• Nonlinear dynamics and stability analysis of vehicle plane motions
• A linearized vehicle longitudinal dynamic model is derived using the exact feedback linearization technique, which accommodates the inertial delay of powertrain dynamics. Directed graphs are adopted ...
• An Adaptive Vehicle Stability Control Algorithm Based on Tire Slip-Angle Estimation
• Stability and Trajectory Control for Post-Impact Vehicle Based on Fuzzy PID Algorithm
• Tyre Characteristics and Vehicle Handling and Stability Basic Tyre Modelling Considerations Semi-Empirical Tyre Models
• - Dynamic Stability Module of AVL - A consistent definition of Control Surfaces - Correction of Regression vehicle scripts - Correction of Fidelity Zero Stabili <p>ty so results are consistent with ...
• Vehicle Dynamics and Control provides a comprehensive coverage of vehicle control systems and the dynamic models used in the development of these control systems. The control system applications ...
• Finally, a report on an autonomous driving test implemented using the proposed architecture is presented, which shows the effectiveness, flexibility, stability, and low-cost of the overall autonomous...
• <p>This PR is to add new vehicle data StabilityControlsStatus to know if stability controls like ESC, Traction Control etc. are active. <p>This PR is <strong>ready</strong> for review. <h3>Risk <p>...
• interventions at the stability boundaries. Experimental results obtained with a steer-by-wire vehicle and a proof of envelope invariance demonstrate the efficacy of the envelope controller in ...
• Control of a quadrotor and a ground vehicle manipulating an object1 Introduction2 Notations3 Problem statement4 Attainable configurations of equilibrium5 Control scheme6 Stability properties7 ...
Control of a quadrotor and a ground vehicle manipulating an object1 Introduction2 Notations3 Problem statement4 Attainable configurations of equilibrium5 Control scheme6 Stability properties7 Constraints enforcement8 Simulations9 Experimental results10 ConclusionsRef

1 Introduction
Euler-Lagrange method

拉格朗日法 描述流体运动的两种方法之一。
欧拉法(euler method)是以流体质点流经流场中各空间点的运动即以流场作为描述对象研究流动的方法。

Reference Governor (RG)
2 Notations
3 Problem statement
4 Attainable configurations of equilibrium
5 Control scheme
6 Stability properties
7 Constraints enforcement
8 Simulations
9 Experimental results
10 Conclusions
Ref
[1204]2016_Control of a UAV and a UGV Cooperating to Manipulate an Object


展开全文
• <div><p>In most of the recent builds when I use aim to move one item from a stack in a dragged vehicle to another location, the stack will often jump suddenly so that I can no longer just hit "...
• We presented a system with high sensitivity and stability based on quartz enhanced photoacoustic spectroscopy with hollow-core photonic bandgap fiber (HC-PBF) as reference cell for ...
• <p>Ability to utilize INAV Configuration App to easily set up flight controller for stability control, GPS, OSD, Smart Audio Support, S.Bus, and other features commonly found on multirotors and fixed ...
• 含整车模型的汽车稳定性控制模型，ESP，在MATLAB/simulink环境下建立。 (Vehicle Stability Control model with vehicle model, ESP. Established under the MATLAB/simulink environment.)
• As an extension of the autonomous steering control problem, this project involves the study of application of active steering for vehicle stability control. Control algorithms are developed that use ...
• Safety aspects of any vehicle can be ... The second area involves techniques to avoid such accidents including blind spot object detection, collision avoidance, and enhanced vehicle stability (EVS).
• With the emergence of vehicle-to-vehicle communi-cation technology, cooperative adaptive cruise control (CACC) cars can be expected in the near future. In this paper, novel criteria for string ...
• This example shows nonlinear grey-box modeling of vehicle ... Many new vehicle features (like Electronic Stability Programs (ESP), indirect Tire Pressure Monitoring Systems (TPMS), road-tire fri...
This example shows nonlinear grey-box modeling of vehicle dynamics. Many new vehicle features (like Electronic Stability Programs (ESP), indirect Tire Pressure Monitoring Systems (TPMS), road-tire friction monitoring systems, and so forth) rely on models of the underlying vehicle dynamics. The so-called bicycle vehicle model is a rather simple model structure that is frequently being used in the vehicle dynamics literature. In this example we will start-off with this model structure and try to estimate the longitudinal and the lateral stiffness of a tire. The actual modeling work was originally carried out by Erik Narby in his MSc work at NIRA Dynamics AB, Sweden.
Vehicle Dynamics Modeling
The following figure illustrates the vehicle modeling situation to be considered.

