1. Trang chủ
  2. » Kỹ Thuật - Công Nghệ

develope active steering sys

7 114 1
Tài liệu đã được kiểm tra trùng lặp

Đang tải... (xem toàn văn)

THÔNG TIN TÀI LIỆU

Thông tin cơ bản

Định dạng
Số trang 7
Dung lượng 266,94 KB

Các công cụ chuyển đổi và chỉnh sửa cho tài liệu này

Nội dung

Regarding the man-machine interface, the influence of the oversteer characteristic when braking and turning on driver’s steering operation, the influence of driver reaction in system fai

Trang 1

1

June 12-15, 2000, Seoul, Korea

Development of the Active Front Steering Control System

AISIN SEIKI CO., LTD., 2-1 Asahi-Machi, Kariya, Aichi 448-8650, Japan For active front steering control systems that intervene in driver’s operation to assist in the control of the vehicle’s motion, the effect of the man-machine interface is much larger than for other conventional control systems This paper focuses on human factors The results of analysis regarding control effects and system design concerns are also described The user benefits of this control system are improved vehicle stability and reduced driving workload Both theoretical and experimental evaluations are described Regarding the man-machine interface, the influence of the oversteer characteristic when braking and turning on driver’s steering operation, the influence of driver reaction in system failure and steering wheel reaction torque when driving with the actuator are also analyzed

Keywords: front steering control, human factor, variable gear ratio, vehicle motion control, failure analysis

INTRODUCTION

Recently, front steering control systems [1]-[4] such as

the steer-by-wire system have been proposed to respond to

the demand for improved handling for better safety and to

aid our aging population Front steering is most closely

connected to the driver as the point of contact between the

man and the vehicle Therefore, large user benefits can be

obtained by control intervention in this area At the same

time, there are some new challenges These items, which

are related to human factors, were analyzed theoretically

and experimentally

SYSTEM CONFIGURATION

A pure steer-by-wire system, which has no mechanical

linkage between the tires and the steering wheel, is the

ultimate steering control system However, at the present

time, a control system that is added to the conventional

steering system and superimposes a controlled steering

angle on the driver’s operation, is reasonable in terms of

cost, reliability and compatibility with current vehicles

Thus, we developed the control system in Fig 1 and

installed it in an experimental vehicle The test subjects

were analyzed using this configuration

USER BENEFITS

The functions of the front steering control system can be classified in two groups One is the passive control such

as variable gear ratio or lead steer The other is active control such as yaw rate feedback control or cooperative control with the brake system The latter can improve vehicle dynamics performance However, it is not directly related to human factors, but to the vehicle motion characteristics Thus, we will not described it here and concentrate on the results of analyzing and evaluating the passive control functions in this paper

VARIABLE GEAR RATIO

EFFECT OF VEHICLE STABILITY IMPROVEMENT

The effect of varying the steering gear ratio to improve vehicle stability is theoretically analyzed Using the simple yaw rate feedback driver model in Fig 2, the performance was analyzed by yaw rate convergence

Driver model:

s Td 1

Kd ) s ( Gd

⋅ +

=

Actuator model: Ga(s) = Ka

s 2 T s 1 T 1

s Tr 1 0 Grdf ) s ( Gv

⋅ +

⋅ +

⋅ +

=

The 1st order delay model for yaw rate feedback was adopted as a simplified driver model The actuator was represented as a steering angle amplification model with a constant gain and no delay The bicycle model was used for the vehicle The transfer function of this closed loop system is calculated as follows:

* Corresponding author e-mail: akita@rd.aisin.co.jp

Driver’s inputs

● Steering wheel angle

● Steering wheel torque

● Master cylinder pressure

● Throttle angle

Vehicle motion

● Wheel’s velocity

● Yaw rate

● Lateral acceleration

● Longitudinal acceleration

Tire

Brush-less

DC motor

Steering Planetary

gear sets

ECU

Fig.1 AFS control system configuration

Vehicle :Gv(s)

Driver :Gd(s)

AFS Actuator :Ga(s)

target yaw rate+ yaw rate

-Vehicle :Gv(s)

Driver :Gd(s)

