Proceedings ofthe 2009 IEEE

International Conference onMechatronics and Automation

August 9 - 12, Changchun, China
Fuzzy Control of Semi-Active Automotive
Suspensions
Aws Abu-Khudhair, Radu Muresan, and Simon X. Yang
School ofEngineering
University ofGuelph
Guelph, Ontario LiG 2Wi, Canada
{aabukhud, rmuresan, syang}@uoguelph.ca
Abstract - This paper presents a new fuzzy controller for
semi-active vehicle suspension systems, which has a significantly
fewer number of rules in comparison to existing fuzzy
controllers. The proposed fuzzy controller has only nine fuzzy
rules, whose performance is equivalent to the existing fuzzy
controller with 49 fuzzy rules. The proposed controller with less
number of fuzzy rules will be more feasible and cost-efficient in
hardware implementation. For comparison, a linear quadratic
regulator controlled semi-active suspension, and a passive
suspension are also implemented and simulated. Simulation
results show that the ride comfort and road holding are
improved by 28% and 31.4, respectively, with the fuzzy
controlled semi-active suspension system, in comparison to the
linear quadratic regulator controlled semi-active suspension.
Index Terms - Passive Suspension System, Semi-Active
Suspension System, Linear Quadratic Regulator, Fuzzy Control.
I. INTRODUCTION
The main function of suspension systems is to isolate the
disturbances from the road to the passenger, while
maintaining good vehicle handling and road holding.
Currently most commercial vehicles employ a standard
passive suspension system consisting of purely passive
elements (spring and damper). Inherent to the passive
suspensions is a trade-off between ride quality and road
holding characteristics. Soft springs and dampers allow for
good ride quality at the expense of increased vertical wheel
and body motion. Meanwhile to provide good road holding
and handling, large spring and damper coefficients are
required [1]. Hence, a trade-off must be made by choosing
coefficients large enough to reduce wheel and vehicle motion,
yet small enough to provide an acceptable ride quality [1, 2].
One solution to this trade-off problem is the addition of a
controllable element (variable damper) to the passive
suspension system; this setup is referred to as semi-active
suspension. In order to achieve the required response from
the semi-active suspension system, a suitable control strategy
must be implemented to provide the necessary damping
coefficient for the variable damper in the semi-active
suspension. The focus of this paper is to provide a suitable
control method to generate the required damping coefficient.
Fuzzy logic control (FLC) has been extensively studied
and implemented in various systems such as: cruise control,
engine speed control, air conditioning units, torque generation
for electrical vehicles, and most recently self-parking vehicle
978-1-4244-2693-5/09/$25.00 2009 IEEE 2118
system [3-5]. A main advantage for this type of control
strategy is that an accurate description of the system is not
necessary, also since the system relies on various sensors,
imprecisions inherent in the measurements obtained by the
various sensors are unavoidable, fuzzy logic control is ideal
for this type of situation, since accurate and precise input is
not required. Due to these advantages, many researchers
choose to look into this type of control strategy to eliminate
the trade-off between the ride quality and vehicle handling. In
[6], the authors proposed a fuzzy controller tuned to enhance
mainly the ride comfort of the vehicle. Through various
simulations they were able to show that the FLC is able to
provide a superior ride quality in comparison to other
common control strategies such as skyhook control [10, 13].
In [8] a FLC that is capable of providing a reasonable
performance with respect to both ride quality and vehicle
handling was developed. The authors achieved this by using a
total of 49 rules in their FLC.
This paper investigates the performance enhancement a
fuzzy logic controller is able to provide. The simulations will
be performed on a quarter car suspension model. In order to
fully understand the performance enhancement the FLC is
able to provide, two additional suspension systems are
modelled and simulated using the same test conditions, these
are the standard passive suspension system [2, 9] and a LQR
controlled semi-active suspension system [1, 2, 9].
The remainder of this paper is structured as follows.
Section II outlines the automotive suspension model used to
test the performance of both passive and semi-active
suspension systems, and the implementation of the standard
LQR control method. The proposed fuzzy control method is
given in Section III. Section IV presents the simulation
results. Finally, the conclusion and future work are provided
in Section V.