Figure 1: Schematic view of a vehicle dynamics system.
By the use of Newton’s law of motion and some basic geometric relationships, the longitudinal velocity v_x(t), the lateral velocity v_y(t) and the yaw rate r(t) measured around the Center Of Gravity (COG) of the vehicle can be described by the following three differential equations:
  d
-- v_x(t) = v_y(t)*r(t) + 1/m*(  (F_x,FL(t)+F_x,FR(t))*cos(delta(t))
dt                             - (F_y,FL(t)+F_y,FR(t))*sin(delta(t))
+ F_x,RL(t)+F_x,RR(t)
- C_A*v_x(t)^2)
d
-- v_y(t) = -v_x(t)*r(t) + 1/m*(  (F_x,FL(t)+F_x,FR(t))*sin(delta(t))
dt                              + (F_y,FL(t)+F_y,FR(t))*cos(delta(t))
+ F_y,RL(t)+F_y,RR(t))
d
-- r(t)   = 1/J*(  a*(  (F_x,FL(t)+F_x,FR(t))*sin(delta(t))
dt                    + (F_y,FL(t)+F_y,FR(t))*cos(delta(t)))
- b*(F_y,RL(t)+F_y,RR(t)))

where subscript x is used to denote that a force F acts in the longitudinal direction and y that it acts in the lateral direction. The abbreviations FL, FR, RL and RR label the tires: Front Left, Front Right, Rear Left and Rear Right, respectively. The first equation describing the longitudinal acceleration also contains an air resistance term that is assumed to be a quadratic function of the longitudinal vehicle velocity v_x(t). In addition, delta(t) (an input) is the steering angle, J a moment of inertia, and a and b the distances from the center of gravity to the front and rear axles, respectively.
Let us assume that the tire forces can be modeled through the following linear approximations:
  F_x,i(t) = C_x*s_i(t)
F_y,i(t) = C_y*alpha_i(t)     for i = {FL, FR, RL, RR}

where C_x and C_y are the longitudinal and lateral tire stiffness, respectively. Here we have assumed that these stiffness parameters are the same for all 4 tires. s_i(t) is the so-called (longitudinal) slip of tire i and alpha_i(t) a tire slip angle. For a front-wheel driven vehicle (as considered here), the slips s_FL(t) and s_FR(t) are derived from the individual wheel speeds (measured) by assuming that the rear wheels do not show any slip (i.e., s_RL(t) = s_RR(t) = 0). Hence the slips are inputs to our model structure. For the front wheels, the tire slip angels alpha_Fj(t) can be approximated by (when v_x(t) > 0)
alpha_Fj(t) = delta(t) - arctan((v_y(t) + a*r(t))/v_x(t))
~ delta(t) - (v_y(t) + a*r(t))/v_x(t)        for j = {L, R}
For the rear wheels, the tire slip angels alpha_Rj(t) are similarly derived and computed as
alpha_Rj(t) = - arctan((v_y(t) - b*r(t))/v_x(t))
~ - (v_y(t) - b*r(t))/v_x(t)                 for j = {L, R}
With J = 1/((0.5*(a+b))^2*m) we can next set up a state-space structure describing the vehicle dynamics. Introduce the states:
x1(t) = v_x(t)      Longitudinal velocity [m/s].
x2(t) = v_y(t)      Lateral velocity [m/s].
x3(t) = r(t)        Yaw rate [rad/s].the five measured or derived input signals
u1(t) = s_FL(t)     Slip of Front Left tire [ratio].
u2(t) = s_FR(t)     Slip of Front Right tire [ratio].
u3(t) = s_RL(t)     Slip of Rear Left tire [ratio].
u4(t) = s_RR(t)     Slip of Rear Right tire [ratio].
u5(t) = delta(t)    Steering angle [rad].and the model parameters:
m                   Mass of the vehicle [kg].
a                   Distance from front axle to COG [m].
b                   Distance from rear axle to COG [m].
Cx                  Longitudinal tire stiffness [N].
CA                  Air resistance coefficient [1/m].The outputs of the system are the longitudinal vehicle velocity y1(t) = x1(t), the lateral vehicle acceleration (measured by an accelerometer):
y2(t) = a_y(t) = 1/m*(  (F_x,FL(t)+F_x,FR(t))*cos(delta(t))
- (F_y,FL(t)+F_y,FR(t))*sin(delta(t))
+ F_x,RL(t)+F_x,RR(t))
and the yaw rate y3(t) = r(t) (measured by a gyro).
Put together, we arrive at the following state-space model structure:
d
-- x1(t) = x2(t)*x3(t) + 1/m*(  Cx*(u1(t)+u2(t))*cos(u5(t))
dt                            - 2*Cy*(u5(t)-(x2(t)+a*x3(t))/x1(t))*sin(u5(t))
+ Cx*(u3(t)+u4(t))
- CA*x1(t)^2)  d
-- x2(t) = -x1(t)*x3(t) + 1/m*(  Cx*(u1(t)+u2(t))*sin(u5(t))
dt                             + 2*Cy*(u5(t)-(x2(t)+a*x3(t))/x1(t))*cos(u5(t))
+ 2*Cy*(b*x3(t)-x2(t))/x1(t))  d
-- x3(t) = 1/((0.5*(a+b))^2)*m)*(  a*(  Cx*(u1(t)+u2(t)*sin(u5(t))
dt                                    + 2*Cy*(u5(t) - (x2(t)+a*x3(t))/x1(t))*cos(u5(t)))
- 2*b*Cy*(b*x3(t)-x2(t))/x1(t))     y1(t) = x1(t)
y2(t) = 1/m*(  Cx*(u1(t)+u2(t))*sin(u5(t))
+ 2*Cy*(u5(t)-(x2(t)+a*x3(t))/x1(t))*cos(u5(t))
+ 2*Cy*(b*x3(t)-x2(t))/x1(t))
y3(t) = x3(t)

