Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Tuesday, July 31, 2018

Estimation of Wet Clutch Friction Parameters in Automotive 2015-01-1146

Transmissions Published 04/14/2015

Matthew Barr and Krishnaswamy Srinivasan

Ohio State University

CITATION: Barr, M. and Srinivasan, K., "Estimation of Wet Clutch Friction Parameters in Automotive Transmissions," SAE Technical
Paper 2015-01-1146, 2015, doi:10.4271/2015-01-1146.

Copyright © 2015 SAE International

Abstract of friction should vary consistently with slip speed, applied pressure,
and temperature, and the overall coefficient of friction versus slip
In this paper, a new algorithm for the off-line estimation of wet clutch
speed (or µK ¯ ωslip or µ ¯ V) curve should have a positive slope[2].
friction parameters is proposed for automotive transmissions,
Figure 1 displays µ ¯ V curves with both positive and negative slopes.
motivated by the usefulness of such an algorithm for diagnosing the
A positive slope is desirable for stable operation and closed loop
condition of the clutch and transmission fluid in service. We assume
control of the clutch slip[1]. As the µ ¯ V slope becomes negative, the
that clutch pressure is measured, which is the case in dual clutch
clutch may experience stick-slip when static friction is higher than
transmissions (DCT). The estimation algorithm uses measured
sliding friction; and/or shudder, when driveline damping cannot
rotational speeds and estimated accelerations at the input and output
sufficiently suppress vibrations caused by an increase in friction
sides of a clutch, measured clutch pressures, and a simplified
associated with a decrease in slip speed[3].
dynamic model of clutch friction to estimate the viscous and contact
components of clutch friction torque. Coefficient of friction data is
generated using the contact friction torque. A Stribeck friction model
is fit to the data, and parameters in the model are then calculated by
applying linear least squares estimation.

