Modeling and Estimation of Dynamic Tire Properties

Institutionen fr systemteknik
Department of Electrical Engineering

Examensarbete
Modeling and Estimation of Dynamic Tire
Properties
Examensarbete utfrt i Reglerteknik
vid Tekniska hgskolan i Linkping
av
Erik Narby
LITH-ISY-EX--06/3800--SE
Linkping 2006
Department of Electrical Engineering Linkpings tekniska hgskola
Linkpings universitet Linkpings universitet
SE-581 83 Linkping, Sweden 581 83 Linkping
Modeling and Estimation of Dynamic Tire
Properties
Examensarbete utfrt i Reglerteknik
vid Tekniska hgskolan i Linkping
av
Erik Narby
Handledare: Thomas Schn
isy, Linkpigs universitet
Anders Stenman
NIRA Dynamics AB
Examinator: Fredrik Gustafsson
isy, Linkpigs universitet
Linkping, 26 February, 2006
Avdelning, Institution
Division, Department
Division of Automatic Control
Department of Electrical Engineering
Linkpings universitet
S-581 83 Linkping, Sweden
Datum
Date
2006-02-26
Sprk
Language
Svenska/Swedish
Engelska/English
Rapporttyp
Report category
Licentiatavhandling
Examensarbete
C-uppsats
D-uppsats
vrig rapport
URL fr elektronisk version

http://www.control.isy.liu.se
http://www.ep.liu.se/
ISBN
ISRN
Serietitel och serienummer
Title of series, numbering
ISSN
Titel
Title
Modellering och skattning av dynamiska dcksegenskaper
Modeling and Estimation of Dynamic Tire Properties
Frfattare
Author
Erik Narby
Sammanfattning
Abstract
Information about dynamic tire properties has always been important for drivers of
wheel driven vehicles. With the increasing amount of systems in modern vehicles
designed to measure and control the behavior of the vehicle information regarding
dynamic tire properties has grown even more important.
In this thesis a number of methods for modeling and estimating dynamic tire
properties have been implemented and evaluated. The more general issue of esti-
mating model parameters in linear and non-linear vehicle models is also addressed.
We conclude that the slope of the tire slip curve seems to dependent on the
stiness of the road surface and introduce the term combined stiness. We also show
that it is possible to estimate both longitudinal and lateral combined stiness using
only standard vehicle sensors.
Nyckelord
Keywords sensor fusion, system identication, tire stiness, slip, vehicle dynamics
Abstract
Information about dynamic tire properties has always been important for drivers
of wheel driven vehicles. With the increasing amount of systems in modern vehicles
designed to measure and control the behavior of the vehicle information regarding
dynamic tire properties has grown even more important.
In this thesis a number of methods for modeling and estimating dynamic tire
properties have been implemented and evaluated. The more general issue of esti-
mating model parameters in linear and non-linear vehicle models is also addressed.
We conclude that the slope of the tire slip curve seems to dependent on the
stiness of the road surface and introduce the term combined stiness. We also
show that it is possible to estimate both longitudinal and lateral combined stiness
using only standard vehicle sensors.
v
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank my supervisor at NIRA Dynamics Anders Stenman for his
help and advice especially during the initial phase of the work with the thesis. I
would also like to thank my supervisor at Linkping University Thomas Schn for
his support during the project and for taking the time to proofread the report.
Thanks also to Urban Forssell CEO of NIRA Dynamics and to my examiner Fredrik
Gustafsson for their input to and their profound interest in this thesis. Special
thanks to Peter Lindskog at NIRA Dynamics for his help with the non-linear
system identication parts of the thesis. Finally I would like to thank everyone else
at NIRA Dynamics for showing interest in my work and for all fruitful discussions.
vii
Notation
Symbols
F
xXX
longitudinal tire force from wheel XX
F
yXX
lateral tire force from wheel XX
F
N
normal force
F
D
air resistance force
F
f
frictional force
r vehicle yaw rate (turning rate around COG)
r
0
wheel radius
v
x
longitudinal velocity at COG
v
y
lateral velocity at COG
a
x
longitudinal acceleration at COG
a
y
lateral acceleration at COG
steering angle of front wheels
slip oset
J
z
vehicle yaw moment of inertia around COG
J
w
wheel moment of inertia
a distance from front axle to COG
b distance from rear axle to COG
h
f
front axle length
h
r
rear axle length
x
normalized traction force
y
normalized lateral force
max
coecient of friction
xmax
longitudinal coecient of friction
ymax
lateral coecient of friction
C
Coulomb coecient of friction
V
coecient of viscous friction
S
coecient of stiction
ix
x
r
0
wheel radius
C
x
longitudinal tire stiness
C
y
lateral tire stiness
C
xN
normalized longitudinal tire stiness
C
yN
normalized lateral tire stiness
C
F
front lateral tire stiness
C
R
rear lateral tire stiness
C
D
drag coecient
C
AIR
total air resistance coecient
C
ratio between steering wheel angle and steering angle

s longitudinal wheel slip
slip angle
air
air density
wheel angular velocity
For all symbols the index XX denotes a wheel index and can be:
FR Front Right
FL Front Left
RR Rear Right
RL Rear Left
Acronyms
SAE Society of Automotive Engineers
GPS Global Positioning System
ABS Anti-lock Braking System
ESP Electronic Stability System
RFI Road Friction Indicator
TPI Tire Pressure Indicator
COG Center Of Gravity
Contents
1 Introduction 1
1.1 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Company . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.3 Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.4 Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.5 Thesis Outline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2 Model Based Signal Processing 3
2.1 State-Space Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1.1 Sampling of Continuous-Time Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.1.2 Linearization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.2 Observers and Observability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.2.1 Observers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.2.2 Observability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.3 Kalman Filter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.4 Extended Kalman Filter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.4.1 Discretized Linearization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.5 Adaptive Filtering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.5.1 Kalman Filter for Adaptive Filtering . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.6 Change Detection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.6.1 CUSUM Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.7 Grey Box Modeling and System Identication . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3 Friction and Tire-Road Friction Estimation Methods 11
3.1 What is Friction? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.2 Friction Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
3.2.1 Static Friction Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
3.2.2 Dynamic Friction Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
3.3 Cause Based Tire-Road Friction Estimation Methods . . . . . . . . 15
3.3.1 Roughness Based Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
3.3.2 Lubricant Based methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
3.4 Eect Based Tire-Road Friction Estimation Methods . . . . . . . . 16
3.4.1 Vibration Based Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
3.4.2 Acoustic Based Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
xi
xii Contents
3.4.3 Slip Based Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
3.4.4 Tire-Tread Deformation Sensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
3.4.5 Hard Braking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
3.4.6 Extra Wheel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
4 Vehicle and Tire Dynamics 19
4.1 Vehicle Body Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
4.2 Wheel Modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
4.3 Tire Modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
4.3.1 Longitudinal Tire Modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
4.3.2 Lateral Tire Modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
4.3.3 Empirical Tire Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
4.3.4 Analytical Tire Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
4.3.5 Longitudinal Tire Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
4.3.6 Lateral Tire Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
4.3.7 Combined Tire Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
4.4 Sensors and Measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
4.4.1 Wheel Angular Velocity Sensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
4.4.2 Lateral Accelerometer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
4.4.3 Yaw Rate Gyro . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
4.4.4 Steering Wheel Angle Sensor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
5 Stiness Estimation 33
5.1 Tire Stiness or Slip-slope? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
5.2 Stiness Estimation using Regression Models . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
5.2.1 Estimation of Longitudinal Stiness . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
5.2.2 Estimation of Lateral Stiness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
5.3 Stiness Estimation using Parameter Identication in State-Space
Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
5.3.1 Linear Tire Model Extended Kalman Filter . . . . . . . . . 45
5.3.2 Non-Linear Tire Model O-Line System Identication . . . 45
6 Mapping Stiness to Friction 51
6.1 Calculating
max
from Braking Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
6.2 Mapping Functions and Curve Fitting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
6.2.1 Linear Function Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
6.2.2 Quadratic Function Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
6.2.3 Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
7 Surface Eects on Slip-Slope 57
7.1 The Secant Eect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
7.2 Sliding in the Pre-Sliding Displacement Phase . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
7.3 Tire Stiness and Surface Stiness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
8 Direct Estimation of
max
61
8.1 Direct Friction Estimation using the Brush Tire Model . . . . . . . 61
8.1.1 Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
8.2 Wheel Model with Dahl Tire Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
8.2.1 Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
9 Limiting Factors in Eect-Based Tire Road Friction Estimation 67
9.1 Excitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
9.2 Noise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
10 Conclusions 71
10.1 Estimating Stiness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
10.2 Surface Eects on Slip . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
10.3 Using Estimated Stiness to Estimate
max
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
10.4 Direct Estimation of
max
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
Bibliography 73
A Vehicle Simulation Model 75
B Test Cases 76
B.1 Sim1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
B.2 Sim2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
B.3 Sim3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
xiv Contents
Chapter 1
Introduction
1.1 Background
Friction is the basic principle upon which all wheel driven vehicles rely. The max-
imum tire-road friction has heavy impact upon how a vehicle behaves in dierent
situations. This is something which everyone who has ever driven a car, mo-
torcycle or bicycle on a slippery surface has experienced. Knowledge about the
maximum tire-road friction has been important for the driver for as long as wheel
driven vehicles have existed. With the increasing amount of systems in modern
vehicles designed to measure and control the behavior of the vehicle, information
regarding the maximum tire-road friction becomes even more important. As this
information has grown more and more important eorts to nd a method of esti-
mating the available friction have increased accordingly [1]. Many methods have
been proposed, but so far no nal solution to the problem has been given.
1.2 Company
This masters thesis has been performed at NIRA Dynamics AB. NIRA Dynamics
AB is a company active in the area of safety enhancing software for the automotive
industry. The company currently has 17 employees and has oces in Linkping
and Gothenburg. More information about NIRA Dynamics AB can be found at
the companys web site: www.niradynamics.se.
1.3 Objectives
The objectives of this thesis are:
To implement and evaluate new methods of estimating the longitudinal tire-
road stiness.
To develop, implement and evaluate methods for estimating the lateral tire-
road stiness.
1
2 Introduction
To develop, implement and evaluate a method for using estimated longitu-
dinal and lateral tire stinesses to estimate the tire-road friction coecient.
1.4 Limitations
To limit the scope of this thesis some limitations are made.
The vehicle is assumed to front wheel driven.
Only methods using standard vehicle sensors i.e., ABS, Anti-lock Braking
System, and ESP, Electronic Stability Program, sensors, are considered.
1.5 Thesis Outline
Chapter 2 contains an introduction to model based signal processing and describes
the theory used in this thesis. The concept of friction and methods of estimating
tire-road friction are discussed in Chapter 3. Chapter 4 contains a description
of vehicle and tire dynamics and modeling. Chapter 5 describes and evaluates
methods of estimating tire-road stiness and Chapter 6 explores whether it is
possible to map values of stiness to values of
max
. The eects which surface
conditions have on slip-slope are discussed in Chapter 7. In Chapter 8 methods of
estimating
max
directly, without going via tire-road stiness are described and
evaluated. Chapter 9 discusses what limits there are to eect based methods of
estimating
max
. Finally Chapter 10 sums up the results of the thesis.
Chapter 2
Model Based Signal
Processing
In model based signal processing a model of the system which generated a signal is
used. This makes it possible to analyze the signal and the system which generated
the signal with methods developed in system and control theory. The method
of using measurements from multiple sensors to get measurements with higher
precision or estimates of non-measurable quantities is called senor fusion. Model-
based signal processing and the Kalman lter in particular are the foundations of
sensor fusion.
2.1 State-Space Models
Many systems can mathematically be expressed as a system of rst-order dier-
ential/dierence equations. A system which is described by a system of rst-order
dierential/dierence equations is said to be on state-space form. Knowing the
state of a system makes it possible to calculate all future output signals if all future
input signals are known. A general continuous-time system in state-space form
can be written as:
x(t) = f(x(t), u(t)), (2.1a)
y(t) = g(x(t), u(t)), (2.1b)
where x is the state vector, u is the input signal vector and y is the output signal
vector. A general discrete-time system in state-space form is often written as:
x[t + 1] = f(x[t], u[t]), (2.2a)
y[t] = g(x[t], u[t]). (2.2b)
Systems which can be described by a linear system of dierential/dierence equa-
tions are of special importance in system theory and control theory as there exists
3
4 Model Based Signal Processing
many methods for analyzing such systems. A linear continuous-time system can
be written as:
x(t) = Ax(t) +Bu(t), (2.3a)
y(t) = Cx(t) +Du(t). (2.3b)
A linear discrete-time system can be written as:
x[t + 1] = Ax[t] +Bu[t] (2.4a)
y[t] = Cx[t] +Du[t] (2.4b)
If the system functions/matrices do not vary with time the system is called time-
invariant.
2.1.1 Sampling of Continuous-Time Systems
The modeling of a physical system in many cases lead to a continuous-time model
i.e., a system of dierential equations. When implementing a controller or an
observer based on a system model in a computer it is necessary to have the system
model in discrete-time form. Therefore it is often necessary to approximate the
continuous-time system model with a discrete-time system model. This process is
called discretization or sampling of a system. For a linear system this can be done
analytically using he following theorem:
Theorem 2.1 (Discretization of linear systems) If the system
x(t) = Ax(t) +Bu(t) (2.5a)
y(t) = Cx(t) +Du(t) (2.5b)
is controlled with an input signal which is piecewise constant during the sample
interval T, then the relation between the input signal, the system state and the
value of the output signal in the sample moments is given by the discrete-time
system
x[kT +T] = Fx[kT] +Gu[kT], (2.6a)
y[kT] = Hx[kT] +Ju[kT], (2.6b)
where
F = e
AT
, G =
T
0
e
At
Bdt, H = C, J = D. (2.6c)
See for example [9] for a proof of the theorem.
2.2 Observers and Observability 5
2.1.2 Linearization
Many methods in system and control theory are based upon the theory of linear
dierential/dierence equations. In many cases when we have a non-linear system
it useful to approximate the system with a linear system around a certain point
in (x
0
, u
0
) in state-input space. We can then analyze/control the system close to
this point using linear methods. The standard way of doing this is to do a Taylor
expansion of the system around (x
0
, u
0
) and disregard higher-order terms. This
gives for a time-discrete system on form (2.6).
x[t + 1] f(x
0
, u
0
) +A(x[t] x
0
) +B(u[t] u
0
),
where
A =
df(x, u)
dx
x=x0,u=u0
, B =
df(x, u)
du
x=x0,u=u0
With the approximation x
0
= f(x
0
, u
0
) the variable substitution x[t] = x[t] x
0
,
u[t] = u[t] u
0
gets us back to the linear case;
x[t + 1] = A x[t] +B u[t]. (2.7)
2.2 Observers and Observability
2.2.1 Observers
Often we are in the situation that we have a system which we want to control or
analyze without having the possibility to measure all states. In this case we may
want to estimate the states which we do not have the possibility to measure. The
most common way of doing this is to use an observer. We start with a system in
state-space form with measurement noise:
x(t) = Ax(t) +Bu(t), (2.8a)
y(t) = Cx(t) +Du(t) +v(t). (2.8b)
Here v(t) is measurement noise. We start with a simulation of the system with
the known input signals:
x(t) = A x(t) +Bu(t).

