.19)

(5.20)

with A the amplitude in radians, f the frequency in Hz and t the time in seconds. Taking

the available ratios and using a ratio between the ring-gear and the sun-gear (z) of 1.5, the

maximum rotational speeds of the sun gear become 8.41, 16.83 and 33.66 rad/s, respectively.

Taking the rated torque of 2.2 Nm delivered by the motor, the maximum torque on the sungear becomes 82 Nm, 41 Nm and 24.3 Nm, respectively2 . The maximum frequencies based

on maximum rotational speed and torque can now be calculated using (5.18) and (5.20).

The results are shown in Table 5.1. From these results it can be concluded that the highest

frequency (5.44 Hz) can be generated taking a ratio of 28:1 (so double thread on the wormgear).

ratio

56:1

28:1

14:1

based on max

2.72 Hz

5.44 Hz

18.89 Hz

based on Tmax

9.10 Hz

6.43 Hz

4.95 Hz

Table 5.1: maximum frequency for each ratio based on the maximum rotational speed and

torque

The ratios between gears of the planetary gear-set and the worm-gear become:

Ratio from worm gear to gear 7 = 28:1

Ratio from gear 7 to gear 6 = 1:6

Ratio from gear 6 to gear 8 = 1:4

ratio from gear 7 to gear 8 = 1:1.5

Ratio from gear worm gear to gear 8 = 18.67:1

The maximum amount of torque and rotational speed on each gear of the planetary gear-set

and worm gear can now be calculated. The results are given in Table 5.2. According to the

gear supplier, each gear of the planetary gear-set has to have a diametral pitch of 12 or less

to be able to withstand this maximum amount of torque, as already chosen earlier. The pitch

diameter of each gear can now be calculated by (5.11). These results are also shown in Table

5.2.

gear

planets

ringinside

ringoutside

sun

worm

Tmax [Nm]

10.25

61.6

61.6

41

2.2

max [rad/s]

67.23

11.21

11.21

16.83

314.16

25.4

152.4

177.8

101.6

38.1

2

The maximum speed of the gear using the smallest ratio is now relatively high and therefore the motor

speed can be lowered, resulting in a higher possible torque of around 2.6 Nm

38

5.5

Discussion

A pulse actuation system is designed consisting of a gear-train assembly and a pulse actuator.

The gear-train assembly consist of 4 spur gears and a planetary gear-set. The chosen gears

are available at Boston Gears and are able to withstand the torque and power delivered by

the pulse actuator. The pulse actuator is chosen to be a worm gear and will be connected to

the ring gear of the planetary gear-set. The maximum torque and power needed to generate

a certain pulse motion is calculated and used to determine the ratio between the worm gear

and the ring gear. This ratio is chosen such that a symmetric pulse with an amplitude of

28.2 degrees and a maximum frequency of 5.4 Hz can be added or subtracted to the steering

wheel input.

Since the ring-gear of the planetary gear-set is connected to the worm-gear, the ring has

teeth on the inside and on the outside. The thickness between the inside and outside teeth

is 16.25 mm. A finite element analysis needs to be performed to see if this is thick enough to

handle the applied torque and power.

The inertia of the spur gears and the planetary gear-set has not been taken into account

in the equations used in this chapter and the efficiency of the gears are chosen to be 100

%. Both will lower the maximum torque and power supplied to each gear and therefore, the

maximum pulse frequency which can be applied to the steering wheel column will also be

lower. To investigate the influence of the inertia and the efficiency of the gears, more research

needs to be performed.

The maximum amount of torque which needs to be supplied by the driver on the steering

wheel during normal driving is around the 1 to 5 Nm according to [13]. This is so low due to

the power steering system. This means that the torque on the spur gears 1 to 4 will not be

higher than 5 Nm and therefore the diametral pitch of gears 1 to 4 can be chosen randomly,

as long as they are the same.