IDNLGREY Vehicle Model
As a basis for our vehicle identification experiments we first need to create an IDNLGREY model file describing these vehicle equations. Here we rely on C-MEX modeling and create a vehicle_c.c model file, in which NY is set to 3. The state and output update functions of vehicle_c.c, compute_dx and compute_y, are somewhat involved and includes several standard C-defined mathematical functions, like cos(.) and sin(.) as well as pow(.) for computing the power of its argument.
The state update function compute_dx returns dx (argument 1) and uses 3 input arguments: the state vector x, the input vector u, and the six scalar parameters encoded in p (t and auxvar of the template C-MEX model file have been removed here):
  /* State equations. */
void compute_dx(double *dx, double *x, double *u, double **p)
{
/* Retrieve model parameters. */
double *m, *a, *b, *Cx, *Cy, *CA;
m  = p[0];   /* Vehicle mass.                    */
a  = p[1];   /* Distance from front axle to COG. */
b  = p[2];   /* Distance from rear axle to COG.  */
Cx = p[3];   /* Longitudinal tire stiffness.     */
Cy = p[4];   /* Lateral tire stiffness.          */
CA = p[5];   /* Air resistance coefficient.      */      /* x[0]: Longitudinal vehicle velocity. */
/* x[1]: Lateral vehicle velocity. */
/* x[2]: Yaw rate. */
dx[0] = x[1]*x[2]+1/m[0]*(Cx[0]*(u[0]+u[1])*cos(u[4])
-2*Cy[0]*(u[4]-(x[1]+a[0]*x[2])/x[0])*sin(u[4])
+Cx[0]*(u[2]+u[3])-CA[0]*pow(x[0],2));
dx[1] = -x[0]*x[2]+1/m[0]*(Cx[0]*(u[0]+u[1])*sin(u[4])
+2*Cy[0]*(u[4]-(x[1]+a[0]*x[2])/x[0])*cos(u[4])
+2*Cy[0]*(b[0]*x[2]-x[1])/x[0]);
dx[2] = 1/(pow(((a[0]+b[0])/2),2)*m[0])
*(a[0]*(Cx[0]*(u[0]+u[1])*sin(u[4])
+2*Cy[0]*(u[4]-(x[1]+a[0]*x[2])/x[0])*cos(u[4]))
-2*b[0]*Cy[0]*(b[0]*x[2]-x[1])/x[0]);
}

The output update function compute_y returns y (argument 1) and uses 3 input arguments: the state vector x, the input vector u, and five of the six parameters (the air resistance CA is not needed) encoded in p:
/* Output equations. */
void compute_y(double *y, double *x, double *u, double **p)
{
/* Retrieve model parameters. */
double *m  = p[0];   /* Vehicle mass.                    */
double *a  = p[1];   /* Distance from front axle to COG. */
double *b  = p[2];   /* Distance from rear axle to COG.  */
double *Cx = p[3];   /* Longitudinal tire stiffness.     */
double *Cy = p[4];   /* Lateral tire stiffness.          */      /* y[0]: Longitudinal vehicle velocity. */
/* y[1]: Lateral vehicle acceleration. */
/* y[2]: Yaw rate. */
y[0] = x[0];
y[1] = 1/m[0]*(Cx[0]*(u[0]+u[1])*sin(u[4])
+2*Cy[0]*(u[4]-(x[1]+a[0]*x[2])/x[0])*cos(u[4])
+2*Cy[0]*(b[0]*x[2]-x[1])/x[0]);
y[2] = x[2];
}