We now feed back the output signal error y(t) C x(t) Du(t) which gives us the
observer:
x(t) = A x(t) +Bu(t) +K(y(t) C x(t) Du(t)), (2.9)

where K is the observer gain matrix. Let us study the estimation error:
x(t) = x(t) x(t) (2.10)
From (2.8), (2.9) and (2.10) we now get
x(t) = (AKC) x(t) +Kv(t) (2.11)

We see now that as long the poles of the observer eig(AKC) lie in the stability
region and the system is observable, the estimation error will decay towards zero.
Furthermore it can be seen that the choice of K is a trade-o between having the
estimation error decaying quickly to zero and sensitivity to measurement noise.
2.2.2 Observability
In order to be able to estimate a state from measured signals a change in the state
must be visible in the measured signals. A state which has this property is said
to be observable.
Denition 2.1 (Observability) The state x
= 0 is said to be non-observable
if, when u(t) = 0, t 0 and x(0) = x
the output signal y(t) = 0, t 0. The

system is said to be observable if it has no non-observable states.
Observability of Linear Systems
The observability of a linear system can be analyzed using the following theorem.
Theorem 2.2 The space of non-observable states of a linear system is the null
space to the observability matrix O.
O(A, C) =
C
CA
.
.
.
CA
n1
(2.12)
This means that the system is observable if and only if O has full rank.
Observability of Non-Linear Systems
Observability is a much more complicated matter for non-linear systems than for
linear. There exists theory which extends the concept of linear observability to
non-linear systems, see for example [9]. This theory is however hard to apply
for practical systems which are subject to noise. In real world applications the
observability of non-linear systems is often decided by comparing state estimates
from non-linear observers with measured or simulated data. Good tracking ability
of the observer indicates that the states which are estimated are observable at
least in the tested signal region whereas bad tracking ability indicates the opposite.
However no denite conclusions can be drawn from such a test.
2.3 Kalman Filter
How should the observer amplication K be chosen in order to minimize the esti-
mation error? The lter which solves this problem is called the Kalman lter [11].
2.4 Extended Kalman Filter 7
Suppose that we have a linear discrete time, time variable system in state space
form with state and measurement noise:
x[t + 1] = A
t
x[t] +B
v,t
u[t] +B
u,t
v[t] (2.13a)
y[t] = C
t
x[t] +e[t] (2.13b)
Assume that the process noise v and the measurement noise e are non-correlated,
white noise random processes with the following properties:
Ev[t] = Ev[t] = 0, (2.14a)
Covv[t] = Q
t
, (2.14b)
Cove[t] = R
t
. (2.14c)
(2.14d)
Let the initial state x[0] of the system have the following properties:
Ex[0] = x
0
, (2.15a)
Covx[0] = . (2.15b)
Then the optimal linear observer in the least-squares sense is called the Kalman
lter, after its founder, and is given by the equations:
x[t + 1[t] = A
t
x[t + 1[t] +B
u,t
u[t], (2.16a)
x[t[t] = x[t[t 1] +K
t
(y[t] C
t
x[t[t 1]), (2.16b)
K
t
= P
t|t1
C
T
t
(C
t
P
t|t1
C
T
t
+R
t
)
1
, (2.16c)
P
t+1|t
= A
t
P
t|t
A
T
t
+Q
t
, (2.16d)
P
t|t
= P
t|t1
P
t|t1
C
T
t
(C
t
P
t|t1
C
T
t
+R
t
)
1
C
t
P
t|t1
, (2.16e)
x[0[0] = x
0
, (2.16f)
P
t|t
= . (2.16g)
It can also be proved that if the process and the measurement noise are Gaus-
sian random processes the Kalman lter is not only the optimal linear lter but
also optimal when non-linear lters are taken into account. The Kalman lter
also solves the problem of choosing the observer amplication for a time-varying
system. In most cases Q and R are not known exactly but are used as tuning
parameters. A large Q/R ratio puts high emphasis on tracking ability but less on
noise suppression and vice versa.
2.4 Extended Kalman Filter
In many situations we have a non-linear model of a system which we want to
analyze. If we do not have the possibility to measure all states it is, as in the
linear case, desirable to be able to estimate the non-measured states using an
observer. The extended Kalman lter is a method for constructing observers
for non-linear systems. The idea is simply to linearize the system around the
previously estimated state and then apply the Kalman lter in each step. If the
system is given in continuous-time we have two possibilities:
1. To rst linearize the model around the previously estimated state and then
discretize the linear model, so called discretized linearization. This is the
method used in this thesis.
2. To rst discretize the model and then linearize the discrete model around the
previously estimated state, so called linearizied discretization. This method
is not used in this thesis. For a thorough explanation of this method, see [11].
2.4.1 Discretized Linearization
Assume that we have a non-linear time-continuous system on the form
x(t) = f(x(t), u(t)) (2.17a)
y(t) = g(x(t), u(t)) (2.17b)
Taylor expansion of (2.17a) around the point ( x, u
0
) give when disregarding higher-
order terms:
x(t) = f( x, u
0
) +f
x
( x, u
0
)(x x) +f
u
( x, u
0
)(u u
0
), (2.18)
where f
x
and f
u
denote the derivative of f(x, u) with respect to x and u, respec-
tively. Rearrangement of (2.18) give us the linear system:
x(t) = f
x
( x, u
0
)x +u
, (2.19)
where
u
= f( x, u
0
) +f
u
( x, u
0
)(u u
0
) f
x
( x, u
0
) x (2.20)
We now discretize the system as explained in Section 2.1.1. This yields:
x(t +T) = e
fx( x,u0)T
x(t) +
T
0
e
fx( x,u0)
du
(2.21)
With the approximation x(t) x(t) we get the linear discrete-time system:
x(t +T) e
fx( x,u0)T
x(t) +
T
0
e
fx( x,u0)
du
(2.22)
Although the extended Kalman lter is widely used it is hard to analyze its per-
formance analytically, it is by no means optimal as is the case with the standard
Kalman lter.
2.5 Adaptive Filtering 9
2.5 Adaptive Filtering
In model-based signal processing we are dependent on a good model of the system
from which our signals originate. In many cases it is not possible to model the
system once and for all and then use that model as the system might be changing
with time. When this is the case we need to adapt the model to the changes in
the system. Using adaptive models for ltering is called adaptive ltering.
2.5.1 Kalman Filter for Adaptive Filtering
Suppose that we have a system which can be written as a linear regression with
time-variable coecients:
y[t] =
T
[t][t] +e[t], (2.23)
where y[t] is the observed signal, [t] is the regression vector, [t] are the system
parameters and e[t] is measurement noise. If the coecients are modeled as a
random walk we can get a state-space description of the system with the process
coecients as states:
[t + 1] = [t + 1] +w[t], (2.24a)
y[t] =
T
[t][t] +e[t], (2.24b)
where w[t] is process noise. The Kalman lter can now be applied in order to
estimate the parameters.
2.6 Change Detection
It is often of great importance to be able to detect a change in the characteristics of
a signal. When a change is detected in a signal necessary actions can be performed
by the system. These actions can be to notify a user or another system or to change
the amplication of a lter.
2.6.1 CUSUM Test
One of the most commonly used methods for detecting a change in a signal or
system is the CUSUM test [11]. From the signal which is to be examined a
distance measure s is calculated. The calculation of the distance measure depends
on the kind of change which is to be detected, e.g., a change in mean value or a
change in variance. The distance measure is then averaged in a certain manner,
the averaged distance measure is called g. The averaged distance measure is then
compared with a predened threshold h. If g exceeds the threshold the CUSUM
test indicates that a change has been detected. The CUSUM test is dened as:
g
t
= g
t1
+s
t
, (2.25a)
g
t
= 0, if g
t
< 0, (2.25b)
g
t
= 0 and alarm if g
t
> h > 0. (2.25c)
2.7 Grey Box Modeling and System Identication
Physical system modeling often leads to a model where one or more parameter
values are unknown i.e. a grey box model. In these cases it is necessary to estimate
the unknown parameter values from measured data. The parameter values can be
estimated by minimizing an error function with respect to the parameters. For
linear and some non-linear systems this can be done analytically [13]. For general
non-linear systems this can be done with numerical algorithms. In this thesis a
version of the Gauss-Newton algorithm described in [13] is used. To calculate the
necessary derivatives a standard central dierence is used. To solve the system
dierential equations for necessary values used in the dierence approximation
Simulink (ODE45) is used.
Chapter 3
Friction and Tire-Road
Friction Estimation Methods
This chapter starts by giving an introduction to friction, then the modeling of
friction is discussed. The last part of the chapter discusses dierent methods
of estimating and measuring the maximum tire-road friction. The methods of
estimating and measuring the maximum tire-road friction can be divided into two
main groups: eect based methods and cause based methods [17].
3.1 What is Friction?
Friction is the resistive force which occurs when two surfaces which travel along
each other are pressed together. The frictional force is always exerted in a direction
which opposes movement. The frictional force is dependent on the microscopic
properties of the two surfaces at the area of contact, see Figure 3.1. Knowledge
of the frictional force is essential within many engineering disciplines. Friction
is caused by a wide range of physical phenomena including plastic and elastic
deformation, uid mechanics and wave mechanics [18]. This makes the modeling
of frictional forces a daunting task. Often we talk about the coecient of friction
or
max
which is the highest normalized friction force which is possible for a
specic surface-surface combination. The coecient of friction
max
is a unit-
less quantity which summarizes the microscopic properties of the two surfaces in
the area of contact. It is important to note that the coecient of friction is a
simplication of the real world and that the value of the coecient of friction only
can be found empirically. A common misconception is to talk about the coecient
of friction of a surface. There is no such thing. The coecient of friction is dened
only between two surfaces.
11
12 Friction and Tire-Road Friction Estimation Methods
F
N
F
F
f
Figure 3.1. The frictional force is dependent upon the microscopic properties of the
contact area and the force pressing the surfaces together.
3.2 Friction Models
Many physical phenomena are involved in how frictional forces arise. There are
many dierent models of friction which incorporate one or many of these phenom-
ena. In this section some of these models are presented and described.
3.2.1 Static Friction Models
Static friction models are used to model the frictional force as a function of the
force pressing the two surfaces together, usually referred to as the normal force,
and sliding velocity.
Coulomb Friction
The simplest and the most commonly used friction model is Coulomb friction
or kinetic friction [18]. The frictional force is said to be dependent only on the
direction of the sliding velocity. Coulomb friction is illustrated in Figure 3.2(a).
Coulomb friction is specied by the Coulomb coecient of friction
C
.
Viscous Friction
Viscous Friction is the frictional force originating from the viscosity of lubricants
in the contact area. This force is modeled to be proportional to the sliding velocity
with proportionality constant
V
. Viscous friction is illustrated in Figure 3.2(b).
3.2 Friction Models 13
F
v
(a) Coulomb friction.
F
v
(b) Viscous friction.
F
v
(c) Stiction
F
v
(d) Combined model illustrating the
Stribeck eect.
Figure 3.2. Static friction models.
Stiction
Stiction or static friction states that the force needed to initiate slide often is
higher than the frictional force once sliding is taking place. Stiction is illustrated
in Figure 3.2(c). Stiction is specied by the Coulomb coecient of friction
C
and
the coecient of stiction
S
, where
S
>
C
.
The Stribeck Eect
The Stribeck eect causes the frictional force to decrease continuously from static
to kinetic friction as the sliding velocity is increases. The Stribeck eect is de-
scribed by the characteristic Stribeck velocity v
st
which denotes the sliding veloc-
ity where 37% of the static friction is active. Coulomb friction, viscous friction,
stiction and the Stribeck eect combined yield a static friction model which can
be seen in Figure 3.2(d).
3.2.2 Dynamic Friction Models
Static friction models imply that there is no displacement of the contact area until
sliding occurs. This is in reality not the case. The contact area shows spring like
behavior until sliding starts taking place at what is called break away [18]. This
phenomenon is called pre-sliding displacement and is illustrated in Figure 3.3.
Dynamic friction models are used to model pre-sliding displacement and other
F F
Figure 3.3. The contact area shows spring-like behavior until break-away.
dynamic eects of friction, while also taking one or more static friction phenomena
into account. Common dynamic friction models are the Dahl model which models
pre-sliding displacement and Coloumb friction and the LuGre model which extends
the Dahl model by also modeling stiction, viscous friction and the Stribeck eect.
See for example [18] for a description of these models.
The Dahl Model
The Dahl model was introduced by P.R. Dahl in 1976 and is based upon the
stress-strain curve in classical solid mechanics [5]. It was developed to simulate
control systems with friction and is a generalization of Coloumb friction. It does
3.3 Cause Based Tire-Road Friction Estimation Methods 15
not model static friction or the Stribeck eect. It is formulated as:
dF
dx
=
0
1
F
max
F
N
sgn(v
r
)
, (3.1)
where x is displacement,
0
is material stiness in the contact patch and is a
design parameter. With = 1, which is the value normally used [5], and F =
0
z,
where z is a measure of deection in the surface (3.1) can be written as:
dF
dz
= v
r