II. AUTOMOTIVE SUSPENSION MODEL AND LINEAR
QUADRATIC REGULATOR
A. Quarter Car Model
A quarter car suspension model with two degrees of
freedom is shown in Fig.I. The model represents the vehicle
suspension system as it relates to one of the four wheels. This
model assumes that the vehicle tire does not leave the ground,
the vertical displacement of both the vehicle body and the tire
are measured from their respective equilibrium positions, and
the vehicle body (sprung mass) is a rigid body.
----.J z,
----.J z.
----.J z,
Fig. 1 Quarter car passive suspension system.
Fig. 2 Quarter car semi-active suspension system.
k, = 16000 N/m, b
s
=1000 Ns/m, k, = 160000 N/m,
m, = 240 kg, m
ll
=36 kg.
The model described above must be extended to properly
implement the functionality of the semi-active suspension [1,
9, 13]. This is accomplished by adding a variable damper in
parallel with the passive elements (spring and damper). By
connecting the variable damper in this manner the
performance of the system is enhanced, by providing an
additional support to the passive elements, and allowing for
increased stability of the system. Fig. 2 shows a schematic
diagram of the system.
State Output
o
11m,
o
-1/ m
u
Fig. 3 Block diagram ofthe semi-active suspension.
L-----1 A
z,
.:
000
o 1/ m
u
0
Ro ad Disturbance
Input
B. Linear Quadratic Regulator
Linear quadratic regulator theory has been studied, and
used by many researchers in an attempt to design an optimal
controller for active and semi-active suspension systems [2, 9,
12]. This type of controller works towards generating an
optimal actuator force that leads to the minimization of a
performance index. This performance index (5) is related to
the ride quality, suspension deflection (Xl) and tire deflection
(X3)'
J I
1 E[T
f
"
2
2 .2 2 .2] (5)
= ;'!!,T c, 0 Z, +PIXI +P2 z, +P,x, +P4
z
u
By introducing the variable damper to the passive system
equations (I) to (3) are modified to account for the additional
element. Equation (4) shows the modified state space
representation of this system.
X=AX+NXb"",; + Li, (4)
where b
Semi
is the damping coefficient of the variable damper
(controlled parameter) in the design, and
The block diagram representation of the state space equations
used in the implementation of the quarter car semi-active
suspension system is shown in Fig.3.
By comparing (3) and (4), and inspecting Fig. 3, It IS
evident that the passive suspension model is equivalent to the
semi-active suspension model, with the assumption that the
damping coefficient of the variable damper is zero for the
passive suspension. This fact allows for a simple simulation of
both the passive and semi-active systems.
(3)
,L =[ ,
-I
o
-I
bLm,
1
-b, I m.
o
o
o
In the quarter car model shown in Fig. I, k, and b
s
represent the spring constant and the damping coefficient,
respectively; m, is the sprung mass that represents the quarter
car equivalent vehicle body mass; mil represents the unsprung
mass that is the equivalent to the mass of the vehicle axel and
tire; and ZII, z, and z; represent the vertical displacements from
static equilibrium of the sprung mass, unsprung mass, and the
road, respectively. The linearized equations of motion are
written as [9]
m,=, +b,(i, -iu)+k,(z, -z.,)=O, (I)
mu=u- b,(i, - i
u)
- k,(z, - zu)+ k,(z, - z,) =O. (2)
In order to implement this model, a state space
representation is constructed as [9]
X=AX +Li"
where
A=[-/1m, -b,11m,
o 0
k, I m
u
b, I m
u
- k, I m
u
[
XI [Z' . :
X
2
Z
X= = s ,
X
3
Zu -z,.
X
4
i
u
where Xl is the suspension deflection; X2 is the absolute
velocity of the sprung mass; X3 is tire deflection; and X4 is the
absolute velocity of the unsprung mass. For this system the
coefficients are described as [9]
2119
PO
0,4 0.3
LG
(c)
(a)
ZR
(b)
ME Sl\I
500.0 1000.0 1500.0 2000.0 2500.0 3000.0 3500.0 4000.0
Dampi ng Coefficient
0,2-
-0.3 -0',2 0.'0 0:1 0.'2
Suspe nsi on Defl ecti on (em)
ZR
1.0-
0.8 -
0.6 -
/I
0.4
-
0.2 -
0.0
0.0
,.