Having a proper model structure file, the next step is to create an IDNLGREY object reflecting the modeling situation. For ease of bookkeeping, we also specify the names and units of the inputs and outputs.
FileName      = 'vehicle_c';                        % File describing the model structure.
Order         = [3 5 3];                            % Model orders [ny nx nu].
Parameters    = [1700; 1.5; 1.5; 1.5e5; 4e4; 0.5];  % Initial parameters.
InitialStates = [1; 0; 0];                          % Initial initial states.
Ts            = 0;                                  % Time-continuous system.
nlgr = idnlgrey(FileName, Order, Parameters, InitialStates, Ts, ...
'Name', 'Bicycle vehicle model', 'TimeUnit', 's', ...
'Display', 'on');
set(nlgr, 'InputName',  {'Slip on front left tire';               ...   % u(1).
'Slip on front right tire';              ...   % u(2).
'Slip on rear left tire';                ...   % u(3).
'Slip on rear right tire';               ...   % u(4).
'Steering angle'},                       ...   % u(5).
'InputUnit',  {'ratio'; 'ratio'; 'ratio'; 'ratio'; 'rad'});
set(nlgr, 'OutputName', {'Long. velocity';  ...   % y(1); Longitudinal vehicle velocity
'Lat. accel.';   ...     % y(2); Lateral vehicle acceleration
'Yaw rate'},                             ...   % y(3).


The names and the units of the (initial) states and the model parameters are specified via SETINIT. We also use this command to specify that the first initial state (the longitudinal velocity) ought to be strictly positive for the model to be valid and to specify that all model parameters should be strictly positive. These constraints will subsequently be honored when performing initial state and/or model parameter estimation.
nlgr = setinit(nlgr, 'Name', {'Longitudinal vehicle velocity'        ... % x(1).
'Lateral vehicle velocity'             ... % x(2).
'Yaw rate'});                          ... % x(3).
nlgr = setinit(nlgr, 'Unit', {'m/s'; 'm/s'; 'rad/s'});
nlgr.InitialStates(1).Minimum = eps(0);   % Longitudinal velocity > 0 for the model to be valid.
nlgr = setpar(nlgr, 'Name', {'Vehicle mass';                         ... % m.
'Distance from front axle to COG';      ... % a
'Distance from rear axle to COG';       ... % b.
'Longitudinal tire stiffness';          ... % Cx.
'Lateral tire stiffness';               ... % Cy.
'Air resistance coefficient'});         ... % CA.
nlgr = setpar(nlgr, 'Unit', {'kg'; 'm'; 'm'; 'N'; 'N/rad'; '1/m'});
nlgr = setpar(nlgr, 'Minimum', num2cell(eps(0)*ones(6, 1)));   % All parameters > 0!

Four of the six parameters of this model structure can readily be obtained through the data sheet of the vehicle in question:
  m  = 1700 kg
a  = 1.5 m
b  = 1.5 m
CA = 0.5 or 0.7 1/m (see below)Hence we will not estimate these parameters:

nlgr.Parameters(1).Fixed = true;
nlgr.Parameters(2).Fixed = true;
nlgr.Parameters(3).Fixed = true;
nlgr.Parameters(6).Fixed = true;

With this, a textual summary of the entered IDNLGREY model structure is obtained through PRESENT as follows.
present(nlgr);

nlgr =
Continuous-time nonlinear grey-box model defined by 'vehicle_c' (MEX-file):

dx/dt = F(t, u(t), x(t), p1, ..., p6)
y(t) = H(t, u(t), x(t), p1, ..., p6) + e(t)

with 5 inputs, 3 states, 3 outputs, and 2 free parameters (out of 6).

Inputs:
u(1)  Slip on front left tire(t) [ratio]
u(2)  Slip on front right tire(t) [ratio]
u(3)  Slip on rear left tire(t) [ratio]
u(4)  Slip on rear right tire(t) [ratio]
States:                                           initial value
x(1)  Longitudinal vehicle velocity(t) [m/s]   xinit@exp1   1   (fix) in ]0, Inf]
x(2)  Lateral vehicle velocity(t) [m/s]        xinit@exp1   0   (fix) in [-Inf, Inf]
x(3)  Yaw rate(t) [rad/s]                      xinit@exp1   0   (fix) in [-Inf, Inf]
Outputs:
y(1)  Long. velocity(t) [m/s]
y(2)  Lat. accel.(t) [m/s^2]
Parameters:                                   value
p1   Vehicle mass [kg]                       1700   (fix) in ]0, Inf]
p2   Distance from front axle to COG [m]      1.5   (fix) in ]0, Inf]
p3   Distance from rear axle to COG [m]       1.5   (fix) in ]0, Inf]
p4   Longitudinal tire stiffness [N]       150000   (est) in ]0, Inf]
p5   Lateral tire stiffness [N/rad]         40000   (est) in ]0, Inf]
p6   Air resistance coefficient [1/m]         0.5   (fix) in ]0, Inf]
Created:       14-Jan-2014 00:33:26

Input-Output Data
At this point, we load the available input-output data. This file contains data from three different experiments:
  A. Simulated data with high stiffness tires [y1 u1].
B. Simulated data with low stiffness tires  [y2 u2].
C. Measured data from a Volvo V70           [y3 u3].