AFS Actuator :Ga(s)

target yaw rate+ yaw rate

-Fig.2 Stability analysis model including a driver

Trang 2

2

The characteristics of this system were theoretically

analyzed by the pole location and step response of the

above transfer function for various steering gain and driver

characteristics This steering gain is the reciprocal of the

steering gear ratio, thus increasing the gain is the same as

decreasing the gear ratio

In the case of the standard driver, shown in Fig 3, yaw

rate convergence is improved by increasing the steering

gain, which means the stability of the vehicle can be

improved

In Example 2 (Fig.4), the driver steers too quickly with

the controller set at high gain The imaginary parts of the

poles get bigger, thus yaw rate overshoots more Since

this is a linear model, there is no divergence The actual

system tends to become unstable This means that it’s

more difficult for a driver who cannot adapt to different

vehicle characteristics to operate the vehicle with an

excessively large steering gain This analysis illustrates

the basic effect of the variable gear ratio function on the

vehicle stability characteristics

The experimental results using the prototype system to

verify these effects are shown in Figs 6 to 10 A double

lane change maneuver, shown in Fig.5, run on a low

friction road, was used for these tests

The vehicle characteristics with steering gear ratios of

17 (Conventional), 10 and 6 were evaluated by a test driver The experimental results are shown in Figs 6 to 8, including Lissajous’s figures of steering angle and yaw rate The average yaw rates for each gear ratio in the evaluation are shown in Fig 9 The peak yaw rate when passing the last gate is shown in Fig.10 These results show that with a smaller gear ratio, the yaw rate is slower, thus vehicle stability can be improved

The system was also evaluated with a driver who was not familiar with driving on a low friction road The results are shown in Figs 11 to 13

Closed loop transfer function:

3

2 T2 Td s s

) Td 1 T 2 T ( s ) Tr Ka Kd 0 Grdf Td 1 T ( Ka Kd 0 Grdf 1

s Tr 1 Kd

Ka

)

s

(

G

⋅ +

⋅ + +

⋅ + + +

⋅ +

⋅ +

=

γ

Fig.3 Ex.1: Yaw rate stability for standard driver

(Td=0.5 sec, Kd=0.245 rad/(rad/sec), Ka=1,2,4,8)

Fig.4 Ex.2: Yaw rate stability for quick and high gain driver

(Td=0.2 sec, Kd=0.49 rad/(rad/sec), Ka=1,2,4,8)

•μ: 0.17

60 km/h

Fig.5 Double lane change course on low friction road

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 -100

-50 0 50 100

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 -20

-10 0 10 20

tim e (sec)

-100 -50 0 50 100 -20

-15 10 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20

Steering angle (deg)

Fig.6 Yaw rate and steering angle at gear ratio 17

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 -100

-50 0 50 100

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 -20

-10 0 10 20

tim e (sec)

-100 -50 0 50 100 -20

-15 10 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20

Steering angle (deg)

Fig.7 Yaw rate and steering angle at gear ratio 10

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 -100

-50 0 50 100

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 -20

-10 0 10 20

tim e (sec)

-100 -50 0 50 100 -20

-15 10 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20

Steering angle (deg)

Fig.8 Yaw rate and steering angle at gear ratio 6

Real Axis

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

20

4

4

8

8

Real Axis

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

20

4

4

8

8

0 0.5 1 1.5

time (sec)

2 Ka=1 4 8

0 0.5 1 1.5

time (sec)

2 Ka=1 4 8

Real Axis

-50

0

50

Ka=1

4

8

2

Ka=1

4

8

2

Real Axis

-50

0

50

Ka=1

4

8

2

Ka=1

4

8

2

0 0.5 1 1.5

time (sec)

Ka=1 4 8

2

0 0.5 1 1.5

time (sec)

Ka=1 4 8

2

3.5 m

5 m

40 m

3.5 m

25 m

2.2 m

5 m

5 m

40 m

3.5 m

25 m

2.2 m

5 m IN

Steering angle

Tire angle

Steering angle

Tire angle

6.47

0 2 4 6

(deg/sec)

Steering gear ratio

6.47

0 2 4 6

(deg/sec)

Steering gear ratio

20.1

0 5 10 15 20 25

Steering gear ratio

(deg/sec) 20.1

0 5 10 15 20 25

Steering gear ratio (deg/sec)