0
z
max
F
N
v
r
(3.2a)
F =
0
z (3.2b)
For a more thorough explanation of friction and friction models see for example [18,
5].
3.3 Cause Based Tire-Road Friction Estimation
Methods
Cause based methods try to measure and identify parameters which have impact
on the maximum tire-road friction. From this information conclusions regarding
maximum tire-road friction can be drawn. The parameters inuencing
max
can
be divided into three groups: vehicle parameters e.g., speed and wheel load, tire
parameters e.g., tire material and tread depth and road parameters e.g., road
type, presence of lubricants and temperature. The parameters inuencing
max
the most are road parameters and most work on cause based tire-road friction
estimation methods have been done on estimating these.
3.3.1 Roughness Based Methods
Roughness based methods measure the roughness of the road. From the measured
roughness it can be possible to draw conclusions regarding the available tire-road
friction. In [10] a roughness measure calculated from measurements of wheel an-
gular velocities is used to complement an eect based method by allowing better
classication of road surfaces. In [6] an optical surface roughness sensor is used
in combination with a wetness sensor to produce estimates of
max
. The general
conclusion which can be drawn from these tests is that a road surface roughness
measure can be used to complement other methods and allows for better classi-
cation of the road surface.
3.3.2 Lubricant Based methods
Lubricant based methods try to identify lubricants e.g., water, snow etc., present
on the road. From this conclusions regarding
max
can be drawn. In [6] optical
wetness and roughness sensors are combined to produce an estimate of
max
.
3.4 Eect Based Tire-Road Friction Estimation
Methods
Eect based methods try to measure the eects of friction on measured signals.
The methods and sensors used to do this vary. There are four main groups of
eect based methods.
3.4.1 Vibration Based Methods
The idea of vibration based methods is that a change in tire-road friction causes a
change in the frequency characteristics of measured wheel speed signals. In [23] a
vibrational model of a tire is used to estimate the slope of the s
x
curve at an
arbitrary point, see Section 4.3 for a description of the s
x
curve. This value is
then said to be correlated with
max
.
3.4.2 Acoustic Based Methods
Acoustic based methods use acoustic sensors to collect tire sound data. By ana-
lyzing the sound made by the tire when rolling over the road surface conclusions
can be drawn regarding
max
. Acoustic based methods are investigated in for
example [6, 22].
3.4.3 Slip Based Methods
Slip based methods of estimating
max
use tire models which model the relation
between tire slip and tire forces. By calculating longitudinal and lateral slip and
corresponding tire forces
max
can be estimated. Dierent methods of curve tting
or parameter identication schemes are used to map the measured/estimated data
to the available tire-road friction. This area can be divided into two subgroups:
longitudinal and lateral methods. The longitudinal methods map longitudinal slip
when applying positive, when driving, or negative, when braking, torque to the
wheels. Lateral methods try to estimate the side slip angle during turning. There
are an abundance of articles within this area. In [10] a method of detecting changes
in
max
by calculating the slope of the s
x
curve when applying driving torque
is presented. The method is complemented by a road surface roughness measure
to improve classication of the road surface. In [17] a method of calculating the
slip of the s
x
curve when braking is presented. In [17] and [21] methods of
adapting non-linear tire models to measured slip data are presented. In [19] a
non-linear vehicle observer coupled with a Bayesian hypothesis selector is used to
estimate
max
.
3.4.4 Tire-Tread Deformation Sensors
When a tire is subject to driving or braking torque the tire-tread in the contact
patch between tire and road starts to deect slightly. As the torque increases
3.4 Eect Based Tire-Road Friction Estimation Methods 17
parts of the contact patch starts to slide. This sliding occurs in parts of the con-
tact patch even with a low friction demand and long before the entire tire starts
to slide. Where in the contact patch sliding occurs and the amount of sliding
taking place is determined by
max
among other things, see [21] for a theoretical
explanation. Tire-tread deformation based approaches for tire-road friction esti-
mation uses sensors embedded in the tire to measure tire-tread deformation. This
information can then be used to estimate
max
. A method based on tire-tread
deformation sensors is described in [17]. In the recent APOLLO project in which
tire sensors are developed it is concluded that even using in-tire sensors it is hard
to estimate
max
in a reliable way [1]. Furthermore the need of sensors in the
tires and self-powered wireless data links between the tire sensors and the vehicle
makes this approach costly and complicated.
3.4.5 Hard Braking
The classical way of measuring tire-road friction is to brake hard and to calculate
max
from the average deceleration. This approach is described in more detail in
Section 6.1. This is obviously not a very convenient way of measuring tire-road
friction and it is only a viable solution for making reference measurements of
max
.
3.4.6 Extra Wheel
Systems using an extra wheel have also been designed, see for example [12]. On
this extra wheel the applied braking or driving torque can be regulated so that
s = s
0
where s
0
= argmax
s
x
(s). If the normal force is known the normalized
traction force
x
and hence
max
can be calculated.
Chapter 4
Vehicle and Tire Dynamics
In order to to simulate a vehicle and also to be able to design observers to estimate
non-measured quantities it is necessary to develop a vehicle model. The vehicle
model developed consists of three subsystems:
vehicle body model
wheel model
tire model
In this thesis only front wheel driven cars are considered in the modeling.
4.1 Vehicle Body Model
In this section a vehicle body model will be derived from standard rigid body
mechanics. We use a planar model of a four wheel two axis vehicle illustrated in
Figure 4.1. We neglect roll and pitch motion. We also neglect lateral air resistance.
F = ma gives in the x direction:
m( v
x
v
y
r) = (F
xFR
+F
xFL
) cos() (F
yFR
+F
yFL
) sin() +F
xRR
+F
xRL
F
D
,
(4.1)
and in the y direction:
m( v
y
+v
x
r) = (F
xFR
+F
xFL
) sin() +(F
yFR
+F
yFL
) cos() +F
yRR
+F
yRL
. (4.2)
= J r gives:
I
z
r = a ((F
xFR
+F
xFL
) sin() + (F
yFR
+F
yFL
) cos()) b ((F
xRR
+F
xRL
) +
+
h
f
2
((F
xFL
F
xFR
) cos() + (F
yFL
F
yFR
) sin()) . (4.3)
Here v
x
and v
y
are the vehicles longitudinal and lateral velocities respectively at
the vehicles Center Of Gravity (COG). r is the vehicles yaw rate around COG.
19
20 Vehicle and Tire Dynamics
h
F
h
R

Fx
FL
Fy
FL
Fx
FR
Fy
FR
Fx
RL
Fy
RL
Fx
RR
Fy
RR
v
y
v
x
r
a
b
F
D
Figure 4.1. Planar four wheel vehicle model.
4.2 Wheel Modeling 21
F
x/yXX
are tire forces and is the front wheel steering angle. Air resistance can
be modeled as F
D
=
1
2
C
D
air
Av
2
x
= C
AIR
v
2
x
[2]. With a slight rearrangement of
the equations we get the system in state-space form:
v
x
= v
y
r+
1
m
((F
xFR
+F
xFL
) cos()(F
yFR
+F
yFL
) sin()+F
xRR
+F
xRL
)C
AIR
v
2
x
(4.4a)
v
y
= v
x
r +
1
m
(F
xFR
+F
xFL
) sin() +(F
yFR
+F
yFL
) cos() +F
yRR
+F
yRL
(4.4b)
r =
1
I
z
(a((F
xFR
+F
xFL
) sin() + (F
yFR
+F
yFL
) cos()) b((F
xRR
+F
xRL
)+
+
h
f
2
((F
xFL
F
xFR
) cos() + (F
yFL
F
yFR
) sin())) (4.4c)
4.2 Wheel Modeling
We want to model the rotational dynamics of a wheel when torque and frictional
force is applied to the wheel, see Figure 4.2. J = yields:
=
1
J
w
( r
0
F
f
). (4.5)
Here, J
w
is the moment of inertia of the wheel, is torque applied to the wheel,
r
0
is wheel radius, is the wheels angular velocity, F
N
is the normal force acting
upon the wheel and F
f
the longitudinal frictional force of the wheel.
v
r
0
F
N
F
Figure 4.2. Longitudinal wheel model.
4.3 Tire Modeling
We want to model the forces exerted by a tire when torque, steering angle and
normal forces are applied to the wheel on which the tire is mounted. We divide
the modeling of the tire forces into two parts: longitudinal and lateral forces.
There are many similarities between the modeling of the two forces as they both
are frictional forces. They dier in variables and parameters by which they are
governed. Common for all models for tire-road interaction is that they use dynamic
friction models, see Section 3, as tire road interaction exhibit signicant pre-sliding
displacement due to the relatively low stiness of rubber.
4.3.1 Longitudinal Tire Modeling
In this section the important variables for longitudinal tire modeling are dened.
Normalized Traction Force
The normalized traction force
x
for a tire is dened as
x
=
F
x
F
N
, (4.6)
where F
x
is the traction force and N is the normal force acting upon the wheel.
The normalized traction force is also called utilized friction and always obeys the
relation
x

xmax
where
xmax
is the coecient of friction in the longitudinal
direction.
Slip
When driving torque is applied to a wheel this results in a force being applied
to the contact area between tire and road surface. This force is opposed by a
frictional force which causes the wheel and hence the vehicle to accelerate. The
pre-sliding displacement phenomenon, see Section 3.2.2, causes a deformation and
hence a displacement of the tire-road contact patch, see Figure 4.3. As the tire
rotates each new part of the tire tread which enters the contact patch is slightly
displaced. This causes the tire to rotate slightly faster than what the longitudinal
velocity of the wheel hub would indicate. The relative dierence in a wheels
angular velocity times its radius compared to its longitudinal velocity is called
slip. The slip s is according to Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) dened as:
s =
r
0
v
x
v
x
. (4.7)
Here is the angular velocity of the wheel, r
0
is wheel radius and v is wheel
longitudinal velocity.
4.3.2 Lateral Tire Modeling
In this section important variables in lateral tire modeling are dened.
4.3 Tire Modeling 23
Road
Tire
Roll direction
Figure 4.3. Tire deformation leads to slip.
Normalized Lateral Force
The normalized lateral force of a tire is analogously to (4.6) dened as:
y
=
F
y
F
N
, (4.8)
where F
y
is lateral force and F
N
is the normal force acting upon the wheel. The
normalized lateral force always complies to the relation
y