The proposed estimation algorithm is tested using the simulation of a

powertrain utilizing a DCT, where the clutch friction model
incorporates a realistic level of fluid film squeeze dynamics. The
algorithm is evaluated under ‘noiseless’ and ‘noisy’ conditions. In the
‘noiseless’ case, clutch accelerations and pressure derivatives are
obtained by differentiating stored clutch speed and pressure signals.
In the ‘noisy’ case, white-Gaussian noise is introduced to the stored
signals, with a noise-to-signal amplitude ratio of 10% for speed
signals and 5% for pressure signals. The clutch accelerations and
pressure derivatives are then estimated using a Kalman filter, and
results are presented for both ‘noiseless’ and ‘noisy’ cases. In both
cases, friction parameters are estimated within 10% of their
respective simulated values, with the estimation accuracy being
generally better for the ‘noiseless’ case.
Introduction
For wet multi-plate clutches in automatic transmissions used in
passenger vehicles, the friction material is typically paper-based.
Additional materials such as organic and inorganic compounds,
cellulose, and fibers may be bonded to the paper layer[1]. To achieve
smooth and consistent torque transfer through a clutch, the coefficient
Figure 1. μ'V curves with positive and negative slopes[3]
The interactions of the automatic transmission fluid (ATF) and the
friction material affect the quality of wet clutch engagement. Lam et
al.[4] explain that the type of oil additives, chemical adsorption
affinities, and oil film characteristics affect the clutch torque capacity
and the µ ¯ V slope at low speeds (e.g., a transmission fluid with the
proper additives allows static friction to be less than sliding friction).
As the ATF ages due to oxidation, thermal degradation, shearing,
vaporization, or hydrolysis, static friction becomes greater than
sliding friction and the performance of the clutch degrades[3]. By
estimating the change in clutch friction parameters, the condition of
the clutch friction material and transmission fluid may be diagnosed
to guide appropriate maintenance action.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Tuesday, July 31, 2018
This paper presents a new algorithm for the estimation of wet clutch
friction parameters for automotive transmissions. The algorithm uses
measured rotational speeds and estimated accelerations at the input
and output sides of a clutch to calculate clutch friction torque during
a gear shift. Assuming for the purpose of estimation a static
relationship between clutch fluid film thickness and clutch pressure,
the viscous component of clutch friction torque is estimated. The
contact component of clutch friction torque is then calculated by
subtracting the viscous torque from the total clutch friction torque.
From the contact friction torque, coefficient of friction data is
generated. A Stribeck friction model is fit to the data, and parameters
in the model are then calculated by applying linear least squares
estimation. The proposed estimation algorithm is tested using the
simulation of a powertrain utilizing a dual clutch transmission (DCT),
which is instrumented with clutch pressure sensors. The algorithm is
evaluated under ‘noiseless’ and ‘noisy’ conditions.
Overview of Powertrain Model
A brief overview of the powertrain model used in the development of
the estimation algorithm is given in this section. Refer to[5] for a
more detailed description of the model. The powertrain model
includes: a mean-value engine model based on a naturally aspirated
3.8L V6 spark-ignition engine with sequential port fuel-injection; a
rotational dynamic model with lumped inertias and shaft compliances
that is based on a powertrain with a six-speed wet DCT of the
configuration shown in Figure 2; a model of clutch friction that
incorporates fluid film squeeze dynamics; a highly nonlinear,
lumped-parameter, and dynamic model of the hydraulic actuation
system; and a model that describes vehicle dynamics and the tire-road
interaction in the longitudinal direction.
Figure 2. Stick diagram of DCT (I - input, O - output, G - gear, R - reverse, N
- neutral, S - synchronizer, OS - output shaft)
A schematic of the powertrain (through the differential) is shown in
Figure 3, and the free body diagrams of the vehicle and axles are
displayed in Figure 4. By applying Newton's second law for each of
the inertias, the front and rear axles, and the vehicle body, the
complete set of equations describing the rotational dynamics of the
powertrain and the longitudinal vehicle dynamics with tire-road
interaction is obtained. For the purpose of estimation, only the
rotational dynamics of the input and output sides of the two clutches
#1 and #2 described by equations (1), 2, (3) are considered.
(1)
(2)
(3)
Here, J, ω, and B represent inertia, angular velocity, and viscous
damping coefficient respectively. The subscripts H, L1, si1, L2, si2
denote the clutch hub, the gearbox side of clutch #1, input shaft #1,
the gearbox side of clutch #2, and input shaft #2, respectively. The
subscript L designates a variable that has the same value for both
clutches.
Figure 3. Rotational dynamics of engine, flywheel and gearbox
Figure 4. Free body diagrams of the vehicle and axles
The dynamic wet clutch friction model, which is adapted from Deur
et al. [6, 7] and extended to model a clutch-to-clutch shift in[5], is a
lumped-parameter model that incorporates fluid film dynamics
combined with a simplified thermal model in an effort to improve the
accuracy with which the clutch engagement process is described. The
accuracy of the commonly used static model is dependent on the
energy level of the engagement; the static model most accurately
represents clutch friction during a high-energy engagement (high
clutch pressure and high initial slip speed), and least accurately
during a low-energy engagement (low clutch pressure and small
initial slip speeds). The static model is inaccurate during a low-
energy engagement due to its inability to describe the delay and
overshoot in friction torque production caused by the fluid film
squeeze dynamics[6]. Hence, the static model is unsuitable for the
simulation of some clutch-to-clutch shifts.
Wet-clutch engagement can be divided into three phases:
hydrodynamic lubrication, partial lubrication and mechanical contact.
In the hydrodynamic lubrication phase, the clutch separator and
friction plates are completely separated by a fluid film. As the plates
are pushed together, fluid is forced out of the clutch pack - as the film
thickness decreases, the viscous friction increases. Partial lubrication
occurs when the film thickness is reduced past the asperity height of
the friction material, and the friction due to asperity contact increases
from zero. The final phase occurs when the remaining fluid is
squeezed out of the friction material asperities. At this point the
viscous friction is reduced to zero, and all of the clutch friction is due
to mechanical asperity contact.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Tuesday, July 31, 2018

The wet clutch friction torque, TF,m, is described by equation (4).