Trang 3

3

When the gear ratio was large, the vehicle spun off the

course due to the delay in the steering operation as in Fig

11 In contrast, when the gear ratio was too small, the

vehicle ran off the course since the driver steered too much

and too quickly, as in Fig 13 Only when the proper gear

ratio was selected did the driver successfully maneuver the

course These results match the aforementioned analysis

The appropriate gear ratio must be selected considering

the compatibility with conventional vehicles for various

drivers

EFFECT OF MITIGATION FOR OPERATION LOAD

If a smaller gear ratio is selected, the driver’s workload

can be reduced [1] Steering operation with various gear

ratios is shown in Fig 15 when driving on the evaluation

circuit course in Fig 14 The steering operation energy is

plotted in Fig 16 The energy reduction corresponds to

the lower gear ratio However, if an excessively small

gear ratio is selected, the energy reduction effect

corresponding to the lower gear ratio cannot be obtained

due to frequent steering corrections, as showing in Fig 16

Furthermore, if a smaller gear ratio is selected, the high

frequency part of the steering operation is increased, as in

Fig 17 This means the operation is not as smooth and the

driver’s mental workload increases It is important to

select the appropriate gear ratio from this point of view as

well

HUMAN FACTORS CONCERNS

This system is closely connected to the driver’s operation compared to other control systems, so it is important to consider human factors issues The main concerns regarding human factors were determined through our vehicle experiments, and then analyzed

OVERSTEER WHILE BRAKING AND TURNING

For the variable gear ratio function, the gear ratio changes as a function of vehicle velocity Thus, the vehicle quickly steers toward the inside of a turn when rapidly braking and turning due to the gear ratio change

A similar phenomenon occurs when accelerating and turning However, the amount of under-steer is smaller than when braking and was not a problem in the vehicle tests So the accelerating and turning condition was not analyzed and the braking while turning problem is the focus in this paper

By considering the required steering speed at maximum deceleration in a small, constant radius turn, it can be determined whether general drivers can easily operate the system This value can be calculated by the following equation

Required steering angular velocity:

dt / } fvgr(v) R

l ) v K 1 {(

st = + ⋅ ⋅ ⋅

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

-200

-100

-50

0

50

100

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

-20

-10

0

10

20

tim e (sec)

-200 -100 0 100 200 -20

-15 10 -10 -5 0 5 10 15

Steering angle (deg)

Fig.11 Result with a beginner driver at gear ratio 17

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

-200

-100

-50

0

50

100

200

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

-20

-10

0

10

20

tim e (sec)

-200 -100 0 100 200 -20

-15 10 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20

Steering angle (deg)

Fig.12 Result with a beginner driver at gear ratio 10

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

-200

-100

-50

0

50

100

200

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

-20

-10

0

10

20

tim e (sec)

-200 -100 0 100 200 -20

-15 10 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20

Steering angle (deg)

Fig.13 Result with a beginner driver at gear ratio 6

Fig.14 Composite circuit course

Fig.15 Steering operation with each gear ratio

Fig.16 Operation energy Fig.17 Power spectrum

of steering angle

-540 -450 -360 -270 -180 -90 0 90 180 270 360 450 540

0 10 20 30 40 50

time (sec)

gear ratio : 17 (normal) 6 3

-80 -70 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0

frequency (Hz)

gear ratio : 3 6

17 (normal)