In all cases, the sampling interval Ts = 0.1 seconds.
load(fullfile(matlabroot, 'toolbox', 'ident', 'iddemos', 'data', 'vehicledata'));

A. System Identification Using Simulated High Tire Stiffness DataIn our first vehicle identification experiment we consider simulated high tire stiffness data.
A copy of the model structure nlgr and an IDDATA object z1 reflecting this particular modeling situation is first created. The 5 input signals are stored in u1 and the 3 output signals in y1. The slip inputs (generated from the wheel speed signals) for the front wheels were chosen to be sinusoidal with a constant offset; the yaw rate was also sinusoidal but with a different amplitude and frequency. In reality, this is a somewhat artificial situation, because one rarely excites the vehicle so much in the lateral direction.
nlgr1 = nlgr;
nlgr1.Name = 'Bicycle vehicle model with high tire stiffness';
z1 = iddata(y1, u1, 0.1, 'Name', 'Simulated high tire stiffness vehicle data');
set(z1, 'InputName', nlgr1.InputName, 'InputUnit', nlgr1.InputUnit);
set(z1, 'OutputName', nlgr1.OutputName, 'OutputUnit', nlgr1.OutputUnit);
set(z1, 'Tstart', 0, 'TimeUnit', 's');

The inputs and outputs are shown in two plot figures.
figure('Name', [z1.Name ': input data']);
Pos = get(gcf,'Position');
set(gcf,'Position',[Pos(1), Pos(2)-Pos(4)/2, Pos(3), Pos(4)*1.5]);
for i = 1:z1.Nu
subplot(z1.Nu, 1, i);
plot(z1.SamplingInstants, z1.InputData(:,i));
title(['Input #' num2str(i) ': ' z1.InputName{i}]);
xlabel('');
axis('tight');
end
xlabel([z1.Domain ' (' z1.TimeUnit ')']);


Figure 2: Inputs to a vehicle system with high tire stiffness.
figure('Name', [z1.Name ': output data']);
for i = 1:z1.Ny
subplot(z1.Ny, 1, i);
plot(z1.SamplingInstants, z1.OutputData(:,i));
title(['Output #' num2str(i) ': ' z1.OutputName{i}]);
xlabel('');
axis('tight');
end
xlabel([z1.Domain ' (' z1.TimeUnit ')']);


Figure 3: Outputs from a vehicle system with high tire stiffness.
The next step is to investigate the performance of the initial model and for this we perform a simulation. Notice that the initial state has been fixed to a non-zero value as the first state (the longitudinal vehicle velocity) is used as denominator in the model structure. A comparison between the true and the simulated outputs (with the initial model) is shown in a plot window.
figure;
compare(z1, nlgr1, [], compareOptions('InitialCondition', 'model'));


Figure 4: Comparison between true outputs and the simulated outputs of the initial vehicle model with high tire stiffness.
In order to improve the model fit, the two tire stiffness parameters Cx and Cy are next estimated, and a new simulation with the estimated model is carried out.
nlgr1 = pem(z1, nlgr1);

A comparison between the true and the simulated outputs (with the estimated model) is shown in a plot window.
compare(z1, nlgr1, [], compareOptions('InitialCondition', 'model'));


Figure 5: Comparison between true outputs and the simulated outputs of the estimated vehicle model with high tire stiffness.
The simulation performance of the estimated model is quite good. The estimated stiffness parameters are also close to the ones used in Simulink® to generate the true output data:
disp('                        True      Estimated');
fprintf('Longitudinal stiffness: %6.0f    %6.0f\n', 2e5, nlgr1.Parameters(4).Value);
fprintf('Lateral stiffness     : %6.0f    %6.0f\n', 5e4, nlgr1.Parameters(5).Value);

                    True      Estimated

Longitudinal stiffness: 200000    197944
Lateral stiffness     :  50000     54724
B. System Identification Using Simulated Low Tire Stiffness Data
In the second experiment we repeat the modeling from the first experiment, but now with simulated low tire stiffness data.
nlgr2 = nlgr;
nlgr2.Name = 'Bicycle vehicle model with low tire stiffness';
z2 = iddata(y2, u2, 0.1, 'Name', 'Simulated low tire stiffness vehicle data');
set(z2, 'InputName', nlgr2.InputName, 'InputUnit', nlgr2.InputUnit);
set(z2, 'OutputName', nlgr2.OutputName, 'OutputUnit', nlgr2.OutputUnit);
set(z2, 'Tstart', 0, 'TimeUnit', 's');