(8)
(4)
Here, µC and µS are the Coulomb and static coefficients of friction,
TV,m and TC,m are the viscous and mechanical contact components of
and ωS and λS are the Stribeck coefficients. ωrel is the static-dynamic
the total friction. The subscript m refers to a variable that is specific
threshold speed that defines, for simulation purposes, a narrow slip
to clutch #1 or #2. The viscous and mechanical contact frictions are
speed band bounded by (±ωrel) for which the clutch is considered to
modeled as:
be locked-up. The static friction torque is calculated as a function of
external torques for slip speeds within this band, in order to improve
simulation accuracy [8, 9]. For slip speeds outside of this band, the
friction torque is calculated using equation (4).

(5) Determination of ‘Ideal’ Clutch Friction

Parameters
The ‘ideal’ clutch friction parameters listed in Table 1 are generated
by fitting the Stribeck friction model described by equation (8) to the
µK - ωslip curve shown in Figure 5. This data, which was generated by
Tersigni et al. [10] for a BorgWarner BW-6100 friction plate,
corresponds to a new clutch with fresh automatic transmission fluid
(ATF). The remaining parameters used in the dynamic wet clutch
(6) friction model are obtained from Yang et al.[11]. The estimation of
these parameters is not addressed in this paper.
Ro,m, Ri,m are the outer and inner radii of the clutch friction plates, Np,m
is the number of friction interfaces, ωslip,m is the clutch slip speed Table 1. Coefficient of friction parameters for new BW-6100 friction plate
(=ωH ¯ ωL,m), hm is the fluid film thickness, ν(θoil) is the oil viscosity with fresh ATF
calculated as function of oil temperature, Ng,m is the number of
grooves in the friction material, and θ0,m is the angular displacement
between the grooves. For the ungrooved friction plates that are
modeled here, Ng,m=1 and θ0,m = 2π radians. The Patir and Cheng
flow factors, ϕf (hm) and ϕfs(hm), and the pressure due to mechanical
asperity contact, PC,m(hm), are functions of film thickness - these
terms govern the transition from the hydrodynamic lubrication phase
to the mechanical contact phase as the fluid film is squeezed from the
clutch plates.

The fluid film dynamics are described by the following equation:

(7)
where Φ is the friction material permeability, d is the friction material
thickness, PK,m is the pressure applied to the clutch piston, AK,m is the
pressure-acting area of the clutch piston, Alining,m is the friction
material area, ϕ(hm) is a flow factor, g(hm) is the surface roughness
factor, ηBJ(hm) is the Beavars and Joseph factor, and Qm is a geometric
scaling factor.
The Stribeck model for the clutch coefficient of friction, µK,m, is
described by equation (8).
Figure 5. µK - ωslip data for new BW-6100 friction plate with fresh ATF[10]
By varying one of the parameters in equation (8) while holding the
remaining parameters at their ideal values, it is observed that the
Stribeck factors, ωS and λS, have a marginal effect on the slope of the
µK - ωslip curve at low slip speeds and have a negligible effect for mid
to high slip speeds[5]. Hence, both ωS and λS will be considered fixed
at their respective ideal values as the friction characteristics change,
and only µC and µS will be estimated.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Tuesday, July 31, 2018
‘Noiseless’ and ‘Noisy’ Cases
In the ‘noiseless’ case, the measurable signals (ωH, ωL1, ωL2, P1, and
P2) used in the estimation algorithm are obtained directly from the
simulation. To simulate the noisiness of in-vehicle speed and pressure
measurements, white-Gaussian noise is introduced in the ‘measured’
speed and pressure signals obtained from the simulation. The
noise-to-signal amplitude ratio is 10% for speed signals and 5% for
pressure signals. Examples of a noisy signal superimposed over a
noiseless signal are provided by the following figures, where Figure 6
and Figure 7 show the clutch hub speed and the pressure at clutch #1
for both the ‘noiseless’ and ‘noisy’ cases.
Figure 6. Clutch hub speed, ‘noiseless’ and ‘noisy’ cases
Figure 7. Clutch #1 pressure, ‘noiseless’ and ‘noisy’ cases
Algorithm for the Estimation of Wet Clutch
Friction Parameters
Friction torque at either clutch #1 or #2 is estimated by applying
linear least squares to equations (1), 2, (3). The resulting expressions
for TF1 and TF2 are given by equation (9).
(9)
The flywheel torque (TFW), the torque transmitted through input shafts
#1 and #2 (Tsi1 and Tsi2), and the speeds of the clutch hub, clutch #1,
and clutch #2 (ωH, ωL1, and ωL2) are obtained directly from the
simulation. Note that for implementation in a vehicle, the flywheel
and both input shafts are modeled as compliant elements, so TFW, Tsi1,
and Tsi2 may be calculated using the additional measurements of
engine and wheel speed and the set of equations describing the
rotational dynamics of the powertrain shown in Figure 3 and the
longitudinal dynamics of the vehicle shown in Figure 4.
The accelerations of the clutch hub, clutch #1, and clutch #2 ( ,
, and ) may be estimated by numerical differentiation or by
applying estimation techniques such as the Kalman Filter. The 4th
order central difference method shown in equation (10) is used for
differentiation under ‘noiseless’ conditions, where the speed signals
saved from previous shifts may be used to derive smoothed
estimates of acceleration. This smoothing effect is achieved by
using ‘future’ values of speed to determine acceleration at any
instant in time.
where
(10)
Here, xk is the independent variable at the kth step, h is the time step,
f (xk) is the output function evaluated at xk, and n is the total number
of data points.
The central difference method is not used for differentiation of
‘noisy’ speed signals, because as demonstrated in Figure 8, where the
clutch hub acceleration is derived by applying the 4th order central