ymax
, where
ymax
is the coecient of friction in the lateral direction.
Slip Angle
During cornering lateral force is applied to the tires. This lateral force is opposed
by a frictional force in the tire-road contact patch. Analogously with the longi-
tudinal case the pre-sliding displacement phenomenon, see Section 3.2.2, causes a
displacement of the tire-road contact patch in the lateral direction. As the tire
rotates each new part of the tire tread which enters the contact patch is slightly
displaced. This causes the tire to be displaced in the lateral direction. The faster
the longitudinal velocity of the tire, the higher the lateral displacement. The an-
gle between the heading direction of the tire and the velocity vector of the tire is
called the slip angle and is dened as:
= arctan
v
y
v
x
, (4.9)
where v
x
is the longitudinal velocity and v
y
is the lateral velocity of the wheel.
An illustration of the slip angle can be seen in Figure 4.4.
4.3.3 Empirical Tire Models
Empirical tire models try to adjust functions to measured data without giving a
physical explanation to the origin of the tire forces. Examples of empirical tire
models are the magic formula tire model and the piecewise linear tire model both
which will be presented in this chapter.
v
y
v
x
v
Figure 4.4. Denition of the slip angle.
4.3.4 Analytical Tire Models
In contrast to empirical tire models analytical tire models model tire forces from a
physical point of view using knowledge about how frictional forces arise in the tire-
road contact patch. These models are not always able to explain all phenomena
which can be encountered in reality but in return their parameters have physical
explanations. Common analytical tire models models in the literature are the
brush model [21], and tire models based on the Dahl model and the LuGre friction
models [18]. The two latter models use general dynamic friction models to model
tire-road friction.
4.3.5 Longitudinal Tire Models
From Section 3.2.2 we know that the frictional force can be described as a function
of the displacement of the contact patch. The displacement of the contact patch
in the longitudinal direction is proportional to the slip. This makes it natural to
develop models of the longitudinal tire force as functions of the tire slip. Here we
will present and describe two longitudinal tire models: the magic formula model
and a simpler piecewise linear tire model. As no slip data from braking is used
in this thesis only positive values of longitudinal tire slip are considered in this
section.
The Magic Formula Model
The magic formula model was introduced by Pacejka et al. in [4]. It is dened as
F = Dsin(C arctan(B E(B arctan(B)))), (4.10)
where B, C, D and E are model parameters. Plots of the normalized traction force
versus slip generated with the magic formula tire model for dierent coecients
of friction can be seen in Figure 4.5. Notice that the dierence in initial slope
between the curves is exaggerated in this plot. There is no physical explanation of
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
s
x
max
= 1.0
x
max
= 0.5
x
max
= 0.1
Figure 4.5. The magic formula longitudinal tire model for dierent values of max.
the parameters of the magic formula tire model. The parameters must be identied
from measurement data for a specic tire-surface combination. The magic formula
tire model has shown to be able to adapt to measured data very accurately [5].
However, there are drawbacks with the magic formula model. The structure of
the model makes it unsuitable for on-line parameter estimation as it is hard to
evaluate the gradient with respect to the parameters.
Piecewise Linear Tire Model
Tire forces are by nature highly non-linear. In many cases reasonable performance
can be obtained with a model which is piecewise linear. By dividing the
x
-s
function into two parts we get the model
x
=
C
xN
s, s
xmax
CxN
xmax
, otherwise
, (4.11)
where C
x
is referred to as the longitudinal tire stiness. This name is somewhat
misguiding as C
x
is not solely dependent on the tire but also on the road surface,
this will be further explained in Chapter 7. Plots of the normalized traction force
versus slip generated with the piecewise linear tire model for dierent coecients
of friction can be seen in Figure 4.6. Notice that the dierence in initial slope is
exaggerated in this plot. This model can be made to resemble the magic formula
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
s
x
max
= 1.0
x
max
= 0.5
x
max
= 0.1
Figure 4.6. Piecewise linear longitudinal tire model for dierent values of max.
model quite well for many tire-surface combinations. As can be seen in Figure 4.7
the model yields very similar results to the magic formula model, especially in the
low slip region of the slip-normalized traction force curve where the magic formula
is very close to being linear.
The Brush Tire Model
The Brush Tire Model assumes that slip is caused by deformation of the tire
tread. The tire tread is said to consist of small brush elements attached to the
tire carcass. A brush element behaves like a linear spring which creates frictional
force as it deforms up to a friction dependent break-away force where the brush
element starts to slide. This divides the tire-road contact patch into two sections:
one sliding and one non-sliding. When parts of the contact area starts to slide
the slip curve deviates from the tangent to the curve in the origin. This explains
the shape of the slip-curve theoretically. The brush model depends on the vertical
pressure distribution in the contact patch, the rubber stiness and the tire-road
friction coecient. In [21] the following version of the brush model is derived
F = 2c
p
a
2
s
4
3
(2c
p
a
2
s)
2
F
N
+
8
27
(2c
p
a
2
s)
3
(F
N
)
2
, (4.12)
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
s
x

Magic Formula Model
Piecewise Linear Model
Figure 4.7. Comparison between the piecewise linear tire model and the magic formula
tire model
where c
p
is a stiness parameter, a is the contact patch length and is the coe-
cient of friction. In Figure 4.8 three curves of the normalized traction force plotted
against wheel slip generated with the brush tire model for dierent values of
max
is shown. This simple form of the brush model lacks modeling of static friction and
the Stribeck eect. However its relative simplicity compared to the magic formula
model and the physical interpretation of the model parameters makes the model
attractive within some applications such as on-line tire-road friction estimation.
The Dahl Tire Model
The Dahl Tire model is based entirely on the Dahl friction model presented in
Section 3.2.2. This yields the following tire model
dz
dt
= v
r

0
z
max
F
N
[v
r
[, (4.13a)
F =
0
z, (4.13b)
where v
r
= r
0
v and
0
is a tire-road stiness parameter. Plots of the steady
state normalized traction force against tire slip are given in Figure 4.9. The main
advantage of the Dahl tire model is that it is stated as a linear dynamic model.
This makes it suitable for control and simulation applications since there are many
established methods for controlling and simulating linear dynamic systems.
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
s
max
=1.0
max
=0.5
max
=0.2
Figure 4.8. s-x curves for the brush model.
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
s
max
=1.0
max
=0.5
max
=0.2
Figure 4.9. s-x curves for the Dahl model.
4.3.6 Lateral Tire Models
Lateral tire models are to great extent analogous to longitudinal tire models al-
though the parameters can dier. The displacement of the contact patch in the
lateral direction is proportional to the slip angle. This makes it natural to develop
models of the longitudinal tire force as functions of tire slip angle. Here we present
and describe the lateral versions of the two models described in Section 4.3.1.
The Magic Formula Model
The magic formula model is the most commonly used empirical tire model in the
literature also in its lateral version. Plots of the normalized lateral force versus
slip angle generated with the magic formula tire model for dierent coecients of
friction are illustrated in Figure 4.10. Notice that the dierence in slope at = 0
is exaggerated in this plot.
1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
y
max
= 1.0
y
max
= 0.5
y
max
= 0.1
Figure 4.10. The magic formula lateral tire model for dierent values of max.
Piecewise Linear Tire Model
The lateral piecewise linear tire model is analogous to the longitudinal case. By
dividing the
x
- function into three parts we get the model:
y
=
C
yN
,
ymax
CyN

ymax
CyN
ymax
,
ymax
CyN
ymax
, otherwise
(4.14)
Plots of the normalized lateral force versus slip angle generated with the piecewise
linear tire model for dierent coecients of friction can be seen in Figure 4.11.
Notice that the dierence in slope at = 0 is exaggerated in this plot.
1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
y
max
= 1.0
y
max
= 0.5
y
max
= 0.1
Figure 4.11. Piecewise linear lateral tire model for dierent values of max.
4.3.7 Combined Tire Model
The longitudinal and lateral tire forces are not independent of each other. The
resulting force can for obvious reasons not be larger than the normal load times
the coecient of friction. As
ymax
and
xmax
generally dier due to dierent tire
characteristics in the lateral and the longitudinal directions we get:
xmax
2
+
ymax
2
1 (4.15)
The possible area of the tire force resultant is called the friction circle [16], despite
the fact that it generally is described by an ellipse. The friction circle is illustrated
in Figure 4.12.
4.4 Sensors and Measurements
In a modern car there are a number of sensors available. The sensors used in the
methods presented and evaluated in this thesis are:
4.4 Sensors and Measurements 31
xmax
ymax
Figure 4.12. Illustration of the friction circle.
Wheel angular velocity sensors
Lateral accelerometer
Yaw rate gyro
Steering wheel angle sensor
These are standard sensors which are present in modern day cars equipped with
ABS and ESP systems. A description of how these sensors work can be found in
for example [8]. In this section we will discuss how the available sensors can be
used in conjunction with the previously derived vehicle model.
4.4.1 Wheel Angular Velocity Sensors
The wheel angular velocity sensors can be used together with the vehicle model in
two ways: directly as measurements of
XX
or to calculate an estimate of v
x
. In
this thesis an estimate of v
x
is calculated according to:
v
x
=
r
0
(
RL
+
RR
)
2
. (4.16)
4.4.2 Lateral Accelerometer
The lateral accelerometer gives measurements of v
y
+v
r
. This yields the measure-
ment equation:
y =
1
m
(F
xFR
+F
xFL
) sin() + (F
yFR
+F
yFL
) cos() +F
yRR
+F
yRL
(4.17)
If a tire model is used to model the tire forces as functions of slip and slip angle
this yields a measurement equation which can be used with the state space vehicle
model (4.4).
4.4.3 Yaw Rate Gyro
The yaw rate gyro yields measurements of r which can be used directly together
with the vehicle model (4.4).
4.4.4 Steering Wheel Angle Sensor
The vehicle model (4.4) uses the steering angle as input signal. As standard cars
are not equipped with a sensor to measure the steering angle the steering angle has
to be estimated from measurements of the steering wheel angle . In this thesis
the following simple static model of the relation between and is used:
= C
, (4.18)
where C
is a car specic constant.

Chapter 5
Stiness Estimation
The combined stiness of the tire road contact patch can be used to estimate the
maximum tire-road friction. In this thesis we divide the methods of estimating
the combined stiness into two groups:
Stiness estimation using regression models.
Stiness estimation using parameter identication in state space models.
This grouping is made due to the fact that when estimating lateral stiness using
regression models the estimation has to be preformed in two steps, whereas when
using parameter identication methods in state space models the estimation is
performed in one step. This will be further explained in this chapter. In this
chapter the two approaches will be explained in detail. In order to maximize
the use of the available tire-force excitation, see Section 9.1, estimation of both
longitudinal and lateral stiness is considered.
5.1 Tire Stiness or Slip-slope?
As explained in Chapter 3, the way in which frictional forces between two surfaces
arise can be divided into two phases. In the pre-sliding phase the magnitude of
the frictional force is governed by the relative displacement and the stiness of
the two surfaces and in the sliding phase the frictional force is dependent on the
sliding velocity and the coecient of friction
max
. As explained in Section 4.3,
the frictional phenomena of pre-sliding displacement and sliding give rise to the
slip and the slip-angle of a tire. If slip is plotted against normalized traction force
for a tire this yields a curve which can be divided into two parts. As can be seen in
Figure 5.1 the slip curve is approximately linear for s < 0.015. For s > 0.015 the
slip curve starts to bend, it reaches the peak friction value
max
at s = 0.030 and
then stabilizes at a static friction value. Note that these values may vary with the
tire-road combination. The slope of the slip curve in the approximately linear low
slip region of the curve is commonly called tire stiness. This name is somewhat
misguiding as the slope of the slip curve also depends on surface properties [17].
33
34 Stiness Estimation
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
s
x
Figure 5.1. Typical s-x curve.
In [10] it is proposed that the slope should simply be called slip-slope instead. In
this thesis the term slip-slope is used when discussing the slope of the s-
x
or -
y
without interpreting the slope as a measure of stiness. When interpreted as a
stiness measure, slip-slope is referred to as combined stiness or simply stiness.
Tire stiness is used when talking about the stiness of the tire alone.
5.2 Stiness Estimation using Regression Models
The longitudinal stiness C
x
and the lateral stiness C
y
can be seen as the slopes
of the linear parts of the s-
x
and the -
y
curves respectively, see Figure 5.2.
When using regression models for stiness estimation we calculate these slopes
from measured data in order to calculate the stiness parameters.
5.2.1 Estimation of Longitudinal Stiness
In [10] a method for estimating the longitudinal tire stiness from measurements
of wheel velocities is proposed. This method is used in this thesis and is outlined
here.
5.2 Stiness Estimation using Regression Models 35
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
s
x
0.2 0.1 0 0.1 0.2
1
0.5
0
0.5
1
y
C
x
s
s