The inputs and outputs are shown in two plot figures.
figure('Name', [z2.Name ': input data']);
Pos = get(gcf,'Position');
set(gcf,'Position',[Pos(1), Pos(2)-Pos(4)/2, Pos(3), Pos(4)*1.5]);
for i = 1:z2.Nu
subplot(z2.Nu, 1, i);
plot(z2.SamplingInstants, z2.InputData(:,i));
title(['Input #' num2str(i) ': ' z2.InputName{i}]);
xlabel('');
axis('tight');
end
xlabel([z2.Domain ' (' z2.TimeUnit ')']);


Figure 6: Inputs to a vehicle system with low tire stiffness.
figure('Name', [z2.Name ': output data']);
for i = 1:z2.Ny
subplot(z2.Ny, 1, i);
plot(z2.SamplingInstants, z2.OutputData(:,i));
title(['Output #' num2str(i) ': ' z2.OutputName{i}]);
xlabel('');
axis('tight');
end
xlabel([z2.Domain ' (' z2.TimeUnit ')']);


Figure 7: Outputs from a vehicle system with low tire stiffness.
Next we investigate the performance of the initial model (which has the same parameters as the initial high tire stiffness model). A comparison between the true and the simulated outputs (with the initial model) is shown in a plot window.
figure;
compare(z2, nlgr2, [], compareOptions('InitialCondition', 'model'));


Figure 8: Comparison between true outputs and the simulated outputs of the initial vehicle model with low tire stiffness.
The two stiffness parameters are next estimated.
nlgr2 = pem(z2, nlgr2);

A comparison between the true and the simulated outputs (with the estimated model) is shown in a plot window.
compare(z2, nlgr2, [], compareOptions('InitialCondition', 'model'));


Figure 9: Comparison betweentrue outputs and the simulated outputs of the estimated vehicle model with low tire stiffness.
The simulation performance of the estimated model is again really good. Even with the same parameter starting point as was used in the high tire stiffness case, the estimated stiffness parameters are also here close to the ones used in Simulink to generate the true output data:
disp('                        True      Estimated');
fprintf('Longitudinal stiffness: %6.0f    %6.0f\n', 1e5, nlgr2.Parameters(4).Value);
fprintf('Lateral stiffness     : %6.0f    %6.0f\n', 2.5e4, nlgr2.Parameters(5).Value);

                    True      Estimated

Longitudinal stiffness: 100000     99372
Lateral stiffness     :  25000     26384
C. System Identification Using Measured Volvo V70 Data
In the final experiment we consider data collected in a Volvo V70. As above, we make a copy of the generic vehicle model object nlgr and create a new IDDATA object containing the measured data. Here we have also increased the air resistance coefficient from 0.50 to 0.70 to better reflect the Volvo V70 situation.
nlgr3 = nlgr;
nlgr3.Name = 'Volvo V70 vehicle model';
nlgr3.Parameters(6).Value = 0.70;   % Use another initial CA for the Volvo data.
z3 = iddata(y3, u3, 0.1, 'Name', 'Volvo V70 data');
set(z3, 'InputName', nlgr3.InputName, 'InputUnit', nlgr3.InputUnit);
set(z3, 'OutputName', nlgr3.OutputName, 'OutputUnit', nlgr3.OutputUnit);
set(z3, 'Tstart', 0, 'TimeUnit', 's');

The inputs and outputs are shown in two plot figures. As can be seen, the measured data is rather noisy.
figure('Name', [z3.Name ': input data']);
Pos = get(gcf,'Position');
set(gcf,'Position',[Pos(1), Pos(2)-Pos(4)/2, Pos(3), Pos(4)*1.5]);
for i = 1:z3.Nu
subplot(z3.Nu, 1, i);
plot(z3.SamplingInstants, z3.InputData(:,i));
title(['Input #' num2str(i) ': ' z3.InputName{i}]);
xlabel('');
axis('tight');
end
xlabel([z3.Domain ' (' z3.TimeUnit ')']);


Figure 10: Measured inputs from a Volvo V70 vehicle.
figure(‘Name’, [z3.Name ‘: output data’]);
for i = 1:z3.Ny
subplot(z3.Ny, 1, i);
plot(z3.SamplingInstants, z3.OutputData(:,i));
title(['Output #' num2str(i) ': ' z3.OutputName{i}]);
xlabel('');
axis('tight');
end
xlabel([z3.Domain ' (' z3.TimeUnit ')']);


Figure 11: Measured outputs from a Volvo V70 vehicle.
Next we investigate the performance of the initial model with the initial states being estimated. A comparison between the true and the simulated outputs (with the initial model) is shown in a plot window.
nlgr3 = setinit(nlgr3, 'Value', {18.7; 0; 0});   % Initial initial states.
figure;
compare(z3, nlgr3);