39

Chapter 6

6.1

Conclusions

The effects of different pulse forms, amplitudes and frequencies on the vehicle rollover and

trajectory using the Pulsed Active Steering Control system is investigated by making simulations with the software program ADAMS. For the simulations a J-turn maneuver is chosen,

using a steering wheel input with a subtracted pulse and with an added pulse. The pulse

frequencies studied are 1, 2, 4 and 8 Hz. The different pulse forms studied are a symmetric

pulse, a C 0 continuous non-symmetric pulse and a C 1 continuous non-symmetric pulse.

The results from the simulations using a steering wheel input with a subtracted pulse show

that the deviation from an uncontrolled vehicle trajectory is the largest for a subtracted pulse

with a frequency of 4 Hz, while the lowest vehicle rollover is found for the highest frequency.

So the best combination of vehicle trajectory and rollover is found for a subtracted pulse with

a frequency of 8 Hz. The pulse amplitude is the most important factor determining the path

deviation and the amount of decreased rollover coefficient: a higher pulse amplitude results

in a lower vehicle rollover, but also in a higher path deviation. If the amplitude of each pulse

form is altered such that the same vehicle trajectory is given, the lowest vehicle rollover is

found for the C 1 continuous non-symmetric pulse, closely followed by the symmetric pulse.

However, the lowest vehicle rollover is obtained for the steering wheel input with a constant

subtracted value.

The results from the simulations using a steering wheel input with an added pulse show

that each pulse form, with a specific frequency and amplitude, can be added to decrease or

even delete a path deviation created by understeer or wind disturbance. Adding a symmetric pulse increases the rollover coefficient less than the C 1 continuous non-symmetric pulse.

However, adding a constant value to the steering wheel input increases the rollover the least.

So the results show that the Pulsed Active Steering Control system is able to decrease

the rollover coefficient by subtracting a pulse and is able to decrease or even delete a path

deviation by adding the pulse to the steering wheel input. However, the best steering wheel

input is found to be the one with a subtracted or added constant value, which is the case for

the Active Steering Control system.

The results found with ADAMS have been validated with the software program Maple

in combination with DynaFlexPro by comparing the self-aligning moment of the front tires.

This is done for the symmetric and the C 0 continuous non-symmetric pulse for a frequency of

40

1 and 4 Hz. It is found that the results are not exactly the same, but the differences between

the programs seem to be consistent for different pulse forms and for different frequencies.

Therefore, the found results can be accepted.

To validate the results shown in Chapter 2 and 3 experimentally and to study the mechanical effect of the PASC on the mechanical steering system, a pulse actuation system is

designed to be built in a test-setup. The pulse actuation system consist of a gear-train assembly and a pulse actuator. The gear-assembly comprises 4 gears and a planetary gear-set. The

gears of the planetary gear-set are chosen such that they can handle the maximum applied

torque and power. A worm-gear is selected as pulse actuator, since other mechanisms do not

seem to be able to add or subtract a pulse with different amplitudes and frequencies without

a lot of motor control. The ratio between the worm-gear and the ring-gear of the planetary

gear-set is chosen such that a symmetric pulse with a maximum frequency of 5.4 Hz can be

subtracted or added to the steering column.

6.2

Recommendations

Simulations have shown that subtracting pulses with low frequencies result in an increased

vehicle rollover, while high frequencies result in a decreased vehicle rollover compared to the

uncontrolled vehicle rollover. So there is a specific frequency for which the vehicle rollover

starts to decrease instead of increase. The results also show that the deviation from the

uncontrolled vehicle trajectory increases if the frequency is increased, but the deviation starts

to decrease if the frequency is increased beyond a specific value. No study is performed to find

these specific frequencies, since it is expected that this depends on the vehicle parameters and

therefore this study goes beyond the scope of this report. More investigation can be performed

to find these specific frequencies.

It is shown that the form of the subtracted or added pulse to the steering wheel input

has an effect on the vehicle trajectory and rollover. Therefore, it is possible that there is a

pulse form which is able to decrease the vehicle rollover even more than the C 1 continuous

non-symmetric pulse. Further research can be performed to find a pulse form which is able

to decrease the vehicle rollover even more.