C
y

Figure 5.2. Combined stiness as the slope of a slip curve.
Calculation of Slip
The denition of slip is stated in Section 4.3.1. As we have no reference speed
available we calculate a reference speed by using the wheel angular velocity of the
non-driven rear wheels:
v
xFX
= w
RX
r
0
(5.1)
Where w
XX
is the angular velocity of wheel XX and r
0
is the nominal wheel ra-
dius. The slip can now be calculated according to the denition in Section 4.3.1.
Calculation of Normalized Traction Force
The denition of normalized traction force is stated in Section 4.3.1. The traction
force can be calculated by using measurements of injection time and engine speed
using a tabulated model for a specic car and engine [10], but is considered to
be known in this thesis. The normal force distributes itself over the four wheels
depending on the forces acting on the vehicle [16], but is in this thesis approximated
with the static normal force distribution:
F
NXX
=
mg
4
(5.2)
Algorithm for Estimation of Longitudinal Stiness
The linear part of the slip curve is approximated with a line with slope k and
oset , see (5.3). The oset is necessary to compensate for the dierence in wheel
radius between the front wheel for which the slip is calculated and the rear wheel
which is used to calculate the longitudinal velocity.
k(s ) (5.3)
It is advantageous, see [10], to rewrite (5.3) as
s =
1
k
+. (5.4)
We introduce measurement noise and rewrite the model on linear regression form:
s[t] =
[t] 1
1/k
+e[t] (5.5)
We can now apply the Kalman lter to adaptively estimate the parameters 1/k
and for each driven wheel according to the method described in Section 2.5.1.
To be able to get both good tracking performance and high noise suppression we
apply a CUSUM detector according to Section 2.6.1. The distance measure used
in the CUSUM test is the estimation error s s. Upon alarm the Kalman lter
design variable Q is multiplied with a pre-dened factor to increase amplication
for one sample. This method yields good results as the tire-road friction coecient
often is piecewise close to constant with sudden jumps.
Results
Figure 5.3 shows a typical plot of the estimated longitudinal stiness when driving
from asphalt to gravel and back on asphalt again using the method outlined in
Section 5.2.1. As can be seen the decrease in slip-slope when going from asphalt
to gravel at time t = 170 is quickly detected. As can be seen in Figure 5.3 there
is an initial transient before reaching a stable estimate of the slip-slope. This is
due to the initial state of the Kalman lter not being equal to the actual state
of the system which in this case is the linear tire model used. A more thorough
discussion of the results of this method can be found in [10].
5.2.2 Estimation of Lateral Stiness
Estimation of lateral stiness is to a great extent analogous with estimation of
longitudinal stiness.
Normalized Lateral Force
The normalized lateral force
yXX
for wheel XX is dened as
yXX
=
F
yXX
N
XX
. (5.6)
Here F
y
is the lateral force and N is the normal force acting upon the wheel. As
we have measurements of the lateral acceleration we can calculate the total lateral
force acting on the vehicle as:
F
y
= ma
y
(5.7)
We assume that the side force distributes over the four wheels in the same way as
the normal forces do, see Section 5.2.1 for a description of normal force distribution.
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
t
k
Figure 5.3. Estimated longitudinal stiness.
This yields:
yXX
=
F
y
FN
XX
N
F
NXX
=
F
y
F
N
(5.8)
Slip Angle
The denition of slip angle for a wheel is stated in Section 4.3.2. From the geometry
in Figure 4.1 we get:
FX
= arctan(
v
y
+ar
v
x
) +, (5.9a)
RX
= arctan(
v
y
br
v
x
). (5.9b)
Lateral Velocity
We see in (5.9) that knowledge of the lateral velocity of the center of gravity of
the vehicle is necessary in order to calculate the slip angles. As standard vehicles
are not equipped with sensors which can measure the lateral velocity we are left
with two options:
1. Assume that the lateral velocity is so small that it can be set to zero without
losing too much accuracy.
2. Construct an observer which uses available sensors to estimate the lateral
velocity.
Both these possibilities have been evaluated in this thesis. There are many ways
to construct an observer to estimate the lateral velocity. In this thesis we evaluate
three dierent methods of estimating the lateral velocity which all are based upon
the vehicle model derived in Chapter 4.
Method 1: Integration of Measurement Signals We have the vehicle model
presented in Chapter 4. We can estimate the longitudinal velocity as
v
x

r
0
(
RL
+
RR
)
2
. (5.10)
If we reduce the vehicle model by replacing the longitudinal velocity v
x
with the
estimate calculated according to (5.10), the yaw rate r with its measured counter-
part and lateral tire forces with measured lateral acceleration a
y
we obtain:
v
y
= v
x
r +a
y
(5.11)
We can now approximate the derivative with an Euler dierence approximation.
This yields:
v
y
[t + 1] v
y
[t] +T(v
x
[t]r[t] +a
y
[t]). (5.12)
An estimate of the lateral velocity can now be calculated using (5.12).
Method 2: Kinematic Model Observer This method relies on a simplica-
tion of the vehicle model presented in Chapter 4 and measurements of yaw rate,
lateral acceleration and longitudinal acceleration. From Section 4.1 we have our
standard vehicle body model (4.4). We replace the state r with the measured yaw
rate r. Then F = ma is used to replace lateral tire forces with measured lateral
acceleration. The longitudinal acceleration is approximated as:
a
x
[t] =
v
x
[t] v
x
[t 1]
T
(5.13)
We then use F = ma to replace longitudinal tire forces with the approximated
longitudinal acceleration. We also neglect the eects of drag. This yields the
model:
x =
v
x
v
y
0 r
r 0
. .. .
At
v
x
v
y
a
x
a
y
(5.14a)
We use measurements of the longitudinal velocity v
x
to construct an observer.
This gives us the measurement equation.
y =
1 0
. .. .
C
x (5.14b)
We study the observability matrix:
det
C
CA
= det
1 0
0 r
= r (5.15)
We see that the model is observable only when r = 0. In [7] this model is used with
an observer designed with pole-placement such that the amplication is zero when
r = 0 and then increases as [r[ increases. Here we discretize the model analytically
and apply a Kalman lter to the discretized model. We have:
e
At
= L
1
(sI A)
1
= L
1
s r
r s
=
= L
1
1
s
2
+r
2
s r
r s
cos(rt) sin(rt)
sin(rt) cos(rt)
Using the method described in Section 2.1.1 we get:

F = e
AT
=
cos(rT) sin(rT)
sin(rT) cos(rT)
(5.16a)
G =
T
0
e
A
d = A
1
(e
AT
I)B =
1
r
sin(rT) 1 cos(rT)
cos(rT) 1 sin(rT)
(5.16b)
H = C =
1 0
(5.16c)
Method 3: Linear Tire Model Kalman Filter Again we start with the
vehicle model derived in Section 4.1. We group the wheels on the front and rear
axle together, this yields what is called a bicycle model. We then model the lateral
tire forces with a linear tire model in accordance with Section 4.3.2. This yields:
F
F
= 2C
F
F
= 2C
F
(arctan(
v
y
+ar
v
x
) +) 2C
F
v
y
+ar
v
x
+, (5.17a)
for the front axle and
F
R
= 2C
R
R
= 2C
R
(arctan(
v
y
br
v
x
)) 2C
R
v
y
br
v
x
, (5.17b)
for the rear axle. If is suciently small we can make the approximation sin()
0, cos() 1. If we now eliminate the state v
x
by instead using v
x
calculated from
measurements according to (5.10) as a model parameter we get the model:
x =
v
y
r

1
m
(
2CF +2CR
vx
) v
x
+
1
m
(
2aCF +2bCR
vx
)
1
Jz
(
2aCF +2bCR
vx
)
1
Jz
(
2a
2
CF 2b
2
CR
vx
)
x +
2CF
m
2aCF
m
(5.18a)
y = r =
0 1
1
m
(
2CF +2CR
vx
)
1
m
(
2aCF +2bCR
vx
)
x (5.18b)
This is a common model in vehicle dynamics used in, for example, [24, 3]. We
discretize the model at each time instant according to Section 2.1.1 using Matlab.
We can now apply the Kalman lter on this model to estimate the lateral velocity.
Algorithm for Estimation of Lateral Stiness
The estimation of lateral stiness can be performed analogously to the longitudinal
case. The main dierence is that there is no oset on the slip angle which must
be estimated. We approximate the linear part of the slip-angle curve with a line
with slope k.
y
k (5.19)
As in the longitudinal case we introduce measurement noise and rewrite this as
[t] =
y
[t]
1
k
+e[t] (5.20)
We can now apply the Kalman lter to adaptively estimate the parameter 1/k
for each driven wheel according to the method described in Section 2.5.1. To be
able to get both good tracking performance and high noise suppression we apply
a CUSUM detector according to Section 2.6.1. The distance measure used in the
CUSUM test is the estimation error . Upon alarm the Kalman lter design
variable Q is multiplied with a pre-dened factor to increase amplication for one
sample.
Lateral Velocity Estimation Results for Method 1
The measurement signal integration method naturally yields very good results
when testing on simulated data without noise or osets in data. Let us study the
results of this method when tested on measured data. In Figure 5.4 the estimated
lateral velocity using method 1 is shown for a set of measured data. We see that the
estimated lateral velocity drifts away to non-realistic values. This indicates that
there are osets, drifts and noise in the measured data which make this method
unsuitable for estimation of the lateral velocity. The methods has also been tested
with pre-ltered measurement signals in order to remove noise and osets without
improved results.
In Figure 5.5 we see the lateral velocity estimate from method 2 when run on test
case Sim1, see Appendix B. We see that the kinematic model observer methods
seems to produce unsatisfactory results in estimating the lateral velocity. The
estimated values do not seem to converge towards their true counterparts. From
this it can be concluded that this method is not suitable for estimation of lateral
velocity.
In Figure 5.6 the estimated lateral velocity from method 3 run on test case Sim1
is shown. As can be seen in Figure 5.6 this methods seems to produce accurate
estimates of the lateral velocity when the lateral stiness is known and constant
as is the case in Sim1. This indicates that the model simplications performed
when deriving the model has not got any signicant impacts on model accuracy
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
5
10
Lateral Velocity Estimate
t
v
y
Figure 5.4. Estimated lateral velocity using method 1 on measured data.
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
1.5
1
0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
Lateral Velocity Estimates
t
v
y

Kinematic Model Observer
True v
y
Figure 5.5. Estimated lateral velocity using method 2 on test case Sim1.
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
t
v
y

Linear Tire Model KF
True v
y
in the region where the signals in this test lie. In Figure 5.7 the estimated lateral
velocity from method 3 run on test case Sim2 is shown. We can see that the
estimated lateral velocity lies close to the true lateral velocity during the intervals
when the stiness parameters used in method 3 are correct. In the interval t
[100, 150] when the lateral stiness parameters used in method 3 are not correct
the estimated lateral velocity diers signicantly from the true lateral velocity.
This shows that method 3 is not robust against errors in C
F
and C
R
and indicates
that method 3 is not suitable to estimate the lateral velocity when the combined
stiness is changing.
Slip-Angle Estimation Results
What do the results for the estimation of lateral velocity mean in terms of slip
angle? In Figure 5.8 the slip angle calculated using Method 3 and v
y
= 0 for
lateral velocity estimates is shown for test case Sim2. As method 1 and 2 for
estimation of lateral velocity do not produce reliable results these are not included
in the plot. The true slip-angle is also included in the plot for reference. As
expected, the slip angle calculated using Method 3 for estimation of the lateral
velocity tracks the true slip angle well during the intervals when the lateral stiness
parameter remains unchanged. During the interval with lowered lateral stiness
the estimated slip angle diers signicantly from the true value. We can also see
that the estimation v
y
= 0 yields a slip angle which diers greatly from the true
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
t
v
y

True v
y
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
5
4
3
2
1
0
1
2
3
4
5
Rear Wheel SlipAngle Estimates
t

v
y
= 0
true
Figure 5.8. Estimated slip angle for test case Sim2.
slip angle.
Lateral Stiness Estimation Results
To test the estimation of lateral stiness the simulated test case Sim2 has been
used. The method presented in Section 5.2.2 has been used to estimate the lateral
stiness parameter. Estimates of the lateral velocity using method 2, method 3,
the assumption v
y
= 0 and the true lateral velocity has been used. The estimated
lateral stiness for the dierent lateral velocity estimates are shown in Figure 5.9.
The true lateral stiness has been included for reference. As can be seen in Fig-
ure 5.9 the lateral stiness estimate using the true lateral velocity lies very close to
the true lateral stiness. This indicates that the method used to estimate lateral
stiness, see Section 5.2.2, functions as intended. However, the lateral stiness is
not estimated in a satisfactory way using the estimated lateral velocities. This is
to be expected since the methods do not produce estimates of the lateral velocity
which are robust against changes in the lateral stiness parameter. We can also
see that the estimated C
y
using the assumption v
y
= 0 show very little, if any,
correlation with the true C
y
.
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
0
5
10
15
t
C
y
N

true v
y
v
y
= 0
true C
y
Figure 5.9. Estimated lateral stiness for test case Sim2.
Models 45
5.3 Stiness Estimation using Parameter Identi-
cation in State-Space Models
We can use methods from system identication to estimate stiness. A vehicle or
wheel model in combination with a linear tire model with the stiness parameters
as model parameters is used. System identication methods can then be used to
estimate the stiness parameters from measurement data.
5.3.1 Linear Tire Model Extended Kalman Filter
In Section 5.2.2 we derived a vehicle model with the lateral tire stiness as a model
parameter. This model is used to estimate the lateral velocity which in turn is
used to estimate the lateral tire stiness. If we assume C
F
= C
R
= C
y
, model the
lateral stiness C
y
as a random walk and incorporate it in the vehicle model we
get the extended model:
x =
v
y
r
C
y
1
m
(
4Cy
vx
)v
y
+
1
m
(mv
x
+
2Cy(ba)
vx
)r +
2Cy
m

