Non-linear control of wheel slip in anti-lock braking systems

based on Hossein Mirzaeinejad, Mehdi Mirzaei*, A novel method for non-linear control of wheel slip in anti-lock braking systems , Control Engineering Practice 18 (2010) 918926.

Guided by, Prof. Abhishek Gupta Prof. V. Kartik

Presented by, Saurabh Gupta - 123014014 Darshan Bang - 123100036 Kajal Khan - 123100046

Contents
Anti-lock Braking System Schematic of ABS Modeling Control system design Control law without integral feedback Control law with integral feedback Simulation Conclusions

Anti-lock braking system

Antilock braking systems (ABSs) are electronic systems that monitor and control wheel slip during vehicle braking. Principle:- A skidding wheel has less traction than a rotating wheel.

Objectives
Reduce stopping distances Improve stability Improve steer-ability during braking

Features
Prevent wheels from locking during heavy braking Modulates the brake line pressure independent of the pedal force

Schematic of ABS

(http://www.google.co.in/imgres?q=abs+system&sa=X&hl=en&biw=1366&bih=667&tbm=isch&tbnid=DVlx205u0VvitM:&imgrefurl=http://www.cvel.clemson.

edu/auto/systems/braking.html&docid=7RQ57SQgNULEmM&imgurl=http://www.cvel.clemson.edu/auto/systems/images/ABS-architecture.png&w=396&h=272 &ei=IzhoUeb-FIWGrAfgtoHgBA&zoom=1&ved=1t:3588,r:12,s:0,i:145&iact=rc&dur=1066&page=1&tbnh=174&tbnw=254&start=0&ndsp=15&tx=147&ty=35)

ABS - Modeling
Governing Equations
= ( ) = =

1 2 = + + V = longitudinal velocity of vehicle = rotational speed of wheel = longitudinal tire force Tb = braking torque = longitudinal slip ratio = friction coefficient R = wheel radius = total mass of the model = wheel mass ( ) + of sprung mass ( )

Wheel free body diagram during modeling

Control System Design

Predictive approach with integral feedback is used

State space form

1 = 1

2 = 2 +
3 = 2

Purpose of controller is to maintain wheel slip x2 = and its integral 3 = , closed to their desired responses
1 =
2 =

= [ ] are the state vectors ( = , = ) = are the outputs of system = Reference model for wheel slip: = 1 Where, = 0.15, = 20

1 2 +

Control System Design Cont.

1 = 2
3

+ +
=2

Performance index

=0 = 1 1 1 + 0.252

Necessary Condition for optimality 1 + 0.252 2 + 0.5 3 + 1 + 0.252 2 2 With Integral feedback Without integral feedback

1 + 2 2 2 3 = 3 3

h: prediction time interval 2 = 2 2 Current tracking errors

3 0 2

Ratio of weighting factors

Control Law without integral feedback

Applying control law to the actual model 2 corresponds to nominal model which differs 1 2 = 2 [2 + 2 2 ] from the actual model due to vehicle mass
Uncertainty and uncertainty in road condition Tracking error dynamics of the wheel slip

1 2 + 2 = 2 2

Error in estimating 2 is due to the error in estimation of friction force So if error on is bounded then error in 2 will also be bounded by a constant F>0 2 2 2 () where = Fh

So to control tracking error, h should be decreased, but with decreasing h, control energy becomes large and oscillatory

Control Law with integral feedback

Applying control law to the actual model:

2 +

1 2 2

1 3 3

Where,

+ (2 2 )

1 1 = 1 + 0.252 2 = 1 + 0.52 3 = 0.5

3 and (2 2 ) have the same sign So integral variable error reduces the effect of model uncertainties So wheel sleep tracking error is much less the previous case
Error dynamics of the integral variable 3 : 3 = 2

1 2 2 = 3 1

1 3 2 (2 2 ) + 3 0 0

Steady state tracking error (2 = 3 = 0) 2 = 0, 3 Wheel slip tracking error in steady state will be zero Effect of model uncertainties is transferred to the tracking error of the integral variable
1 3

Simulation
Parameter Value R L hcg mw mvs 0.326 m 2.5 m 0.5 m 40 kg 415 kg

1.7 kgm-2

Flat dry road, =0.8 Velocity 20 m/s (72 km/hr) There is no modeling uncertainty

Simulation results during braking with and without control: (a) wheel and vehicle speed (uncontrolled), (b) wheel and vehicle speed (controlled), (c) wheel slip, and (d) wheel slip tracking error

Simulation Cont
Uncertainties in vehicle mass = 15 % Uncertainties in Coefficient of friction = 10 % Time of prediction (h) = 0.003 s

Comparison of performances of the controller with and without integral feedback: (a) wheel slip tracking error and (b) braking torque.

Conclusions
Controller with integral feedback control is more robust, can handle nonlinearity and uncertainty of the model in a better way Controller without integral feedback As time of prediction (h), error in tracking slip , energy input and torque input ~ Controller with integral feedback reduces the oscillation, with better tracking error

13

Appendix A

Appendix B