It is expected that the effects of different pulse forms, frequencies and amplitudes also

depend on the vehicle velocity. At higher velocities the lateral acceleration is higher and the

vehicle is rolling or skidding more. The effect of the PASC system on the vehicle trajectory

and rollover at higher velocities can therefore be investigated as well.

A future project is to built the test setup to validate the found results experimentally and

to investigate the mechanical effect of the PASC system on the mechanical steering system.

It is expected that the PASC system has a big effect on tire wear and driving comfort.

This needs to be studied as well.

41

Bibliography

[1] NHTSA Annual Assessment, Traffic Safety Facts, NHTSA DOT HS 810 809, 2006

[2] J. Ackermann, Dr. T. B

unte and D. Odenthal, Advantages of active steering for vehicle

dynamics control, German Aerospace Center, D.99ME013, 1999

[3] J. Ackermann, Verfahren zum Lenken von Strassenfahrzeugen mit Vorder- und Hinterradlenkung, Patent No. P 4028 320 Deutsches Patentamt Munchen, Anmeldung 6.9.90,

erteitl 18.02.93; European Patent 047 130, US Patent 5375057, 1993

[4] D. Odenthal, T. B

unte, and J. Ackermann, Nonlinear steering and braking control for

vehicle rollover avoidance, European Control Conference, (Karlsruhe, Germany), 1999

[5] D. N. Wormley, Analysis of automotive roll-over dynamics, Course at Carl Cranz

Gesellschaft, Oberpfaffenhofen, Germany, 1992

[6] M. Nagai, M. Shino, F. Gao, Study on integrated control of active front steer angle and

direct yaw moment, JSAE review 23 (2002) 309-315, Tokyo University of Agriculture

and Technology, 2001

[7] A. R. Orozco, Evaluation of an Active Steering System, Masters Degree Project, The

Royal Institute of Technology, 2004

[8] C. C. Kuo, Sports Utility Vehicle Rollover Control with Pulsed Active Steering Control

Strategy, Masters Degree Project, University of Waterloo, 2005

[9] I. Besselink, T. Veldhuizen and H. Nijmeijer, Improving Yaw Dynamics by Feedforward

Rear Wheel Steering, IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium, Eindhoven, 2008

[10] J. Fenton, Handbook of automotive design analysis, Mercury house business publications ltd., pp. 192-193, 1973

[11] www.bostongears.com

[12] I. I. Artobolevsky, Mechanisms in Modern Engineering Design, Volume I to V, 19751980

[13] S. Beiker, Verbesserungsmoglichkeiten des Fahrverhaltens von Pkw durch zusammenwirkende Regelsysteme, PhD Thesis, Technical University of Braunschweig, Germany,

2000.

42

Appendix A

The performed simulation consists of a pulse with an amplitude of 120 degrees and a frequency

of 8 Hz. The pulse starts at a time of 1.5 seconds instead of 2 seconds and ends at a time of

5.5 seconds instead of 5 seconds. This time area is chosen because the rollover coefficient is

about 50% of the maximum rollover coefficient at this start and end time. The result of the

simulation is shown in figure A.1. It can be seen that the rollover coefficient is decreased for

the entire simulation time. Note that the path deviation will be bigger because of the lower

average steering wheel input.

Rollover coefficient versus time

unpulsed

small pulse time interval

long pulse time interval

Rollover coefficient

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0

0

10

Time [s]

Figure A.1: Rollover coefficient for a pulse with a frequency of 8 Hz and an amplitude of 120 degrees between

t = 1.5 - 5.5

43

Appendix B

freq (Hz)

1

2

4

8

a

0.25

0.125

0.0625

0.03125

b

0.005

0.00125

0.000313

0.000078

c

0.045

0.01125

0.002813

0.000703

Table B.1: Values a, b and c for different frequencies used for the non-symmetric pulse