1
Iz
(
2Cy(ba)
vx
)v
y
+
1
Iz
(
2Cy(a
2
+b
2
)
vx
)r +
2aCy
m

0
. (5.21)
The measurement equation is the same as in the linear model in Section 5.2.2. If
we apply an observer directly on this model we are able to estimate the lateral tire
stiness directly. This extended model is non-linear and therefore we cannot apply
a linear observer such as the Kalman lter directly. Instead we apply the extended
Kalman lter using discretized linearization as described in Section 2.4.1.
Results
In Figure 5.10 a plot of the estimated lateral stiness C
y
is given, the test case
used is Sim2. As can be seen in Figure 5.10 the estimated C
y
does not seem to
react on a change in the actual lateral stiness. If we x C
y
and run the the model
on simulated data we can calculate the quadratic error of the simulated signals in
comparison with the measured signals. We get the error function:
V (C
y
) =
N
t=1
|y[t] Cx[t[C
y
]|
2
. (5.22)
In Figure 5.11 V (C
y
) is plotted for a range of values of C
y
for test case Sim1, see
Appendix B. We see in Figure 5.11 that V (C
y
) has a global minima for C
y
= 510
4
which is the correct value. We also note that the V has no other minimas. This
indicates that it is possible to estimate the lateral stiness using the standard
sensor set, at least o-line. This will be further investigated in the next section.
5.3.2 Non-Linear Tire Model O-Line System Identication
We want to investigate whether it is possible to estimate the longitudinal and the
lateral stiness parameters using the available sensor set. In [3] GPS is used to
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
4
2
0
2
4
EKF v
y
t
v
y

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
0
1
2
3
4
5
x 10
4
EKF C
y
t
C
y
EKF v
y
True v
y
Figure 5.10. Estimated lateral stiness using the extended Kalman lter method.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
x 10
4
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
10000
V
(
C
y
)
C
y
Figure 5.11. V (Cy) is plotted for a range of values of Cy for test case Sim1
Models 47
estimate the tire parameters and in [14] an adaptive observer structure is proposed
to estimate states and parameters. Here we propose a method of estimating the
longitudinal and lateral stiness parameters using o-line system identication.
We have the vehicle model:
v
x
= v
y
r +
1
m
((F
xFR
+F
xFL
) cos() (F
yFR
+F
yFL
) sin() +F
xRR
+F
xRL
C
AIR
v
2
x
), (5.23a)
v
y
= v
x
r +
1
m
((F
xFR
+F
xFL
) sin() + (F
yFR
+F
yFL
) cos() +F
yRR
+F
yRL
),
(5.23b)
r =
1
J
(a((F
xFR
+F
xFL
) sin() + (F
yFR
+F
yFL
) cos()) b(F
yRR
+F
yRL
)).
(5.23c)
We approximate the tire forces with linear tire models
F
xXX
= C
x
s
XX
, (5.24a)
F
yXX
= C
y
XX
, (5.24b)
where C
x
and C
y
are the longitudinal and lateral tire stiness parameters respec-
tively. We approximate the tire slip angles
XX
with
FX
= arctan
v
y
+ar
v
x

v
y
+ar
v
x
, (5.25a)
for the front wheels and
RX
= arctan
v
y
br
v
x

v
y
br
v
x
, (5.25b)
for the rear wheels. We also assume that the longitudinal wheel slips s
XX
are
measured. This yields:
v
x
= v
y
r +
1
m
(C
x
(s
FR
+s
FL
) cos() 2C
y

v
y
+ar
v
x
sin() +Cx(s
RR
+s
RL
)
C
AIR
v
2
x
), (5.26a)
v
y
= v
x
r +
1
m
C
x
(s
FR
+s
FL
) sin() + 2C
y

v
y
+ar
v
x
cos()
+ 2C
y
v
y
br
v
x
, (5.26b)
r =
1
J
aC
x
((s
FR
+s
FL
) sin() + 2C
y

v
y
+ar
v
x
cos())
2bC
y
v
y
br
v
x
. (5.26c)
With the available measurements of v
x
calculated from the rear free rolling wheels,
a
y
from the lateral accelerometer and r from the yaw rate gyro we can use the
method described in Section 2.7 to identify the stiness parameters C
x
and C
y
.
Results
The method presented in this section has been tested on simulated and measured
data.
Tests on Simulated Data The test case used is Sim1, see Appendix B. Input
signal torque and steering angle are sinusoidal in order to get a high level of ex-
citation. The identication algorithm described in Section 2.7 has been run from
a range of dierent starting positions for the parameters C
x
and C
y
which are
to be estimated. The initial and nal parameter values from when the identi-
cation algorithm is run from a range of dierent starting positions are shown in
Figure 5.12. We see in Figure 5.12 that the parameter values converge to points
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
x 10
5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
x 10
4
Cx
C
y
Figure 5.12. Initial and nal parameter values for identication algorithm run on
simulated data.
close to their true values, C
x
= 2 10
5
and C
y
= 5 10
4
, given that the starting
point for the parameters is reasonably close to the true parameter values. In some
cases the algorithm gets stuck in local optima. This is an inherent problem of all
iterative gradient search algorithms [15] and is to be expected.
Tests on Measured Data Data has been measured using a Volvo V70 during
normal driving. In order to test the method on measured data the data has to
be pre-ltered. The oset in slip-data has been estimated and removed using the
method described in Section 5.2.1. The linear approximation of the tire forces
is only valid up until the break-away force is reached when the wheel starts to
Models 49
spin. In order to solve this problem the oset corrected slip values are bounded
to the interval [0, s
top
] where s
top
is the slip value where the maximum frictional
force is reached, note that doing this is equivalent to using the piecewise linear
longitudinal tire model presented in Section 4.3.1. As braking is not modeled data
from braking should not be used. It is also important to note that as we are using
a linear approximation of the lateral tire forces, data collected from driving with
slip-angles outside the linear part of the -
y
curve will yield incorrect estimates
of the lateral stiness coecient. In Figure 5.13 we see the estimated values of the
parameters C
x
and C
y
given a number of dierent starting points. We see that
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
x 10
5
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
x 10
5
Cx
C
y
Figure 5.13. Initial and nal parameter values for identication algorithm run on
measured data.
the parameter values do not converge to a point instead they converge close to the
line C
x
= 10
5
in parameter space. This is probably the correct value for C
x
which
indicates that there is enough longitudinal excitation to reliably estimate C
x
. The
fact that C
y
does not converge to the same value for the dierent starting points
indicates that there is not enough lateral excitation to reliably estimate C
y
. These
tests tell us that it is indeed possible to estimate the longitudinal and the lateral
tire stiness parameters using only measurements of yaw rate, lateral acceleration
and longitudinal velocity calculated from free rolling wheels. It is also possible to
conclude from tests performed on measured data that it is only possible to reliably
estimate C
y
given high lateral excitation and that this is not always the case with
data collected during normal driving.
Chapter 6
Mapping Stiness to Friction
The hypothesis used when estimating
max
for a tire-surface combination with
a stiness-based method is that
max
for a tire-surface combination is correlated
with the combined stiness. The idea is to, using reference values of the friction
coecient
max
for dierent road surfaces, nd a function f(k) which maps an
estimated value of the combined stiness k to a value of the friction coecient
max
. Methods for mapping the estimated stiness to a value for the tire-road
friction coecient are presented and evaluated in this chapter. A discussion on
the eects which
max
and other surface properties have on slip-slope is given in
Chapter 7. This chapter is divided into two sections. The rst section describes
how to calculate reference values of the tire-road friction coecient during braking
and the second section discusses dierent mapping function structures and how
they can be adjusted to t measured data.
6.1 Calculating
max
from Braking Data
Most modern cars are equipped with Anti-lock Braking Systems (ABS). An ABS
system seeks to maintain steerability of the vehicle during hard braking by applying
maximum brake force until the vehicle starts to slide. The system then releases
the brakes for a short while and then applies maximum braking force again and
so on until the driver stops braking. Most modern ABS systems also try to brake
as eciently as possible i.e., stay on the minimum of the s-
x
curve i.e., where
x
=
maxx
. This makes it possible to calculate the tire-road friction coecient
max
from wheel speed data from before and after an ABS braking. During braking
we have
m v
x
= F
x
=
max
F
N
=
max
mg
max
=
v
x
g
. (6.1)
If ABS braking starts at time t = t
1
and ends at time t = t
2
we can calculate the
tire-road friction coecient according to
max
=
v
x
g

v
x
(t
2
) v
x
(t
1
)
g(t
2
t
1
)
. (6.2)
51
52 Mapping Stiness to Friction
For each ABS braking performed we get a data tuple consisting of the stiness
value and the friction coecient value.
6.2 Mapping Functions and Curve Fitting
We want to nd a mapping function f
(k) from stiness k to tire-road friction

coecient with parameters which minimizes an error function V ().
= argmin
V () (6.3)
In this thesis two dierent mapping function structures are studied: a linear
function structure and a quadratic function structure. We want to minimize the
quadratic error, this yields:
V () =
N
i=1
(f
(k
i
)
i
)
2
(6.4)
6.2.1 Linear Function Structure
We have the linear function structure:
f
(k) = ak +b, =
a b
T
(6.5)
For a given set of stiness values k =
k
1
k
2
k
N
T
and corresponding
friction coecient values =
1

2

N
T
we get the linear system of
equations:
k
1
1
k
2
1
.
.
.
.
.
.
k
3
1
= (6.6)
is now given by the least squares solution to (6.6).

6.2.2 Quadratic Function Structure
We have the quadratic function structure:
f
(k) = ak
2
, = a (6.7)
For a given set of stiness values k =
k
1
k
2
k
N
T
and corresponding
friction coecient values =
1

2

N
T
we get:
V () =
N
i=1
(ak
2
i

i
)
2
(6.8)
6.2 Mapping Functions and Curve Fitting 53
The minimum of V () can be found by dierentiation:
dV ()
d
= 2
N
i=1
k
2
i
(ak
2
i
i
) = 0 a
N
i=1
k
4
i
=
N
i=1
k
2
i
i
a =
N
i=1
k
2
i
N
i=1
k
4
i
. (6.9)
As V () is quadratic and positive we get:
= argmin
V () =
N
i=1
k
2
i
N
i=1
k
4
i
(6.10)
6.2.3 Results
In Figure 6.1 estimated slip-slope values calculated according to 5.2.1 plotted
against values of
max
calculated during braking according to Section 6.1 for a
number of test runs is shown. The data has been collected using a single test vehi-
cle with a single tire-set over a period of two weeks under dierent road conditions.
The linear and quadratic mappings adapted to data are also shown in the plot.
As can be seen in Figure 6.1 the collected data shows little correlation between
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
k
A
B
S

Quadratic Mapping
Linear Mapping
Figure 6.1. Measured values of max plotted against estimated longitudinal stiness
for a multitude of road surfaces.
estimated slip-slope and calculated
max
. The estimated mapping functions have
in this case no relevance. This can have a multitude of reasons:
The method of estimating slip-slope yields incorrect results.
The method of estimating
max
from ABS brakings yields incorrect results.
The tire stiness may have changed between the test runs because of chang-
ing external conditions.
The slip-slope value was not stable when the reference braking was made.
This would yield data points with an erroneous slip-slope value.
The surfaces driven on have low correlation between stiness and tire-road
friction.
The rst point is not very probable since tests done in for example [10] indicates
that the method works as intended. Tests run for this thesis also indicate that the
method works, see section 5.2.1. The second point may be valid, but as we have no
other possibility of making reference measurements of
max
this method has to be
considered as giving reasonable values of
max
. It is also widely used to measure
max
and is sometimes used to dene
max
[8] which means that true
max
or not
this is the value we want to be able to estimate. In order to eliminate errors due to
the other points stated above additional testing has been made. These tests have
been run during one day with non-changing weather conditions. Two dierent
road surfaces are present on the test run: asphalt and gravel, in Section 5.2.1 it is
shown that there is a correlation between slip-slope and
max
on these surfaces.
No reference ABS brakings have been made until the estimated slip-slope value has
converged to a stable value for the current road surface. In Figure 6.2 the results
of this test can be seen. As can be seen, Figure 6.2 shows a higher correlation
between slip-slope and calculated
max
even though there are outliers in data. As
no evidence for a quadratic trend in the data can be seen we can conclude that
the most reasonable choice of mapping function is the linear function. The test
performed here tells us that the estimated slip-slope can be used to estimate a
value of
max
under controlled forms when:
Reference ABS brakings are made when the estimated slip-slope has con-
verged to the correct value.
Tests are run on surfaces on which there is a correlation between stiness
and friction.
6.2 Mapping Functions and Curve Fitting 55
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
k
A
B
S