difference method to a ‘noisy’ clutch hub speed signal, the level of
noise in the resulting accelerations is magnified. In fact, the level of
noise in the estimated accelerations is so significant that the friction
torque, as well as the coefficient of friction parameters, cannot be
estimated with any reasonably accuracy. Hence for ‘noisy’ conditions,
a modified version of the discrete Kalman estimator presented by Bai
et al. [12] is implemented.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Tuesday, July 31, 2018
Figure 8. Clutch hub acceleration derived by applying the 4th order central
difference method to ‘noisy’ clutch hub speed signal
The Kalman estimator is designed as follows. The discrete plant is
modeled as:
(11)
where x(n) is the vector of state variables at the nth instant, A is the
state matrix, C is the measurement matrix, and G is the state noise
matrix. For acceleration estimation using speed measurements, x, A,
C, and G are given by equations (12), 13, 14, 15).
(12)
(13)
(14)
(15)
Here, T is the sample period. g1 and g2 are process weights for each
state variable. The state estimator is described by:
(16)
is the vector of estimated state variables at the nth instant and L
is the Kalman estimator gain vector. L may be calculated using the
built-in MATLAB function ‘kalman’: kalman(ss(A, G, C, 0, T ), q, r, 0).
q and r are the process noise covariance matrix and measurement
noise covariance matrix, respectively. The discrete Kalman estimator
as implemented in Simulink is shown in Figure 9. g1, g2, q, and r are
selected by matching the clutch hub acceleration estimated with the
Kalman filter to the ‘ideal’ clutch hub acceleration derived by
applying the 4th order central difference method to the ‘noiseless’
clutch hub speed signal. As successfully demonstrated by Hebbale
and Ghoneim[13], such an approach for selecting the aforementioned
filter parameters may be easily adapted for implementation of a
Kalman estimator in a vehicle, where process and measurement noise
may be more significant and noise statistics may not be available.
Figure 10 displays the ‘ideal’ and estimated clutch hub accelerations;
it's observed that the clutch hub acceleration derived with the Kalman
estimator is smooth and generally follows the slowly varying mean
average of the ‘ideal’ derivative.
Figure 9. Simulink implementation of discrete Kalman estimator
Figure 10. Clutch hub acceleration estimated by applying Kalman filter to
‘noisy’ clutch hub speed signal
Estimated and simulated friction torques are shown for a 2-3 upshift
in Figure 11, where the estimation is completed under ‘noiseless’
conditions, and Figure 12, where the estimation is completed under
‘noisy’ conditions. In both cases, clutch #2 is engaged from 1.54s to
2.04s at which time the shift from 2nd to 3rd gear begins. The shift
ends when clutch #1 sticks at 2.74s. For both slipping and sticking
conditions, the estimated and simulated friction torques match
reasonably well for both clutches, with the estimation being more
accurate when completed under ‘noiseless conditions’. We note here
that the quality of the friction torque estimation depends on the
fidelity of the rotational dynamic model and how accurately the
accelerations of the clutch hub, clutch #1, and clutch #2 ( , ,
and ) are estimated. Also, the estimation accuracy for the ‘noisy’
case is worst when the clutch is completely disengaged; however,
data obtained during the completely disengaged state is not used to
estimate coefficient of friction parameters.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Tuesday, July 31, 2018