Fig. 6: Membership Functions for the proposed Fe. (a) Suspension deflection
Input MFs ; (b) Body velocity Input MFs; (c) Damping coefficient output MFs.
,t
III. THE PROPOSED NEW Fuzzy CONTROLLER
FLC is one of the most efficient and popular control
methods that currently exist for controlling the variable
damping system in semi-active suspensions. A standard FLC
is composed of a fuzzification interface, fuzzy rule base,
decision making logic, and defizzification interface [14, 15].
The Fuzzification interface is the process which transforms
measurements into fuzzy sets which are then used in the fuzzy
rule base, and decision making process. The Defuzzification
interface is the process which converts the fuzzy output into
crisp values to be used by the plant. The input and output
functions used in the controller depend on the working
dynamics of the plant to be controlled, and are subject to the
designers knowledge and method of design.
In the proposed FLC two inputs are implemented, they
are the suspension deflection (SD, Fig. 6.a), and the sprung
mass body velocity (BY, Fig. 6.b). Each of these inputs is
represented by using three triangular membership functions
(MFs) with the following linguistic variables: Negative (NE),
Zero (ZR), and Positive (PO). The output membership
function (Damping Coefficient, Fig. 6.c) is designed as a
singleton fuzzy set composed of five membership functions
with the linguistic variables : Zero (ZR), Small (SM), Medium
(ME), Large (LG), and Extra Large (XL).
NE ZR PO

0 6-
0,4-
(b)
--.J z,
--.J z.
(a)
Fig. 4 Equivalence offorce control and damper control systems . (a) Force
control ; (b) damper control.
Fig. 5 LQR semi-active control laws.
In Fig. 5, the active force is given as
F;, = -K1(B
T
P+S)x, (6)
where
R= _ _I_ 0
2 ' 2 2 2 ,
m
s
m
s
m
s
m
s
8=[0 11m, 0 l /mJ , P=[PI p, P
3
pJ
F
b =- - -'-
stmJ
.\ 0: - X .J
The performance matrix (P) above contains the weights
used in the LQR control performance; these weights are set
depending on which aspects of the suspension system are
desired to be enhanced. In this paper the values are picked to
reduce the sprung mass acceleration without significantly
penalizing the other performance aspects. This is done by
using very small coefficients in the performance matrix [9]:
P = [0.4 0.16 0.4 0.16]
Using the determined active force, the damping
coefficient of the semi-active damper can be calculated using
the conditions in Fig. 5. Although this control method
provides a reasonable performance enhancement to all
performance criteria, it requires specific and very accurate
road and vehicle dynamics measurements, which in tum
require expensive sensors.
Depending on the actuator force and the difference
between the absolute velocity of the sprung mass and that of
the unsprung mass, the semi-active damper (bsemD will take on
a specific value using the equations in Fig. 5 [2].
2120
The control method is implemented in the fuzzy rule base
using fuzzy conditional statements. Table I shows the 9 fuzzy
rules implemented in the controller. These rules are
interpreted by the controller as follows:
IF (SD is NE) and (BV is NE), THEN (DC is XL).
IF (SD is NE) and (BV is ZR) , THEN (DC is LG).
IF (SD is PO) and (BV is PO), THEN (DC is XL) .
TABLE !
FLC RULES FOR CALCULATING THE DAMPING COEFFICIENT
-40 -'-------------------------
Time Interval
.... Passive Response - Semi-Active - LOR Response - Semi-Active - FLC Response
Fig. 7 Results for ride quality simulati on.
t,
l'
.r., .r., .r.,
.
"
. . . .
. . . . .
1:.A1 lY :Ai :If; :If; :If;
l U
,
:n ,1 :n ,1
f#

-- -- -- -- -- -- --
- 'l-
0
l I
'"

I b
I'"

,
'l .
'H
.
'l
.
'.'t
','t ## '.'t
. .
,
.
. . . .