Quadratic Mapping
Linear Mapping
Figure 6.2. Measured values of max plotted against estimated longitudinal stiness
for two dierent road surfaces.
Chapter 7
Surface Eects on Slip-Slope
Slip-slope based tire-road friction estimation relies on the correlation between tire-
road friction and tire slip and tire slip angle. In order to develop and analyze slip-
slope based tire-road friction estimation methods it is necessary to understand how
tire and road surface properties, such as friction, aect slip and slip-slope. The slip
phenomenon and surface eects on slip are not yet fully understood [17]. Classical
tire models predict no surface eects on slip-slope in the origin [16], there are
however surface eects on the estimated slip-slope. We will explain and analyze
some of the eects which surface properties have on estimated slip-slope in this
chapter.
7.1 The Secant Eect
As can be seen in Figure 5.1 even the rst part of the slip curve is not perfectly
linear. The higher up on the slip curve the more the curve deviates from the
tangent of the curve in s = 0. This eect causes a decrease in the estimated slip-
slope when estimating slip-slope using slip data from the non-linear region of the
slip curve. For a low friction surface this eect is more pronounced than for a high
friction surface when driving with the same friction demand/normalized traction
force. This eect is called the secant eect and is illustrated in Figure 7.1. If slip
data from outside the approximately linear region of the slip curve is used this eect
can have a large impact on estimated slip-slope as can be seen in Figure 7.1. We
can see that in order to get consistent estimates of slip-slope, slip data above the
approximately linear part of the slip curve should not be used when estimating slip-
slope. The secant eect is more thoroughly investigated by Mller et al. in [17].
Mller et al. concludes that the secant eect aects the estimated slip-slope also
for low-slip data, but that the eect is very small. This indicates that the secant
eect only accounts for a minor part of dierence in slip-slope observed on dierent
surfaces when using only low-slip data. This means that the secant eect predicted
from standard tire models cannot on its own be used to justify slip-slope based
friction estimation algorithms.
57
58 Surface Eects on Slip-Slope
0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
s
max
= 1.0
max
= 0.5
Figure 7.1. Illustration of the secant eect.
7.2 Sliding in the Pre-Sliding Displacement Phase
The observed correlation between
max
and slip-slope cannot be explained with
traditional tire models [10, 17]. A possible explanation to the increased slip, which
results in a decreased slip-slope, when going from a high friction surface to a low
friction surface is that there is sliding taking place in the pre-sliding displacement
phase of the frictional force curve. If the slip caused by sliding increases linearly
with applied traction force and this increase is dependent on
max
this would
explain the observed data. If this is the case then a slip-slope based friction
estimation algorithm would be able to estimate the tire-road friction or at least
be suitable to detect changes in tire-road friction. This would also imply that
standard frictional models are not applicable for tire-road interaction. Tests which
have been performed during the work with this thesis show that a decrease in
max
is not always accompanied by a decrease in estimated slip-slope even if the decrease
in
max
is large e.g.
max
= 0.8 to
max
= 0.4. This also seems to verify classical
tire theory which states that the tire-road friction coecient has very little impact
on the tire slip curve in the low slip region [16]. The brush model, see Section 4.3.5,
leads to that a part of the tire-road contact patch is always sliding. The larger
part of the contact patch in sliding the more the slip curve deviates from the linear
model of the slip-curve. The eect this has on the estimated slip-slope is however
included in the secant eect.
7.3 Tire Stiness and Surface Stiness 59
7.3 Tire Stiness and Surface Stiness
As described in Section 3.2.2 frictional forces between two surfaces can be described
by a pre-sliding phase and a sliding phase. In the pre-sliding phase the frictional
force is proportional to the displacement of the two surfaces and show properties
which can be approximated with linear springs. In a rotating tire the continuous
displacement of the tire tread results in a higher rotational velocity of the wheel
than what the absolute velocity of the tire hub would indicate i.e., slip. The slip is
proportional to the displacement of the tire tread and hence also to longitudinal tire
force. This fact is used when modeling longitudinal tire forces, see Section 4.3.1.
Classically displacement of the material in the contact patch is considered only to
occur in the tire [20]. Measurements showing that the estimated slip-slope varies
greatly with surface properties [10] may force us to rethink this. When torque
is applied to a tire pre-sliding displacement occurs not only in the tire tread but
also in the road surface. This can be due to elastic and/or plastic deformation
of the material in the road surface. Building on the description of pre-sliding
displacement as extension of linear springs this can be seen as connecting two
linear springs in series, see Figure 7.2. The spring constant k
T
of the tire springs
Figure 7.2. Combined stiness can be seen as a serial connection of springs in the tire
and road surface.
is what is called the tire stiness and accordingly we call the spring constant of
the road surface k
R
road surface stiness. Two linear spring connected in series
can be replaced by one, the combined spring constant or stiness is then given by:
k =
1
1
kT
+
1
kR
(7.1)
The combined stiness k can then be seen as the initial slope of the resulting
slip-normalized traction force curve. In classical tire theory the stiness of the
road surface is considered to be so high so that the combined stiness k is de-
pendent only on tire characteristics and k is therefore often called tire stiness.
In recent research it has been shown that k calculated from measured values of
slip and normalized traction force is far from constant but varies with road sur-
face [10], [17]. One possible explanation to this observed phenomenon is that the
60 Surface Eects on Slip-Slope
road surface stiness can one some surfaces be low enough to heavily aect the
measured combined stiness. How the surface stiness eects the combined sti-
ness can be seen in Figure 7.3 which shows the combined stiness for a xed tire
stiness as a function of surface stiness.
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
k
R
k
Figure 7.3. Combined stiness as a function of surface stiness
Chapter 8
Direct Estimation of
max
We have so far discussed methods of estimating
max
by rst estimating the com-
bined tire-road stiness and then mapping the stiness value to a value for
max
.
Another possibility is to use tire models which have
max
as a physical parameter
and try to estimate this parameter. In this thesis we investigate two dierent
methods of doing this.
8.1 Direct Friction Estimation using the Brush
Tire Model
We have the Brush tire model (4.12). With the notation C
xN
=
2cpa
2
FN
we get:
x
=
F
x
F
N
= C
xN
s
C
2
xN
s
2
3
max
+
C
3
xN
s
3
27
2
max
. (8.1)
This can be written on linear regression form as:
y(t) =
T
(t) +e(t), (8.2a)
where
(t) =
s(t)
s(t)
2
3
s(t)
3
27
, (8.2b)
=
C
xN
C
2
xN
max
C
3
xN
2
max
. (8.2c)
We can now estimate recursively using the Kalman lter for adaptive ltering
according to Section 2.5.1. To improve the performance the Kalman lter is cou-
pled with a CUSUM change detector according to Section 2.6.1. As explained
61
max
in Section 5.2.1 an oset in the calculated slip is present when calculating slip
from the relative tire velocity dierence between front and rear tires. To use this
method on measured data this oset has to be estimated. This can be done ac-
cording to the method described in Section 5.2.1. The calculated slip s is then
replaced with the corrected slip value s
c
= s when using this method. From
the estimated

there are multiple ways of calculating an estimate of the tire-road
friction coecient . Possible ways are

1
=

2
1
2
, (8.3a)
and

2
=
3
1
3
. (8.3b)
We can combine these two estimates to

max
=

1
+
2
2
. (8.3c)
The fact that the tire-road friction is a physical parameter which can be measured
by braking, see Section 6.1, can be used to calibrate the system. Whenever an
ABS braking is performed we can use the calculated value of the friction coecient
ABS
and set the parameters according to
2
=

1
2
, (8.4a)
3
=

2
1
3
. (8.4b)
If the measured normalized traction force
x
at some point is higher than the
estimated tire-road friction coecient we set the parameters according to
2
=

1
2
x
, (8.5a)
3
=

2
1
3
x
. (8.5b)
8.1.1 Results
In contrast to slip-slope based friction estimation the brush model based friction
estimation estimation scheme uses not only low slip data but also higher slip data
from the non-linear part of the slip curve. The methods should therefore give
better results than a slip-slope based estimation method when high slip data is
available. How about when only low-slip data is available? Using the brush model
for friction estimation is then very similar to a slip-slope based scheme for friction
estimation. When the slip-slope decreases and only low-slip data is available
1
is
adjusted whereas
2
and
3
are kept almost constant. This results in a decrease of
the estimated tire-road friction coecient
max
. This eect can be compensated
8.1 Direct Friction Estimation using the Brush Tire Model 63
for so that
max
does not change until we have received high-slip data which
validates a lower tire-road friction coecient. This eect can however be wanted
as it makes use of the hypothesis that a low surface stiness often implies a low
tire-road friction coecient and vice versa. Estimated friction using the brush
model method can bee seen in Figure 8.1. The value of
max
calculated during
the latest ABS-braking is also included. During these tests no adaptation of the
brush-parameters to t the calculated value from ABS-braking of
max
according
to (8.4b) has been made. Note that
ABS
is only valid directly after an ABS-
braking has been made. In Figure 8.1 we see that the brush model method seems
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
1.1
1.2
t
m
a
x

ABS
brush
Figure 8.1. Estimated value of max using the brush tire model and calculated during
ABS-brakings.
to overestimate
max
in this particular case. This is probably due to the lack of
high slip data. When there is little high slip data the method resorts to being
slip-slope dependent and as no calibration is used the method does not produce
good results. What happens if we use the available
ABS
to calibrate the system?
In Figure 8.2 this is shown. We see that the estimated now adjusts to the same
level as
ABS
when a braking is made. The sudden rises in
max
in the plot is
caused by the adjustment of the model parameters to
x
according to (8.5b). This
indicates that
max
for braking and for traction are not the same. In order to
draw any real conclusions regarding this method it has to be tested on surfaces
where the true
max
is known. The results from this method depends greatly
on parameter settings, a more restrictive tuning of the parameters could lead to
a system which produces very good estimates of
max
during periods with high
excitation.
max
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
1.1
1.2
t
m
a
x

ABS
brush
Figure 8.2. Estimated value of max using the brush tire model when reference values
of max are used to calibrate the system.
8.2 Wheel Model with Dahl Tire Model
In [5] Canudas de Wit integrates a one wheel model with the LuGre friction model
and estimates friction with an observer. Here we try a similar approach. We have
the one-wheel model (4.5). We combine the one wheel model with the Dahl tire
model, see Section 4.3.5, this gives us the model:
z = (r v)(1

0
z), (8.6a)
v =

0
m
z, (8.6b)
=
1
J
w
(
0
z), (8.6c)
where m =
vehicle mass
#driving wheels
, assuming that the same amount of driving torque
is applied to all driving wheels. The Dahl friction model neglects some friction
phenomena, but has fewer parameters which must be estimated than the LuGre
model. Assuming that the stiness parameter
0
and the friction parameter
may vary independently of each other we have two parameters to estimate. If we
model the two parameters as random walks we can add them as augmented states
8.2 Wheel Model with Dahl Tire Model 65
to (8.6). This yields the extended model:
z = (r
0
v)(1

0
z), (8.7a)
v =

0
m
z, (8.7b)
=
1
J
w
(
0
z), (8.7c)