Figure 11. Estimated (noiseless case) and simulated friction torques during a
2-3 upshift

Figure 13. Estimated (with lookup table) and simulated film thickness during
a 2-3 upshift, ‘noiseless’ case

Figure 12. Estimated (noisy case) and simulated friction torques during a 2-3
upshift

Recalling equation (5), the viscous friction torque is modeled as a

function of the slip speed, the temperature of the transmission fluid at
the friction interface, and the fluid film thickness. Hence, the viscous
torque may be estimated if the slip speed and transmission fluid
temperature are measured and if the fluid film thickness can be
estimated. Assuming that the film dynamics are much faster than the
overall clutch engagement process, the film thickness is estimated
using a lookup table of clutch pressure versus film thickness. Figure 14. Estimated and simulated viscous friction torque during a 2-3
upshift, ‘noiseless’ case

(17)

For a 2-3 upshift, estimated and simulated clutch film thicknesses and
viscous friction torques are shown for the ‘noiseless’ case in Figure
13 and Figure 14, and for the ‘noisy’ case in Figure 15 and Figure 16.
In both cases, the estimated clutch film thicknesses and viscous
friction torques are good matches for the respective simulated terms.
Note that the estimation of the film thicknesses and viscous torques is
least accurate when the clutch is in the mechanical contact phase.
Recalling from the section describing the powertrain model
development, the viscous friction torque decreases to zero throughout
the mechanical contact phase of clutch engagement; since viscous
torque is negligible during this phase, error in the estimates of film
thickness and viscous torque is inconsequential. We can also
conclude that ‘noisy’ speed signals do not significantly affect the
estimation of film thickness or viscous friction torque. Hence, it is
reasonable to estimate film thickness using a lookup table of clutch
pressure versus film thickness, regardless of the condition (‘noiseless’ Figure 15. Estimated (with lookup table) and simulated film thickness during
or ‘noisy’) in which the estimation is completed. a 2-3 upshift, ‘noisy’ case
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Tuesday, July 31, 2018
Figure 16. Estimated and simulated viscous friction torque during a 2-3
upshift, ‘noisy’ case
The contact friction torque is estimated by subtracting the viscous
friction torque from the clutch friction torque. Coefficient of friction
data is then generated using the expression described by equation (6),
where contact friction torque is a function of clutch slip speed and the
coefficient of friction. The static coefficient of friction, µS, is
calculated by taking the average of the coefficient of friction data
points that correspond to the low slip speed regime of the mechanical
contact phase. Recalling the description of the powertrain model, the
clutch is locked-up when the slip speed is within the range of ±ωrel,
and the clutch is slipping when |ωslip,m | - ωrel > 0. In addition, the
difference between the Patir and Cheng flow factors governs the
transition from the partial lubrication phase to mechanical contact
phase - the viscous torque approaches zero as ϕf (hm) - ϕfs (hm)
approaches zero. Hence, the coefficient of friction data points that
correspond to the low slip speed regime of the mechanical contact
phase are selected by applying the following conditional statements
to slip speed and film thickness data:
0 < |ωslip,m | - ωrel ≤ ωstick,TOL and ϕf (hm) - ϕfs (hm) < 0.6. ωstick,TOL,
defined as the stick tolerance, is set equal to 0.5 rad/s. For estimation
under ‘noisy’ conditions, the remaining outliers in the coefficient of
friction data, primarily caused by noise in the slip speed signals, are
eliminated by removing coefficient of friction data points that deviate
from the previous static coefficient estimate by more than the error
tolerance, Etolerance. Etolerance is set equal to 20%.
µC is estimated using the linear least squares solution described by
equation (18).
(18)
Here, µS is the most recent estimate of the static coefficient of
friction. The following conditional statements are applied to remove
coefficient of friction data points that correspond to a completely
disengaged clutch or a clutch operating in the hydrodynamic
lubrication phase of engagement: 0.6 < (ϕf (hm) - ϕfs(hm))<0.85 and
ωslip,m >1 rad/s. For the ‘noiseless case’, these conditional statements
ensure that the coefficient of friction data points used in the parameter
estimation are obtained during the desired phases of engagement.
However, when the noise levels in the slip speed signal are
significant, the slip speed does not monotonically decrease toward
zero during engagement or monotonically increase from zero during
disengagement. This behavior causes some coefficient of friction data
points corresponding to a locked-up clutch to be used in the
estimation of µC. Thus, for the ‘noisy’ case, the following condition is
applied: Pa/s. Here, the derivative of clutch
pressure, which is calculated using a Kalman estimator, must be