Figure 12: Comparison between measured outputs and the simulated outputs of the initial Volvo V70 vehicle model.
The tire stiffness parameters Cx and Cy are next estimated, in this case using the Levenberg-Marquardt search algorithm, whereupon a new simulation with the estimated model is performed. In addition, we here estimate the initial value of the longitudinal velocity, whereas the initial values of the lateral velocity and the yaw rate are kept fixed.
nlgr3 = setinit(nlgr3, 'Fixed', {false; true; true});
nlgr3 = pem(z3, nlgr3, 'SearchMethod', 'lm');

A comparison between the true and the simulated outputs (with the estimated model) is shown in a plot window.
compare(z3, nlgr3);


Figure 13: Comparison between measured outputs and the simulated outputs of the first estimated Volvo V70 vehicle model.
The estimated stiffness parameters of the final Volvo V70 model are reasonable, yet it is here unknown what their real values are.
disp('                        Estimated');
fprintf('Longitudinal stiffness: %6.0f\n', nlgr3.Parameters(4).Value);
fprintf('Lateral stiffness     : %6.0f\n', nlgr3.Parameters(5).Value);

                    Estimated

Longitudinal stiffness: 110437
Lateral stiffness     :  72926
Further information about the estimated Volvo V70 vehicle model is obtained through PRESENT. It is here interesting to note that the uncertainty related to the estimated lateral tire stiffness is quite high (and significantly higher than for the longitudinal tire stiffness). This uncertainty originates partly from that the lateral acceleration is varied so little during the test drive.
present(nlgr3);

nlgr3 =
Continuous-time nonlinear grey-box model defined by 'vehicle_c' (MEX-file):

dx/dt = F(t, u(t), x(t), p1, ..., p6)
y(t) = H(t, u(t), x(t), p1, ..., p6) + e(t)

with 5 inputs, 3 states, 3 outputs, and 2 free parameters (out of 6).

Inputs:
u(1)  Slip on front left tire(t) $ratio$
u(2)  Slip on front right tire(t) $ratio$
u(3)  Slip on rear left tire(t) $ratio$
u(4)  Slip on rear right tire(t) $ratio$
u(5)  Steering angle(t) $rad$
States:                                           initial value
x(1)  Longitudinal vehicle velocity(t) $m/s$   xinit@exp1   17.9123   (est) in \]0, Inf\]
x(2)  Lateral vehicle velocity(t) $m/s$        xinit@exp1         0   (fix) in $-Inf, Inf$
x(3)  Yaw rate(t) $rad/s$                      xinit@exp1         0   (fix) in $-Inf, Inf$
Outputs:
y(1)  Long. velocity(t) $m/s$
y(2)  Lat. accel.(t) $m/s^2$
y(3)  Yaw rate(t) $rad/s$
Parameters:                                   value     standard dev
p1   Vehicle mass $kg$                        1700         0   (fix) in \]0, Inf\]
p2   Distance from front axle to COG $m$       1.5         0   (fix) in \]0, Inf\]
p3   Distance from rear axle to COG $m$        1.5         0   (fix) in \]0, Inf\]
p4   Longitudinal tire stiffness $N$        110437   172.833   (est) in \]0, Inf\]
p5   Lateral tire stiffness $N/rad$        72926.3   9765.52   (est) in \]0, Inf\]
p6   Air resistance coefficient $1/m$          0.7         0   (fix) in \]0, Inf\]

The model was estimated from the data set 'Volvo V70 data', which
contains 2501 data samples.
Loss function 2.60172e-07 and Akaike's FPE 2.60588e-07
Created:       14-Jan-2014 00:33:26

Concluding Remarks
Estimating the tire stiffness parameters is in practice a rather intricate problem. First, the approximations introduced in the model structure above are valid for a rather narrow operation region, and data during high accelerations, braking, etc., cannot be used. The stiffness also varies with the environmental condition, e.g., the surrounding temperature, the temperature in the tires and the road surface conditions, which are not accounted for in the used model structure. Secondly, the estimation of the stiffness parameters relies heavily on the driving style. When mostly going straight ahead as in the third identification experiment, it becomes hard to estimate the stiffness parameters (especially the lateral one), or put another way, the parameter uncertainties become rather high.
Additional InformationFor more information on identification of dynamic systems with System Identification Toolbox™ visit the System Identification Toolbox product information page.