17 6 3 gear ratio 0

200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600

Additional energy due to correction

5m 25R

15R

15R

15 R

15R Start line

160m

White line Pylon

5m 25R

15R

15R

15 R

15R Start line

160m

White line Pylon

Off the course

Steering angle

course

Steering angle

Tire angle

Spin out

Spin out

Trang 4

4

When using the variable gear ratio characteristic shown

in Fig 19 [1] based on a limited steering wheel operation

range, the required velocity is 260 deg/sec Since the

general driver’s fastest steering speed is about 200 to 1600

deg/sec, almost any driver should be able to operate the

system However, this maneuver is supposed to be

difficult An experimental evaluation using this gear ratio

characteristic was done under the condition in Fig 18

Fig 20 shows the experimental results indicating that a

rapid return steering operation is necessary even at a

deceleration of 0.5G

For the modified gear ratio characteristic in Fig 21, the

gear ratio change gradient (∂fvgr(v)/∂v) is around 0.1

/(km/h) Using the above equation, the required steering

operation speed is 50 deg/sec, which general drivers

should easily be able to do In the experiments, the driver

could smoothly maneuver through the course as in Fig 22

This is also a requirement for the variable gear ratio set up

EFFECT OF SYSTEM FAILURE

The following 2 kinds of system failures can arise

1 Sudden, unintended steering

The failure analysis and countermeasures study that

examined various failure detection mechanisms, sudden,

unintended steering can never arise as long as the dual

failure does not occur Thus, the analysis for the system

failure 1 is not considered in this paper For this

configuration, when the system locks up, the steering

characteristic just returns to that of conventional system

However, if the change is large, it may affect to drive The

following analysis focuses on the variable gear ratio function due to the large characteristic change

To understand the phenomena with concrete value, the simple model in Fig 23 was set up under the following assumptions

[Assumption]

1 At the beginning, the driver steers with a small gear ratio in the variable gear ratio function

2 The system locks up and the gear ratio returns to the normal one that is large

3 The driver notices the failure after some constant lag time and starts steering using a normal steering gain to return to the planned trajectory

For the driver model, a 1st order linear prediction model was used where the driver steers corresponding to the deviation between the planned trajectory and a point projected on straight line a set distance ahead of the car This “preview distance” is a function of the vehicle speed Then the corrective steering operation speed is limited to match the actual environment The linear bicycle model with the Pacejka tire model is used as the vehicle model The maximum deviation from the planned trajectory was used as the evaluation parameter

The simulation results for these rather severe conditions are shown in Fig 24 The permissible value depends on the driving environment The deviation is not so large with small steering gains, even under this severe condition

The vehicle experiments were done to verify these results A severe double lane change course on a dry asphalt road in Fig 25 was set up to evaluate the failure effect The Active Front Steering Control System was locked up during the 1st or 2nd turn The driver did not know in advance when the failure was to occur Gear ratio values of 10 and 6 were chosen for the Active Front Steering Control When the system locked up, it reverted

to a gear ratio of 17 4 people including professional and beginner drivers were evaluated

[Calculation parameters]

•R: 15

•Gmax: 1 G

•v: 5 to 150 km/h

Fig.18 "Braking and turning" evaluation method

and calculation parameters

Fig.21 Adjusted gear ratio Fig.22 Driver’s operation

Fig.19 Proposed gear ratio Fig.20 Driver’s operation

Fig.23 System fail model

•Vehicle velocity: 40km/h

•Maximum corrective steering speed: 200 deg/sec

•Planned turning radius: 20 m

•Driver preview time: 2 sec Fig.24 Maximum deviation in system failure

Steering gain

Recognition time=0.5 sec

0.2 sec

0 1 2 3 4

1 1.5 2 2.5 3

0.1 sec

Steering gain

Recognition time=0.5 sec

0.2 sec

0 1 2 3 4

1 1.5 2 2.5 3

0.1 sec

60km/h

Braking Pyron

4 m

15R

stop line

0

5

10

15

20

25

0 50 100 150

velocity (km/h)

0

5

10

15

20

25

0 50 100 150

velocity (km/h)

-200 -150 -100 -50 0 50

100

velocity (km/h)

yaw rate (deg/sec) steering angle (deg)

time (sec)

0 1 2 3 4 -200

-150 -100 -50 0 50

100

velocity (km/h)

yaw rate (deg/sec) steering angle (deg)

time (sec)

0 1 2 3 4

10

20

30

40

50

velocity (km/h)

10

20

30

40

50

velocity (km/h)

-200 -150 -100 -50 0 50 100

0 1 2 3 4

velocity (km/h) yaw rate (deg/sec)

steering angle (deg)

time (sec) -200

-150 -100 -50 0 50 100

0 1 2 3 4

velocity (km/h) yaw rate (deg/sec)

steering angle (deg)

time (sec)