44

Appendix C

Motor characteristics

Definition

Standstill current

Rotor moment of inertia

Static friction torque

Radial load permitted at shaft end with rated speed

Axial load permitted at shaft end with rated speed

Electrical power

Table C.1: Technical data of the motor

45

Value

2.3

1.6

0.05

270

90

14

Unit

A

kgcm2

Nm

N

N

W

Appendix D

The outside pitch diameter of the ring gear depends on the inside pitch diameter and the

space between the inside and outside pitch diameter (d):

(D.1)

D7,outside = D7,inside + addenduminside + d + dedendumoutside

N

72

Dinside =

=

=6

(D.2)

P

12

1

1

addenduminside = a =

=

(D.3)

P

12

2.2

2.2

dedendumoutside = ht a =

+ 0.002 =

+ 0.002 = 0.277

(D.4)

P

8

The different used parameters are shown in figure D.1. Note that the values in the

equations are in inches. Taking a minimum of 15 mm for the distance between the inside and

outside teeth, the outside of the ring gear becomes 176.55 mm. The number of teeth on the

outside can now be calculated by:

176.55

8 = 55.6

(D.5)

25.4

So the number of teeth on the outside of the ring gear is 56. This results in a total

thickness d of 16.25 mm.

N =DP =

46

- Chung Autonomous 2006Enviado porDeok Jin Lee
- Liebherr A 900 C Litronic EDC Hydraulic Excavator Service Repair Manual SN24677 and up.pdfEnviado porjfjksekdmeik
- Automotive-electronics-2010-sampleEnviado porSurender Reddy D
- Sheriff's Report: June 22Enviado porErica McClain
- IJEET_06_08_005Enviado porIAEME Publication
- Hysteresis Vector Controller for Three Phase Induction MotorEnviado porIJSTR Research Publication
- BCT-Module 04.pdfEnviado porgsudhanta1604
- Active Guidance and Dynamic Flight Mechanics for Model RocketsEnviado porĐăng Khôi Trần
- JTM031101[1]Enviado porPappuRamaSubramaniam
- Wave Drift Damping - NewmanEnviado porleandro_soares2000
- NON-DLE_Fuel_V2-1LEnviado porDenis Jimenez
- Simulink Control DesignEnviado porYonas Ghiwot
- ElctronicFaultFinding 79strEnviado poribiz4
- Steering System(1)Enviado pordevilalsvnce
- 30-86-1-SM(6)Enviado porSanthosh Lingappa
- Full Text 15Enviado porSatishReddy
- IJIRAE::Water Level Controller by Fuzzy LogicEnviado porIJIRAE- International Journal of Innovative Research in Advanced Engineering
- paper 19Enviado porapi-282905843
- FCTM_A321_R(10SEP14).pdfEnviado porhlvtruong
- Ada 493999Enviado porAndré Ostrufka
- Automotive Steering Systems.pptEnviado porDineshBirdi
- M36d Manual Sterring Gear.pdfEnviado porLuis Marquez
- Weighfeeders for bulk solids.pdfEnviado porpuracsinteses
- bvnfcgbfgmnhlkflfjhçlkfghjfgljdfçlgudfouyoirjlkjhçdlkfjhfgjgdflkiEnviado porWenderson Cirilo
- AX90044-i001_-_SCX10™_Deadbolt™_RTREnviado porRicardo Hernandez
- BF106 BF120Enviado porOtoniel Nuñez
- Artigo Acidente de Trânsito Derrapagem Alta Velocidade2016!01!1470Enviado porAlexandre Lara
- Safari Storme Muscled for More BrochureEnviado porcharan_p@rediffmail.com
- 1.pdfEnviado porJuan Sebastian
- Pump It Down Re v1.4Enviado porMason S