展开全文
• promotes energy independence and economic stability, it also advocates the advancement of alternative vehicle technologies in an overall global perspective. These technologies greatly facilitate the ...
• Lane change maneuver of high-speed automated vehicles is complicated since it involves highly nonlinear vehicle dynamics, which is critical for the driving safety and handling stability. Addressing ...
• In this thesis we consider the problem of designing and implementing Model Predictive Controllers (MPC) for stabilizing the dynamics of an autonomous ground vehicle. For such a class of systems, the ...
• and lateral stability on curved roads. A model including vehicle longitudinal and lateral dynamics is built first, which is as discrete as the predictive model of the system controller. Then, a cost ...
• With the introduction of vehicle stability systems like ESP®, and passive safety systems like seat belts and airbags, driving safety has been improved and the number of road traffic fatalities and ...
• 3.8.3 Design Case 3: Stability qConstraint on the Control Input/80 3.8.4 Design Case 4: Stability qConstraint on the Control InputqConstraint on the Output/81 References/81 4 FUZZY OBSERVER DESIGN 83 ...
• A robust trajectory linearization control (TLC) scheme is presented for a generic hypersonic vehicle (GHV) entry flight. The basic TLC frame constructs a baseline controller for the GHV attitude...
• So far I see no difference in terms of bbox stability with and without SORT in my own project (autonomous vehicle dataset)</p><p>该提问来源于开源项目：abewley/sort</p></div>
• The requirements of string stability, robustness and tracking performance are systematically measured by the Hinfinity norm, and explicitly satisfied by casting into the linear fractional ...
• <p>Flew basic stability checks, including autotune. Flight and autotune went well. Applied the autotune gains, and flew them. After flight (and a few power cycles) while creating autotune report, ...
• 车身稳定控制系统(VSC：Vehicle Stability Control )是丰田开发的一种汽车主动安全系统，能够极大提高车辆操控安全系数和驾驶便利性。当出现紧急转弯、紧急加速和紧急制动等突发情况时，车辆可以迅速感知并采取相应...


车身稳定控制系统(VSC：Vehicle Stability Control )是丰田开发的一种汽车主动安全系统，能够极大提高车辆操控安全系数和驾驶便利性。当出现紧急转弯、紧急加速和紧急制动等突发情况时，车辆可以迅速感知并采取相应的制动措施，如对每个轮胎进行单独控制，同时降低引擎的输出，维持车身的稳定。

牵引力控制系统Traction Control System，简称TCS，也称为ASR或TRC。它的作用是使汽车在各种行驶状况下都能获得最佳的牵引力。牵引力控制系统的控制装置是一台计算机，利用计算机检测4个车轮的速度和方向盘转向角，当汽车加速时，如果检测到驱动轮和非驱动轮转速差过大，计算机立即判断驱动力过大，发出指令信号减少发动机的供油量，降低驱动力，从而减小驱动轮的滑转率。计算机通过方向盘转角传感器掌握司机的转向意图，然后利用左右车轮速度传感器检测左右车轮速度差；从而判断汽车转向程度是否和司机的转向意图一样。如果检测出汽车转向不足（或过度转向），计算机立即判断驱动轮的驱动力过大，发出指令降低驱动力，以便实现司机的转向意图。

From <https://baike.baidu.com/item/%E7%89%B5%E5%BC%95%E5%8A%9B%E6%8E%A7%E5%88%B6%E7%B3%BB%E7%BB%9F/2523757?fromtitle=TCS%E7%89%B5%E5%BC%95%E5%8A%9B%E6%8E%A7%E5%88%B6%E7%B3%BB%E7%BB%9F&fromid=10159524>

车身电子稳定系统（ESP），是对旨在提升车辆的操控表现的同时、有效地防止汽车达到其动态极限时失控的系统或程序的通称。电子稳定程序能提升车辆的安全性和操控性。

ESP是英文Electronic Stability Program的缩写，中文译成“电子稳定程序”。它通过对从各传感器传来的车辆行驶状态信息进行分析，然后向ABS、ASR发出纠偏指令，来帮助车辆维持动态平衡。ESP可以使车辆在各种状况下保持最佳的稳定性，在转向过度或转向不足的情形下效果更加明显。

[1]

ASR全称：Acceleration Slip Regulation-----驱动（轮）防滑系统。

它属于汽车主动安全装置。又称牵引力控制系统防止车辆尤其是大马力车在起步、在加速时驱动轮打滑现象，以维持车辆行驶方向的稳定性。

From <https://baike.baidu.com/item/ASR>

CCS指的是一种定速巡航系统。

英文全称：Cruise Control System

中文译名：定速巡航系统

解释：定速巡航系统，又称为定速巡航行驶装置，速度控制系统，自动驾驶系统等；其作用是：按司机要求的速度合开关之后,不用踩油门踏板就自动地保持车速，使车辆以固定的速度行驶.采用了这种装置，当在高速公路上长时间行车后，司机就不用再去控制油门踏板，减轻了疲劳，同时减少了不必要的车速变化，可以节省燃料。

From <https://baike.baidu.com/item/CCS/13013844#viewPageContent>


展开全文