V V V V
-0.05
-0.04
-0.03
0.04
0.05
0.03
:[ 0.02
.20.01
0
;:
Q)
C -0.01
e
i= -0.02
Rule # Suspension Body Damping
Deflection Velocity Coeffi cient
(SD) (BV) (DC)
I NE NE XL
2 NE ZR LG
3 NE PO ME
4 ZR NE SM
5 ZR ZR ZR
6 ZR PO SM
7 PO NE ME
8 PO ZR LG
9 PO PO XL
IV. SIMULATION R ESULTS
By implementing the memberships of Fig. 6, along with
the rules in Table I, a suitable damping coefficient can be
determined to stabilize the system efficiently.
-0.5 -'----- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
0.5 ,--- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Time Intreval
50
..0.. - - -:0..-- - -
0.4 t--:..._- - - ..-- - - ..
EO.3
-0.4 +----' "-- ---' '------' "-- ---' "-- ---'
.. .. Passive Response -r-e-r-Semt-Acnve - LOR Response - Semi-Active - FLC Response
.. .. Passive Response Semi-Active - LOR Response - Semi-Active - FLC Response
Fig. 8 Results for road holdin g simulation.
Time Intreval
Fig. 9 Results for support of static weight simulat ion.
By analysing the magnitude of the various responses
obtained from the simulation, it is clear that fuzzy logic
control is able to provide a superior performance enhancement
over the LQR controller, and the passive suspension system.
Table II contains a summarization of the observed magnitude
response by each system.
In this section, the quarter car model is used to test the
performance of the proposed fuzzy controller. The
performance of the proposed controller is compared to that of
the LQR control method for semi-active suspensions, as well
as to a standard passive suspension system.
In order to obtain a clear indication of the performance
enhancement FLC is able to provide for semi-active
suspensions, three functions of the modeled suspension
system are simulated [2]:
1. Ride quality (Fig. 7)
In general the ride quality is optimized by minimizing
the vertical acceleration of the passenger's location.
2. Road holding and handling (Fig 8)
This function is characterized by the vehicles
cornering, breaking, and traction abilities. The
performance of the suspension in regards to these
characteristics can be improved if the variations in the
normal tire loads are minimized.
3. Support of static weight (Fig 9)
This function is enhanced by minimizing the rattle
space requirement of the vehicle (suspension deflection).
In all three simulations, the road disturbance is modelled
as a sine wave with a frequency of 1Hz and amplitude of
0.01m. The inputs to the FLC are assumed to be readily
available, either through direct measurement; using proximity
and velocity sensors, or through a standard observer system.
2121
TABLE II
PERFORMANCE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE PASSIVE AND SEMI-ACTIVE
SUSPENSIONS
Type of
Ride
Road Holding Support of Static
Quality
Suspension
(m/s
2
)
(m) Weight (mm)
Passive
54 0.088 7.7
Suspension
LQR
Controlled 44 0.076 5.5
SASS
FL
Controlled 31 0.052 2.5
SASS
Using the data in Table II, it is evident that the proposed
fuzzy logic controller offers a significant improvement in
performance with comparison to the optimal (LQR) control
method. The simulation results show that the three suspension
functions are enhanced with the fuzzy controlled semi-active
suspension system in comparison to the optimal controlled
semi-active suspension system by 28%, 31% and 54%
respectively. From these results it's evident that the proposed
fuzzy logic controller is outperforming the LQR controller by
at least 28%, which is a significant improvement.
V. CONCLUSION
In this paper, a fuzzy logic control strategy for semi-active
suspension systems is developed. The fuzzy logic controller
is used to generate the damping coefficient required by the
variable damper in semi-active suspension systems. An
optimal controller based on the linear quadratic regulator for
semi-active suspensions, and a passive suspension system, are
adopted for comparison with the proposed fuzzy logic
controller.
Simulation results show that the proposed fuzzy logic
controller performs significantly better than the linear
quadratic regulator control method for the same semi-active
suspension system, as well as a standard passive suspension
system. Analysis of the results show that the trade-off
problem suspension systems suffer from is significantly
reduced by using the proposed new fuzzy logic controller.
Furthermore, the performance enhancement that the proposed
fuzzy logic controller provides, is not only limited to a single
suspension function as in the controller proposed by the
authors in [6], but is also tuned to enhance the performance of
all three basic functions of the suspension system.