- Steering System & Suspension Design for 2005 Formula SAE-A Racer CarEnviado porPrihastyaWishnutama
- Gauge_032017Enviado porPCezzz
- Auto Express - March 8 2017Enviado porPCezzz
- standard-tube-map.pdfEnviado porJavier
- SAE - Design of a Suspension for a CarEnviado porEnrique Balam
- Predictive Active Steering Control for Autonomous Vehicle SystemsEnviado porjiugarte1
- Hydraulic Power Steering System Design in Road VehiclesEnviado porKart01
- 11254!!!Enviado porPCezzz
- FS2014 Event Guide WEBEnviado porPCezzz
- 626537Enviado porRuth Buscombe
- 1-s2.0-S0043164813005966-mainEnviado porPCezzz
- art%3A10.1007%2FBF03325752Enviado porPCezzz
- P_2519Enviado porPCezzz
- P_2520Enviado porPCezzz
- Active Control of Narrow Tilting Vehicle DynamicsEnviado porPCezzz
- PhD Thesis 640529Enviado porPCezzz
- 00463536 f de 85 Be 132000000Enviado porPCezzz
- 2012o%27neillmscrEnviado porPCezzz
- DownloadEnviado porPCezzz
- Tyre ModelsEnviado porPCezzz
- How Many Words Should Each Section of a 10000 Word Business Dissertation Be_ _ Yahoo AnswersEnviado porPCezzz
- Um06 Man Nutz-illeEnviado porPCezzz
- Us 5086861Enviado porPCezzz
- Formula Student FlyerEnviado porPCezzz
- 1849Enviado porPCezzz
- Us 8762004Enviado porPCezzz
- pub-6Enviado porPCezzz
- Turbocharger Failure Analysis 3-09Enviado porPCezzz

- Tcits Presentation -October 2014Enviado porĐức Mụp
- RA 9165 PptEnviado porRassey Mae Llerin
- electric field insect.pdfEnviado porFarid Hendra Pradana
- sc_manual_sl_English.pdfEnviado porvictor Sanmiguel
- Ground Vibrations and Air Blast Effects Induced by Blasting in Open Pit Mines Case of Metlaoui Mining Basin Southwestern Tunisia 2381 8719 1000247Enviado porΙωάννης Ζαφειράτος
- Augmented DesktopEnviado poryaldabaoth.zengawii
- SMEs Development in MongoliaEnviado porADBI Events
- Quotation for Fly Ash Brick MachinesEnviado porVetri Odayakulam
- EL MEJOR PARA EL CALCULO HIDRAULICO.pdfEnviado porMarcos
- Lessons in Leadership for Teams in Crimson Tide (1995)Enviado porVedant Prusty
- Yazoo - Only YouEnviado porvasilisc
- Practical Science Assessment Yr6Enviado porsismero
- Gampopa Essence Mahamudra 1Enviado porgabriela
- NicankoEnviado porAnonymous 51AHYfkP
- BCP Template.xlsEnviado porDark Sight
- Report the History-Present and Future of CoachingEnviado porTeodora
- Robert Schumann Sheet Music on MusicaNeo (Digital Download)Enviado porAlexisPogres
- Destination Brand IdentityEnviado porAditya MIshra
- Part3 T05 PowerPad Calculation Wizard TutorialEnviado porPrawin Kumar
- YouTube Creator Playbook.pdfEnviado pordorje@blueyonder.co.uk
- Estudio Sacroiliaca MulliganEnviado porIsabelGuijarroMartinez
- Brackets (Text Editor)Enviado porMaycol Nay Mendoza Oviedo
- 5Enviado porTeuku Irwanda
- datagridview faqEnviado porNguyễn Anh Dũng
- Air Line Management System | DBMS projectEnviado porTechnical Aniket
- WPS-08Enviado porAnonymous 7vljJzH
- Farm AnimalsEnviado porProject Director ATMA
- Strategic Plan Draft for Gamifying the Movement Athlete AppEnviado porHospes Comesque
- Soal Bahasa Inggris Kelas 5Enviado porPuspa Lalonowati
- Proceedings of the SGP – PEMSEA MeetingEnviado porPEMSEA (Partnerships in Environmental Management for the Seas of East Asia)

## Muito mais do que documentos

Descubra tudo o que o Scribd tem a oferecer, incluindo livros e audiolivros de grandes editoras.

Cancele quando quiser.