Trajectory with AFS

Recognize failure, then start correcting Preview point Maximum deviation

Trajectory

in failure

Bicycle model with Pacejka tire model

Trang 5

5

The test results showed that each driver could

successfully pass through the course in all cases The

recognition lag time was 0.1 to 0.3 sec and the maximum

steering speed was about 300 deg/sec in most cases Figs

26 to 28 show the results when using a gear ratio of 6

These simulations and experiments show that the driver

can manage a lock-up failure under these conditions when

using the gear ratio characteristic in Fig.21 A problem

with this experiment is that the drivers knew a failure was

supposed to occur, even though they didn’t know when,

and quickly responded without panic It is necessary to

evaluate the performance of general drivers under actual

conditions to improve the reliability of the experiments A

driving simulator would be useful for this purpose This is

one of our future research tasks

EFFECT OF REACTION STEERING TORQUE

Reaction torque is applied by the actuator to not only

the tires, but also the steering wheel Thus, the effect of

the reaction torque for driver’s operation was analyzed

This analysis was also classified into 2 functions One is

the passive function where the system follows driver’s

intension and operation The other is the active function

where the system automatically activates based on the

vehicle condition

Passive function

The fundamental mechanism regarding the reaction

torque is described using a simple model in Fig 29 The

difference between the system with and without the AFS

system can be described as:

Steering torque without AFS:

sw I t I

Steering torque with AFS:

m I sw I t I Tm '

This means that the torque generated by the AFS motor

is not additional torque but same torque that is actuating

the tire Therefore, since the actuator follows the driver’s

steering operation, the driver should not feel any

unexpected steering wheel torque However, the control

system has some delay The effect of the delay and the

level that is acceptable was analyzed

The driver’s haptic evaluation of the steering operation when the vehicle was stationary was done using the Significant Difference Method Various amounts of lag time after the target signal was generated by the steering wheel angle, were added to the AFS actuator command signal As shown in Fig 30, the driver feels uncomfortable with more than 0.1 sec of lag time This is the system delay limit

•ωsw,αsw: Steering velocity, acceleration

•ωm,αm: Motor velocity, acceleration

•ωt,αt: Tire velocity, acceleration

•Tsw’: Steering torque

•Tm: Motor torque Fig.29 Principle model for reaction torque generation mechanism

40 km/h Fig.25 Evaluation course for system failure

-200

-150

-50

0

50

100

200

-20

-10

0

10

20

-300

-200

-100

0

100

200

300

tim e (se )

-200 -100 -50 0 50 100 200

-20 -10 0 10 20

-300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300

tim e (se )

-200 -100 -50 0 50 100 200

-20 -10 0 10 20

-300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300

tim e (se )

•Surface: Dry asphalt

•Vehicle velocity: 0km/h

•Steering input: Random

(Various pattern)

Fig.30 Haptic evaluation for the system lag time

3.5 m

5 m

20 m

3.5 m

15 m

2.2 m

5 m

5 m

20 m

3.5 m

15 m

2.2 m

5 m IN

Steering angle Tire angle

Superimposed angle Failure

1 2 3 4 5

System lag time (sec.)

Standard level

= no incompatibility

Steering angle

Tire angle

Failure

sw

sw,α ω m

m,α ω t

t,α ω

Steering wheel

sw

sw,α ω m

m,α ω t

t,α ω

Steering wheel

Steering angle

Tire angle Superimposed angle

Superimposed angle

Trang 6

6

The required response of the system was analyzed It

can be calculated from the driver’s maximum steering

operation speed, operation range at that speed and

permissible lag time using the following equation

Required system functioning speed:

Rnorm: Normal gear ratio

Rvgr: Gear ratio in variable gear ratio function

θmax: Steering operation range

ωswmax: Driver’s maximum steering operation speed

Tlag: Acceptable system lag time

The results from 2 example calculations for severe

driving conditions are shown in Fig 31 One condition is

for high speed steering with a narrow range such as in case

of a collision avoidance maneuver The other is for slow

speed operation with a wide steering angle range like when

parking The haptic evaluation using the experimental

vehicle with gear ratios of 6 and 10 was done The

maximum driving speed of the prototype system was 32

deg/sec at the tire angle As the results of the haptic

evaluation, the drivers didn’t notice the system delay with

a gear ratio of 10, but felt it with a gear ratio of 6 This

experimental result matches the calculation results

Active function

When the system with active functions is triggered

such as when the vehicle starts to become unstable, the

motor angle is superimposed to the driver’s steering

operation to compensate the vehicle’s motion This

operation generates additional reaction torque This

influence was analyzed through vehicle experiments using

the aforementioned course on an artificially low friction

road with 4 drivers, including professionals and beginners

The following simple yaw rate feedback control algorithm

was adopted

Target tire angle: θt=θt0+Krp⋅(γt−γ)−Krd⋅dγ/dt

θt0: Target tire angle calculated from the steering angle

γ t: Target yaw rate calculated using the bicycle vehicle

model with the Pacejka tire model

Krp, Krd: Proportional gain, Differential gain

All drivers were able to pass through the test course

without any negative influences from the AFS system

Fig 32 shows the results from one of these experiments

Fig.33 shows the relationship between the reaction

torque when the correction control was applied and the

steering angle fluctuation at that time It shows that very

little steering angle fluctuations occurred, even when

rather high reaction torque was applied This is likely due

to the fact that the direction of the correction control

coincides with the driver’s intention, thus the driver didn’t

feel large unintended motions It can be concluded from

these experiments that the system does not generate any

negative effects to the driver

CONCLUSION

The following facts were verified when the appropriate gear ratio was selected

1 User benefits 1-1 Vehicle stability can be improved

1-2 Steering operation workload can be mitigated

2 Concerns for human factor 2-1 The driver can manage the oversteer and understeer characteristic caused by the variable gear ratio 2-2 The driver can control the vehicle, even when the control system suddenly locks up

2-3 The reaction torque doesn’t affect the driver’s operation

These are preliminarily results since it is difficult to generalize these effects over the entire driving public, many of whom have different driving styles and preferences Further research using a wider range of drivers is necessary to refine this system for the market

Fig.32 The influence of reaction torque

Fig.31 Required system functioning speed

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0

0 5 10 15 20 25 Reaction steering torque (Nm)

Fig.33 Influence of reaction torque

Tlag max sw max

max )

1 Rvgr

Rnorm

(

vsr

+ ω

-50 0 50 100

t (sec)

-20 -10 0 10 20

t (sec)

-20 -10 0 10 20

t (sec)

Steering wheel torque

Reaction torque

Steering angle

Tire angle

Compensation

by the system

10 6

Steering gear ratio

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Prototype

performance High speed, narrow range(1600deg/sec, 90deg)

Low speed, wide range (540deg/sec, 1080deg)

10 6

Steering gear ratio

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Prototype

performance High speed, narrow range(1600deg/sec, 90deg)

Low speed, wide range (540deg/sec, 1080deg)

Trang 7

7

NOMENCLATURE

p.1 Kd : Driver’s steering gain

Td : Time constant of driver’s operation

Ka : Actuator gain

Grdf0 : Vehicle yaw rate gain [= v/ ( 1 +K ⋅ v )) ]

Tr : Parameter of Gv(s) [ =m ⋅ lf/ ( Cr ⋅ ) ⋅ v ]

T1 : Parameter of Gv(s) [ = lr/v ]

T2 : Parameter of Gv(s) [ = Iz/ ( Cr ⋅ ) ]

M : Vehicle mass

Iz : Yaw moment of inertia

v : Velocity of vehicle body

Cf, Cr : Cornering power

lf, lr : Length between center of gravity and tire

contact point

l : Wheel base

K : Stability factor

p.3 R : turning radius

Gmax : maximum deceleration

fvgr : VGR steering gear ratio function

vt : vehicle velocity at t sec

γ : yaw rate

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The advice of Dr Y Amano of TOYOTA CENTRAL

R&D LABS., INC in the ergonomic analysis is gratefully

acknowledged

REFERENCES

[1] Akita, T., Yoshida, T., et al 1999 User Benefits of

Active Front Steering Control System: Steer-by-Wire:

FISITA 99SF013

[2] Shimizu, Y., Kawai, T., Yuzuriha, J 1999

Improvement in driver-vehicle system performance by

varying steering gain with vehicle speed and steering

angle: VGS (Variable Gear-ratio Steering system): SAE

1999-01-0395

[3] Wolfgang, K., Matthias, H 1996 Potential Functions

And Benefits Of Electronic Steering Assistance: FISITA

B0304

[4] Karnopp, D 1992 Active Steering Systems: Report of

Department of Mechanical, Aeronautical and Materials

Engineering, The University of California, Davis

Ngày đăng: 24/07/2014, 09:48

TỪ KHÓA LIÊN QUAN