Unlike the work presented in [8] where the authors used a
total of 49 rules to achieve a 40% improvement over the
passive suspension, the proposed fuzzy controller is able to
achieve a 42% improvement over the passive system using
only 9 rules. This is a significant improvement over the
design in [8], since the implementation of the 49 rules in
hardware will add to the complexity, cost, as well as the size
of the design.
2122
To further demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed
controller, future work will involve the implementation of the
fuzzy controller using the Spartan 3E FPGA board, while
simulating the quarter car model using the LabVIEW design
and simulation environment.
Further research would also be performed to look into the
performance of the controller, when using an observer system
to predict the state of the vehicle suspension system. This
would reduce the dependency of the control strategy on the
various expensive sensors that are needed to determine the
state of the suspension, which is needed by the control system.
REFERENCES
[1] A.1. Barr and 1.L Ray, "Control of an active suspension using fuzzy
logic," in Proc. of5th IEEE Int!. Conference on Control and Automation,
New Orleans, USA, 1996, pp. 42-48.
[2] R. Rajamani, "Vehicle Dynamics and Control, " Springer, Berlin, 2006.
[3] R. Riadi, R. Tawegoum, A. Rachid, and G. Chasseriaux, "Decentralized
temperature fuzzy logic control of a passive air conditioning unit," in
Proc. of 15th IEEE IntI. Mediterranean Conference on Control and
Automation, Athens, Greece, 2007, pp. 1-6.
[4] Q. Zeng and J. Huang, "The design and simulation of fuzzy logic
controller for parallel hybrid electric vehicles," in Prec. ofthe IEEE IntI.
Conference on Automation and Logistics, Shandong, China, 2007, pp.
908-912.
[5] R. Muller and G. Nocker, "Intellignet cruise control with fuzzy logic," in
Proc. of IEEE IntI. Intelligent Vehicles '92 Symposium, Detroit, USA,
1992, pp.173-178.
[6] C.F. Nicolas, 1. Landaluze, E. Castrillo, M. Gaston, and R. Reyero,
"Application of fuzzy logic control to the design of semi-active
suspension systems," in Proc. of 6th IEEE IntI. Conference on Fuzzy
Systems, Barcelona, Spain, 1997, pp. 987-993.
[7] L. Zheng, Y. N. Li, J. Shao, and X. S. Sun, "The design of a fuzzy-
sliding mode controller of semi-active suspension systems with MR
dampers," in Proc. of 4th IEEE IntI. Conference on Fuzzy Systems and
Knowledge Discovery, Hainan, China, 2007, pp. 514-518.
[8] Z. Li, Y. Yang, X. Gong, Y. Lin, and G. Liu, "Fuzzy control of the semi-
active suspension with MR damper based on uGA," in Proc. of IEEE
Int!. Vehicle Power and Propulsion Conference, Harbin, China, 2008,
pp. 1-6.
[9] T. Butsuen, "The Design of semi-active suspensions for automotive
vehicles," Ph.D. diss., M.LT., 1989.
[10] M. Bigarbegian, W. Melek, and F. Golnaraghi, "A novel neuro-fuzzy
controller to enhance the performance of vehicle semi-active suspension
systems," Vehicle System Dynamics, vol. 46, no.8, pp. 691-711,2008.
[11] L.C. Felix-Herran, J.1. Rodriguez-Ortiz, R. Soto, and R. Ramirez-
Mendoza, "Modeling and control for a semi-active suspension with a
Magnetorheological damper including the actuator dynamics," in Proc.
of IEEE IntI. Electronics, Robotics and Automotive Mechanics
Conference, Morelos, Mexico, 2008, pp 338-343.
[12] L.R. Ray, "Robust linear-optimal control laws for active suspension
systems," ASME Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and
Control, vol. 114, no. 4, pp. 592-598, 1992.
[13] M. Ahmadian, and C.A. Pare, "A quarter-car experimental analysis of
alternative semi-active control methods," Journal of Intellignet Material
Systems and Structures, vol. 11, no. 8, pp. 604- 612, 2000.
[14] K. Tanaka, H.O. Wang, "Fuzzy Control Systems Design and Analysis: A
Linear matrix Inequality Approach," John Wiley & Sons, New York,
2001.
[15] M. E. Dupre, "GA Optimized Fuzzy Control of an Autonomous Mobile
Robot," MSc Thesis, University of Guelph, 2007.