10292

Evaluation of a Pulsed Active
Steering Control System

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 J-turn maneuver input . . . . . . . . .

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
C.1 Torque (Nm) versus speed (rpm) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
45
ferent frequencies
iii
D.1 Tooth parts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
iv
46
List of Tables
3.1
Parameters of the used demo vehicle model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
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
C.1 Technical data of the motor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
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
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

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
roll acceleration of vehicle

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 Pulsed Active Steering effects

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 Pulse actuation system

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 Conclusions and recommendations

6.1 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.2 Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
40
40
41
Bibliography
41
A Pulse during an extended time
43
B Non-symmetric pulse values
44
C Motor characteristics
45
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
viii
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
D Calculation ring gear thickness
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
The overview of this report is as follows:

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
Pulsed Active Steering effects

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
Table 3.1: Parameters of the used demo vehicle model
Figure 3.1: Vehicle motions defined according to the SAE convention
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
Steering wheel input vs time
steering wheel angle [deg]
Jturn maneuver input
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0
10
time [s]
Figure 3.2: Representation of the J-turn maneuver input

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]
Figure 3.3: Representation of the used symmetric and non-symmetric pulse

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.
Figure 3.4: Nonlinear Vehicle Yaw Model
Figure 3.5: Nonlinear Vehicle Roll Model

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
Vehicle dynamics with pulse subtraction
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.
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
Symmetric pulse input
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
A high frequency of 8 Hz results in a smaller path deviation compared to the 4 Hz

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]
(a) Pulse amplitude 120 degrees
(b) Pulse amplitude 80 degrees
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 vs time
10
Time [s]
10
Time [s]
(a) Pulse amplitude 120 degrees
(b) Pulse amplitude 80 degrees
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
Non-symmetric pulse input
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]
(a) Vehicle trajectory for a non-symmetric pulse

with different frequencies
(b) Average vehicle trajectory for the symmetric

and non-symmetric pulse
Figure 3.9: Vehicle trajectories

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
0.5
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
Pulse peak-time modulation

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.
Vehicle trajectory
0
20
30
y [m]
unpulsed
nonsym. pulse, a = 1/4 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]
(a) Vehicle trajectory
(b) Rollover coefficient
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
Optimal subtraction method
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
C0 continous nonsym. pulse
0.6
C1 continous nonsym. pulse
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
time
Figure 3.12: Representation of the different pulse forms

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
sym. pulse, amp 76
new nsp, amp 72
constant subtraction
0.5
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
Vehicle dynamics with pulse addition
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).
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]
(a) Steering wheel angle input
(b) Vehicle trajectory
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.
0.3
unpulsed
C0 cont. nonsym. pulse
C1 cont. nonsym. pulse
symmetric pulse
averaged unpulsed
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
DFP and Maple simulations
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
Selfaligning moment vs time

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
Pulse actuation system

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.
(a) 3-Dimensional drawing designed by A. Berlin
(b) Working scheme
Figure 5.1: Gear-train assembly design

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.
(a) three-bar rotating-slotted-link mechanism

[12]
(b) four-bar crank and rocker-arm mechanism

[12]
Figure 5.2: multiple-bar mechanisms

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.
(a) Link-gear mechanism with driven link angle

of oscillation adjustment [12]
(c) Four-bar mechanism with a rocker arm of

variable length [12]
(b) Lever-ratchet mechanism with variable

angular velocity of the ratchet wheel [12]
(d) Three-bar link-gear mechanism with driven

link stroke adjustment [12]
Figure 5.3: adjustable-amplitude mechanisms

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
Figure 5.4: Steering system

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
Torque on steering wheel [Nm]
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
acceleration of steering wheel [rad/s ]
Figure 5.5: Torque versus steering wheel acceleration

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
C1 nonsym. pulse, peak time = 3/4 T
600
C nonsym. pulse, peak time = 2/3 T
400
C nonsym. pulse, peak time = 2/3 T
[Nm]
C0 nonsym. pulse, peak time = 3/4 T

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 = 3/4 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

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 ring gear teeth

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

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
Pitch diameter [mm]

25.4
152.4
177.8
101.6
38.1
Table 5.2: Planetary gear-set and worm gear data

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
Conclusions and recommendations

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
Pulse during an extended time

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.
unpulsed
small pulse time interval
long pulse time interval
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
Non-symmetric pulse values

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
Figure C.1: Torque (Nm) versus speed (rpm)

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
Calculation ring gear thickness

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 =
Figure D.1: Tooth parts
46

10292

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

10292

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Evaluation of a Pulsed Active

Steering Control System

Representation of the J-turn maneuver input . . . . . . . . .

C.1 Torque (Nm) versus speed (rpm) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

D.1 Tooth parts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Parameters of the used demo vehicle model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

C.1 Technical data of the motor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

roll acceleration of vehicle

3 Pulsed Active Steering effects

5 Pulse actuation system

6 Conclusions and recommendations

A Pulse during an extended time

B Non-symmetric pulse values

D Calculation ring gear thickness

The overview of this report is as follows:

Pulsed Active Steering effects

Table 3.1: Parameters of the used demo vehicle model

Figure 3.1: Vehicle motions defined according to the SAE convention

Steering wheel input vs time

steering wheel angle [deg]

Jturn maneuver input

Figure 3.2: Representation of the J-turn maneuver input

Figure 3.3: Representation of the used symmetric and non-symmetric pulse

Figure 3.4: Nonlinear Vehicle Yaw Model

Figure 3.5: Nonlinear Vehicle Roll Model

Vehicle dynamics with pulse subtraction

steering wheel angle [deg]

Symmetric pulse input

A high frequency of 8 Hz results in a smaller path deviation compared to the 4 Hz

(a) Pulse amplitude 120 degrees

(b) Pulse amplitude 80 degrees

Rollover coefficient vs time

(a) Pulse amplitude 120 degrees

(b) Pulse amplitude 80 degrees

Non-symmetric pulse input

(a) Vehicle trajectory for a non-symmetric pulse

(b) Average vehicle trajectory for the symmetric

Figure 3.9: Vehicle trajectories

Rollover coefficient versus time

Pulse peak-time modulation

(a) Vehicle trajectory

(b) Rollover coefficient

Optimal subtraction method

C0 continous nonsym. pulse

C1 continous nonsym. pulse

Figure 3.12: Representation of the different pulse forms

Rollover coefficient versus time

Vehicle dynamics with pulse addition

steering wheel angle [deg]

(a) Steering wheel angle input

(b) Vehicle trajectory

DFP and Maple simulations

Selfaligning moment vs time

Selfaligning moment vs time

Selfaligning moment vs time

Selfaligning moment vs time

Pulse actuation system

(a) 3-Dimensional drawing designed by A. Berlin

(b) Working scheme

Figure 5.1: Gear-train assembly design

(a) three-bar rotating-slotted-link mechanism

(b) four-bar crank and rocker-arm mechanism

Figure 5.2: multiple-bar mechanisms