much greater than the clutch spring stiffness, KK,m. This condition
guarantees that the clutch cavity is full and that the clutch is stroking.
For both the ‘noiseless’ and ‘noisy’ cases, data from three complete
shift cycles is used for parameter estimation. In this paper, a shift
cycle is defined as the sequential shifting from 1st gear - 6th gear - 1st
gear, The estimated friction parameters for both clutch #1 and clutch
#2 are summarized for the ‘noiseless’ case in Table 2, and for the
‘noisy’ case in Table 3. For clutch #1, the percent error in the
estimates of the Coulomb and static coefficients of friction are 6.32%
and −4.92% respectively for the ‘noiseless’ case, and 7.49% and
−0.75% respectively for the ‘noisy’ case. For clutch #2, the percent
error in the estimates of the Coulomb and static coefficients of
friction are 2.41% and −7.87% respectively for the ‘noiseless’ case,
and 5.35% and −2.56% respectively for the ‘noisy’ case. In addition,
all estimated µC values are greater than the corresponding µC value.
Thus, this estimation algorithm is accurate enough to recognize the
slope of the µK - ωslip curve. Given data from dozens or even
hundreds of shift cycles rather than three, the estimation accuracy
may be further improved by making more restrictive the conditional
statements that are applied to the coefficient of friction data to
remove outlier data points (e.g., reduce the stick tolerance and reduce
the error tolerance).
Table 2. Estimation of ideal coefficient of friction parameters, ‘noiseless’ case
Table 3. Estimation of ideal coefficient of friction parameters, ‘noisy’ case
To demonstrate that the friction parameter estimation scheme
performs well for ideal as well as poor clutch friction cases,
simulations of three shift cycles are completed for each set of
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Tuesday, July 31, 2018
parameters listed in Table 4. Note that the ideal parameters are
identical to those found in Table 1. For cases 1 and 2, the static
coefficient of friction is increased while the Coulomb coefficient of
friction is decreased. Both parameters are scaled relative to their ideal
values. Note that the slope of the µK - ωslip curve is positive for the
ideal case and case 1, but is negative for case 2. For all three
parameter sets, the percent error in the estimate of each friction
parameter is provided in Table A.1 (‘noiseless’ case) and Table A.2
(‘noisy’ case) in Appendix A.
Table 4. Simulated coefficient of friction parameters for parameter estimation
The estimation scheme performs well regardless of the simulated
friction parameters. The percent error is less than 10% for all
estimated parameters, except for the Coulomb coefficient of friction
when case 2 friction parameters are simulated. Despite the decreased
estimation accuracy for case 2, µS and µC are still estimated with
enough accuracy to differentiate between a positive and a negative
µK - ωslip slope.
Summary and Recommendations
In this paper, an algorithm for the estimation of wet clutch friction
parameters is developed and evaluated using a simulation of a
powertrain utilizing a DCT. Since the commonly used static friction
model is only accurate for high-energy (high clutch pressure and high
initial slip speed) clutch engagements, the clutch friction modeled in
the simulation incorporates fluid film squeeze dynamics. Assuming
for the purpose of estimation a static relationship between clutch fluid
film thickness and clutch pressure, the viscous component of clutch
friction torque is estimated. The contact component of clutch friction
torque is then calculated by subtracting the viscous torque from the
total clutch friction torque, which is estimated using measured
rotational speeds and estimated accelerations at the input and output
sides of the clutch. From the contact friction torque, coefficient of
friction data is generated. A Stribeck friction model is fit to the data,
and parameters in the model are then calculated by applying linear
least squares estimation. Of the four parameters in the Stribeck
model, only the static friction coefficient and Coulomb friction
coefficient are estimated here. The parameter estimation is performed
under both ‘noiseless’ and ‘noisy’ conditions. In the ‘noiseless’ case,
clutch accelerations and pressure derivatives are obtained by
differentiating stored clutch speed and pressure signals. In the ‘noisy’
case, white-Gaussian noise is introduced in the stored signals, with a
noise-to-signal amplitude ratio of 10% for speed signals and 5% for
pressure signals.
Three sets of coefficient of friction parameters are simulated. Results
are presented for the estimation of each parameter set. The percent
error is less than 10% for all estimated parameters, except for the
Coulomb coefficient of friction when case 2 friction parameters are
simulated. However, despite the decreased estimation accuracy for
case 2, µS and µC are still estimated with enough accuracy to
differentiate between a positive and a negative µK - ωslip slope.
We note that the acceptable percent error in the estimate is a function