0
= 0, (8.7d)
= 0. (8.7e)
We can now apply the extended Kalman lter with discretized linearization ac-
cording to Section 2.4.1.
8.2.1 Results
Tests of the method have been performed using simulated data from the simulation
model described in Appendix A. The test case used is Sim3, see Appendix B. In
Figure 8.3 the estimated stiness parameter
0
and the estimated coecient of
friction is shown. As can be seen in Figure 8.3 this method is not able to estimate
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
0
20
40
60
80
100
t
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
t
m
a
x
Figure 8.3. Estimated 0 and max.
the longitudinal stiness correctly. The estimated value of the friction coecient
is not able converge to the correct value even if this could depend on the tire model
max
used when generating data. From this we can conclude that this method is not
suitable for estimation of the friction coecient.
Chapter 9
Limiting Factors in
Eect-Based Tire Road
Friction Estimation
In order to evaluate and understand the results we have to understand what limits
there are to the results and what we can expect.
9.1 Excitation
In order to be able to estimate a parameter in a model a change in this parameter
has to lead to a change in observed data. This is closely related to the observability
of a state, see Section 2.2.2. In many cases the system state or the input signal has
to change in order for a change in parameter values to be visible, this is the need
of excitation of a system. In the case of tire-road friction estimation this means
that we need data measured during periods when
max
aects measured data.
As discussed in Section 7 the main eect which
max
has on the tire forces and
hence the vehicle is that a part of the tire-road contact patch slides. How much of
the contact patch is sliding is determined by
max
,
x
and
y
. The more of the
contact patch is sliding the more the slip curve deviates from its tangent in the
origin. This can be seen in Figure 9.1. This deviation is when using direct methods
of friction estimation used to estimate
max
. This means that in order to be able
to estimate
max
reliably we need a suciently high deviation of the slip curve
from the tangent of the curve in the origin. This means that we need a suciently
high
x
or
y
for the deviation to be signicant enough to compensate for noise
and model errors. As the slope of the curve in the origin also changes with surface
conditions we also need data points lying spread along the curve to estimate the
stiness parameters and
max
reliably. This can be a problem as a driver has to
drive actively in order to provide high enough excitation for the parameters to be
estimated. As can be seen in Figure 9.1 the slip curve has not deviated noticeable
from the tangent in the origin until about 50% of
max
is reached. The friction
67
68 Limiting Factors in Eect-Based Tire Road Friction Estimation
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
s
x
Figure 9.1. Deviation from the tangent at s = 0.
demand needed to compensate for noise and model inaccuracies is even higher.
For high
max
surfaces this is rarely reached during normal driving whereas for
low
max
this is more often the case. In Figure 9.2 a scatter plot of s
x
data
collected during normal driving can be seen. When estimating slip-slope excitation
is less of a problem even if a high level of excitation is necessary in order to get
a reliable estimate of the slip-slope. This can also bee seen in Figure 9.2 where
using the eye a straight line easily can be adapted to data whereas it is harder to
decide on an entire slip curve. The need for excitation when estimating slip-slope
is thoroughly discussed in [10].
9.2 Noise
When estimating a time-varying parameter there is always a trade-o between
detection speed and noise suppression. As can be seen in Figure 9.2 there are
non-negligible amounts of noise in measured slip and normalized traction force.
Assuming that there exists no bias in measurements signals an unbiased parameter
estimation algorithm will eventually converge towards the true parameter values.
The signal to noise ratio decides how much data is needed to reach the true pa-
rameter value with a certain degree of uncertainty. When considering noise in
combination with excitation this means that for the
max
and slip-slope estima-
tion problem that it is necessary to have a sucient amount of data, to compensate
9.2 Noise 69
0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01 0.012 0.014 0.016 0.018 0.02
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
s
x
Figure 9.2. Data measured during normal driving.
for noise, spread over a suciently large part of the slip curve for excitation rea-
sons. This further emphasizes the need of active driving as it is necessary to get
not just a few high slip data points. As
max
is not constant this means that a
vehicle has to be driven very actively at all times in order to be able to quickly
detect a change in
max
.
70 Limiting Factors in Eect-Based Tire Road Friction Estimation
Chapter 10
Conclusions
10.1 Estimating Stiness
We can from tests performed in this thesis, see Section 5.2.1, and by others [10]
conclude that it is possible to estimate the combined longitudinal stiness using
standard vehicle sensors. We can also conclude that it is possible to estimate
the combined lateral stiness using standard vehicle sensors at least in an o-line
manner, see Section 5.3.2. We have also investigated the possibilities of estimating
lateral velocity and slip-angle. We have seen that knowing the true combined
lateral stiness it is possible to accurately estimate lateral velocity and hence slip-
angle during normal driving. This leads to the possibility of accurately estimating
vehicle lateral velocity and slip angle using an observer with estimated values of
the lateral stiness parameters.
10.2 Surface Eects on Slip
We have investigated the eects which the road surface has on slip, see Section 7.
We have two plausible explanations to the observed data. The secant eect causes
the slip-slope to be lower on a low
max
surface than on a high
max
surface
when driving with the same friction. This is caused by partial sliding in the
tire-road contact patch which causes the slip curve to deviate from its tangent in
the origin when the friction demand increases. We have also concluded that it
is not probable that the entire contact patch slides before the wheel is in spin.
This means that
max
as such does not aect the initial slope of the slip curve.
The eect which probably causes the dierence in initial slope of the slip curve is
instead deformation of the road surface.
10.3 Using Estimated Stiness to Estimate
max
We have investigated the possibility of using estimated combined stiness to esti-
mate
max
, see Chapter 6. We can conclude that it is possible to use estimated
71
72 Conclusions
combined stiness as an indicator for low friction under certain controlled con-
ditions. We can also conclude that there are tire-road surface combinations for
which it is not possible to use estimated stiness to estimate
max
.
10.4 Direct Estimation of
max
We have investigated two dierent methods of estimating
max
directly without
rst estimating stiness, see Chapter 8. We have seen that the brush model
method, see Section 8.1, has the possibility of using high-slip data and the pos-
sibility of calibration from braking data which makes it suitable for estimation
of
max
. As with all eect based
max
methods we will always have a problem
with getting suciently high excitation, see Chapter 9. We previously concluded
that
max
does only aect tire forces, to a reliably measurable extent, in high slip
situations. This means that it is practically impossible to estimate
max
without
a high level of excitation. During low excitation periods this leaves us with the
only possibilities of either relying on a stiness based method or using cause based
methods for estimation of
max
, see Chapter 3.
Bibliography
[1] Apollo - intelligent tyre for accident-free trac: Final report. IST-2001-34372.
[2] M. Alonso and E. J. Finn. Physics. Addison-Wesley, 1992. ISBN 0-201-56518-
8.
[3] R. Anderson and D. M. Bevly. Estimation of tire cornering stiness using
GPS to improve model based estimation of vehicle states. 2005.
[4] E. Bakker, L. Nyborg, and H. Pacejka. Tyre modelling for use in vehicle
dynamic studies. 1987. SAE Paper #870421.
[5] C. Canudas de Wit, P. Tsiotras, E. Velenis, M. Basset, and G. Gissinger.
Dynamic friction models for road/tire longitudinal interaction. 2003.
[6] U. Eichhhorn and J. Roth. Prediction and monitoring of tyre/road friction.
1992. XXIV FISITA Congress, London, GB.
[7] J. Farrely and P. Wellstead. Estimation of vehicle lateral velocity. Pro-
ceedings of the 1996 IEEE International Conference on Control Applications,
Dearborn, Michigan, USA, 1996.
[8] W.J. Fleming. Overview of automotive sensors. IEEE Sensors Journal, 1:296
308, Dec 2001.
[9] T. Glad and L. Ljung. Reglerteori - Flervariabla och olinjra metoder. Stu-
dentlitteratur, 2003. ISBN 91-44-04004-7.
[10] F. Gustafsson. Slip-based tire-road friction estimation. Automatica,
33(6):10871099, 1997.
[11] F. Gustafsson. Adaptive Filtering and Change Detection. Wiley, 2000. ISBN
0-471-49287-6.
[12] A. Ingulstad. New friction measuring device - for safer driving during winter.
Nordic Road & Transport Research, (2), 2000.
[13] P. Lindskog. Methods, Algorithms and Tools for System Identication Based
on Prior Knowledge. Dissertations No 436, Linkping Studies in Science and
Technology, may 1996. ISBN 91-7871-424-8.
73
74 Bibliography
[14] C. Liu and H. Peng. A state and parameter identication scheme for linearly
parameterized systems. ASME Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurements
and Control, 120(4):524528, 1998.
[15] L. Ljung. System Identication: Theory for the User. Prentice Hall, 1999.
ISBN 0-13-881640-9.
[16] W. F. Milliken and D. L. Milliken. Race Car Vehicle Dynamics. SAE Inter-
national, 1995. ISBN 1-56091-526-1.
[17] S. Mller, M. Uchanski, and K. Hedrick. Estimation of the maximum tire-
road friction coecient. ASME Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurements
and Control, 125:607617, 2003.
[18] H. Olsson, K.J. strm, C. Canudas de Wit, M. Gfvert, and P. Lischinsky.
Friction models and friction compensation. 1998.
[19] L. R. Ray. Nonlinear tire force estimation and road friction identication:
simulation and experiments. Automatica, 33(10):18191833, 1997.
[20] N. D. Smith. Understanding parameters inuencing tire modeling. Colorado
State University, 2004 Formula SAE Platform, 2004.
[21] J. Svendenius and B. Wittenmark. Review of wheel modeling and friction es-
timation. Technical Report ISRN LUTFD/TFRT7607SE, Lund University,
2003.
[22] A. Svrdstrm. Classication of road surface using a neural net (in swedish).
1993. Technical Report UPTEC 93 056R, Uppsala University.
[23] T. Umeno. Estimation of tire-road friction by tire rotational vibration model.
R&D Review of Toyota CRDL, 37(3), 2002.
[24] A. Y. Ungoren, H. Peng, and H. E. Tseng. A study on lateral speed estimation
methods. International Journal of Vehicle Autonomous Systems, 2:126144,
2004.
Appendix A
Vehicle Simulation Model
In order to test and verify the methods proposed in this thesis a simulation model
has been implemented in Simulink. The simulation model uses the vehicle body
model derived in Section 4.1, the wheel model derived in Section 4.2 for each of the
wheels of the vehicle and the piecewise linear tire model described in Section 4.3.
The model takes steering angle, tire-road friction coecient and engine torque
as input data. See Figure A.1 for a Simulink block schedule of the simulation
model. The sfun-block implements the models in Chapter 4. The simulation data
generated with this model used in this thesis is described in Appendix B.
sfun_car
vehicle model
delta
steering angle
tau
engine torque
mu_max
coefficient of friction
y
To Workspace
Figure A.1. Simulink block schedule the simulation model.
75
Appendix B
Test Cases
This appendix describes how the test data used in the thesis was generated or
measured. The data for the SimX test cases were all generated using the simulation
model described in Appendix A. For these test cases parameter values and plots
of the input signals and are given.
B.1 Sim1
Sim1 is a test case with high longitudinal and lateral excitation and constant
parameter values. The parameter values used for test case Sim1 can be found in
Table B.1. The input signals used for test case Sim1 can be found in Figure B.1.
B.2 Sim2
Sim1 is a test case with high longitudinal and lateral excitation and with changing
tire stiness and friction. At time t = 100 C
x
, C
y
and
max
are set to half their
start values and at time t = 150 they are reset to their start values. The parameter
values used for test case Sim2 can be found in Table B.2. The input signals used
for test case Sim2 can be found in Figure B.2.
B.3 Sim3
Sim1 is a test case with high longitudinal excitation, no turning and with changing
tire stiness and friction. At time t = 100 C
x
, C
y
and
max
are set to half their
start values and at time t = 150 they are reset to their start values. The parameter
values used for test case Sim3 can be found in Table B.3. The input signals used
for test case Sim3 can be found in Figure B.3.
76
B.3 Sim3 77
Parameter Value Unit
m 1700 [kg]
a 1.5 [m]
b 1.5 [m]
J
z
1700 [kgm
2
]
t
F
1.5 [m]
t
R
1.5 [m]
max
1 [-]
C
xN
50 [-]
C
yN
11.5 [-]
J
w
2.65 [kgm
2
]
r
0
0.31 [m]
Table B.1. Sim1 parameter values.
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
0.1
0.05
0
0.05
0.1
t
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
t
Figure B.1. Sim1 input signals.
78 Test Cases
m 1700 [kg]
a 1.5 [m]
b 1.5 [m]
J
z
1700 [kgm
2
]
t
F
1.5 [m]
t
R
1.5 [m]
max
1 [-]
C
xN
50 [-]
C
yN
11.5 [-]
J
w
2.65 [kgm
2
]
r
0
0.31 [m]
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
0.1
0.05
0
0.05
0.1
t
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
t
B.3 Sim3 79
m 1700 [kg]
a 1.5 [m]
b 1.5 [m]
J
z
1700 [kgm
2
]
t
F
1.5 [m]
t
R
1.5 [m]
max
1 [-]
C
xN
50 [-]
C
yN
11.5 [-]
J
w
2.65 [kgm
2
]
r
0
0.31 [m]
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
1
0.5
0
0.5
1
t
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
t
80 Test Cases
Upphovsrtt
Detta dokument hlls tillgngligt p Internet eller dess framtida ersttare
under 25 r frn publiceringsdatum under frutsttning att inga extraordinra
omstndigheter uppstr.
Tillgng till dokumentet innebr tillstnd fr var och en att lsa, ladda ner,
skriva ut enstaka kopior fr enskilt bruk och att anvnda det ofrndrat fr icke-
kommersiell forskning och fr undervisning. verfring av upphovsrtten vid en
senare tidpunkt kan inte upphva detta tillstnd. All annan anvndning av doku-
mentet krver upphovsmannens medgivande. Fr att garantera ktheten, sker-
heten och tillgngligheten nns det lsningar av teknisk och administrativ art.
Upphovsmannens ideella rtt innefattar rtt att bli nmnd som upphovsman
i den omfattning som god sed krver vid anvndning av dokumentet p ovan be-
skrivna stt samt skydd mot att dokumentet ndras eller presenteras i sdan form
eller i sdant sammanhang som r krnkande fr upphovsmannens litterra eller
konstnrliga anseende eller egenart.
Fr ytterligare information om Linkping University Electronic Press se fr-
lagets hemsida http://www.ep.liu.se/
Copyright
The publishers will keep this document online on the Internet or its possi-
ble replacement for a period of 25 years from the date of publication barring
exceptional circumstances.
The online availability of the document implies a permanent permission for
anyone to read, to download, to print out single copies for your own use and
to use it unchanged for any non-commercial research and educational purpose.
Subsequent transfers of copyright cannot revoke this permission. All other uses of
the document are conditional on the consent of the copyright owner. The publisher
has taken technical and administrative measures to assure authenticity, security
and accessibility.
According to intellectual property law the author has the right to be men-
tioned when his/her work is accessed as described above and to be protected
against infringement.
For additional information about the Linkping University Electronic Press
and its procedures for publication and for assurance of document integrity, please
refer to its www home page: http://www.ep.liu.se/
c ( Erik Narby

Modeling and Estimation of Dynamic Tire Properties

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Modeling and Estimation of Dynamic Tire Properties

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Institutionen fr systemteknik

Department of Electrical Engineering

URL fr elektronisk version

ratio between steering wheel angle and steering angle

x(t) = A x(t) +Bu(t).

x(t) = A x(t) +Bu(t) +K(y(t) C x(t) Du(t)), (2.9)

x(t) = (AKC) x(t) +Kv(t) (2.11)

the output signal y(t) = 0, t 0. The

is a car specic constant.

Using the method described in Section 2.1.1 we get:

(k) from stiness k to tire-road friction

is now given by the least squares solution to (6.6).

Вам также может понравиться