of intended use of the friction estimate. For this paper, with a focus
on developing the estimation algorithm without reference to a specific
use of the friction estimate,10% error in the friction estimate is a
reasonable target value. The allowable percent error should be further
refined when specific uses of the friction estimate are established, and
is an area for future work.
The most obvious limitation of the proposed friction parameter
estimation scheme is posed by the measurement noise observed in
practice that may not have been adequately captured in this work.
Thus, experimental validation is needed to evaluate the accuracy of
the estimation algorithm as implemented in a vehicle.
Other topics for future study are worth noting as well. Only
ungrooved clutch friction plates are modeled here; however, modern
friction plates typically have complex groove patterns. Therefore,
clutch friction models would need to be suitably modified along with
the friction estimation scheme. Also, the mean value engine model
used here does not consider the perturbations in the torque output of a
multi-cylinder engine. For a lightly-damped powertrain such as a
DCT, such perturbations on the engine torque may result in clutch
slip speed perturbations and affect the estimated friction. Hence, a
sensitivity study is needed to investigate the effect of engine torque
perturbations and powertrain damping on the accuracy of the
estimation algorithm.
References
1. Rizzoni, G., and Srinivasan K.. “ME7236: Powertrain Dynamics
Class Notes.” The Ohio State University, 2012.
2. Grzesiak, A., Lam, R., Fairbank, D., Martin, K. et al., “Friction
Clutches” in “Design Practices: Passenger Car Automatic
Transmissions,” (Warrendale, SAE International, 2012),
doi:10.4271/AE-29.
3. Berglund, K., Marklund, P., Larsson, R., Pach, M. et al., “Wet
Clutch Degradation Monitored by Lubricant Analysis,” SAE
Technical Paper 2010-01-2232, 2010, doi:10.4271/2010-01-
2232.
4. Lam, R., Chavdar, B., and Newcomb, T., “New Generation
Friction Materials and Technologies,” SAE Technical Paper
2006-01-0150, 2006, doi:10.4271/2006-01-0150.
5. Barr, M. “Dynamic Modeling, Friction Parameter Estimation,
and Control of a Dual Clutch Transmission.” The Ohio State
University, 2014.
6. Deur, J., Petric, J., Asgari, J., and Hrovat, D., “Modeling of
Wet Clutch Engagement Including a Thorough Experimental
Validation,” SAE Technical Paper 2005-01-0877, 2005,
doi:10.4271/2005-01-0877.
7. Ivanović, V., Herold, Z., Deur, J., Hancock, M. et al.,
“Experimental Characterization of Wet Clutch Friction
Behaviors Including Thermal Dynamics,” SAE Int. J. Engines
2(1):1211-1220, 2009, doi:10.4271/2009-01-1360.
8. Karnopp, D. “Computer-Simulation of Stick-Slip Friction in
Mechanical Dynamic-Systems.” Journal of Dynamic Systems
Measurement and Control-Transactions of the Asme 107, no. 1
(1985): 100-03, doi:10.1115/1.3140698.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Tuesday, July 31, 2018
9. Deur, J., Asgari J., and Hrovat D.. “Modelling of an Automotive
Planetary Gear Set Based on Karnopp Model for Clutch
Friction.” In ASME 2003 International Mechanical Engineering
Congress and Exposition, 8 pages. Washington, Dc, USA:
ASME, 2003, doi:10.1115/IMECE2003-41693.
10. Tersigni, S., Henly, T., Iyer, R., Cleveland, C. et al., “New
Durability Testing of Dual Clutch Transmission Fluids,” SAE
Technical Paper 2008-01-2397, 2008, doi:10.4271/2008-01-
2397.
11. Yang, Y., Lam, R., and Fujii, T., “Prediction of Torque Response
During the Engagement of Wet Friction Clutch,” SAE Technical
Paper 981097, 1998, doi:10.4271/981097.
12. Bai, S., Maguire, J., and Peng, H., “Dynamic Analysis
and Control System Design of Automatic Transmissions,”
(Warrendale, SAE International, 2013), doi:10.4271/R-413.
13. Hebbale, K. V., and Ghoneim Y. A.. “A Speed and Acceleration
Estimation Algorithm for Powertrain Control.” Paper presented
at the American Control Conference, 1991, 26-28 June 1991,
ISBN 0-87942-565-2: 415-420.
Contact Information
Please contact Professor K. (Cheena) Srinivasan
Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering
The Ohio State University
srinivasan.3@osu.edu
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of California Berkeley, Tuesday, July 31, 2018

APPENDIX
APPENDIX A
Table A.1. Estimation of varying sets of coefficient of friction parameters, ‘noiseless’ case

Table A.2. Estimation of varying sets of coefficient of friction parameters, ‘noisy’ case

The Engineering Meetings Board has approved this paper for publication. It has successfully completed SAE’s peer review process under the supervision of the session organizer. The process
requires a minimum of three (3) reviews by industry experts.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or
otherwise, without the prior written permission of SAE International.

Positions and opinions advanced in this paper are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE International. The author is solely responsible for the content of the paper.

ISSN 0148-7191

http://papers.sae.org/2015-01-1146