Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical

Engineers, Part D: Journal of Automobile

Engineering
http://pid.sagepub.com/

Vehicle Dynamics−−Theory into Practice

D A Crolla
Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part D: Journal of Automobile Engineering 1996 210: 83
DOI: 10.1243/PIME_PROC_1996_210_250_02

The online version of this article can be found at:

http://pid.sagepub.com/content/210/2/83

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

Institution of Mechanical Engineers

Additional services and information for Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part D: Journal of Automobile
Engineering can be found at:

Email Alerts: http://pid.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

Subscriptions: http://pid.sagepub.com/subscriptions

Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

Citations: http://pid.sagepub.com/content/210/2/83.refs.html

>> Version of Record - Apr 1, 1996

What is This?

Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on October 16, 2014


Automobile Division Chairman's Address
Vehicle dynamics-theory
D A Crola, BTech, DTech, CEng, FIAgrE, FIMechE
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Leeds
The paper reviews the contributions of vehicle dynamics theory to practical vehicle design. I n particular, it focuses on actively con-
trolled components, for example active suspension, four wheel steering, and their impact on vehicle performance and safety.
K e y words: vehicle dynamics, ride, handling, suspensions, active control
1 HISTORICAL OVERVIEW
Vehicle dynamics is a relatively young subject. The first
notable attempts to understand ride vibration were in
the 1920s, but it was not until the 1930s that published
work on steering, stability and suspensions began to
appear. No review of the development of vehicle
dynamics would be complete without recognizing the
contributions of Frederick W. Lanchester during these
early years. Arguably the most outstanding engineer of
his generation, his deliberations on vehicle design were
both perceptive and profound despite the lack of formal
theory at that time and they still make fascinating
reading today. Another of the key figures in the devel-
opment of the subject, Maurice Olley (l), later sum-
marized the situation in the early 1930s as follows:
'There had been sporadic attempts to make the vehicle
ride decently, but little had been done. The rear pass-
enger still functioned as ballast, stuck out behind the rear
wheels. Steering was frequently unstable and the front
axle with front brakes made shimmy almost inevitable.
The engineers had made all the parts function excellently,
but when put together the whole was seldom satisfac-
tory.'
Progress on understanding the ride motions of vehi-
cles was made by applying the principles of engineering
vibration theory. However, putting this theory into
practice was not so straightforward since it involved
lots of suspension design issues. It was probably during
this period that the importance of compromise between
ride comfort and handling behaviour was first recog-
nized. In 1932, Olley built his famous K2 rig-a car
frame with movable masses-and coined the phrase 'flat
ride' as he tried to put theory into practice. In 1936,
Lanchester (2) read his magnum opus at the Institution
of Automobile Engineers, summarizing his understand-
ing of vehicle dynamics developed over the previous 30
years and leading to arguments in favour of indepen-
dent suspension.
The analysis of handling and steering, however, was
not so straightforward. Although various authors had
tried to develop simple mechanistic views to explain the
turning motion of automobiles, it was not really until
the mid-1950s that a sound theoretical groundwork
was laid. Milliken (3) refers to an event in 1956 as a
This Address was presented at Divisional Centre Meetings ofthe Automobile Diui-
sion held during the 1995-6 session. The M S was received on 28 June 1995 and
was accepted for publication on 25 July 1995.
DO3495 Q IMechE 1996
Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on October 16, 2014
83
into practice
'watershed' in the development of vehicle dynamics. The
Institution of Mechanical Engineers organized a meet-
ing in London on 'Research in automobile stability and
control and in tyre performance'. The papers given then
(see Fig. 1) are now regarded as seminal in vehicle
dynamics and they are still widely referred to in the
United States simply as 'The IME Papers'. Two key fea-
tures were instrumental in enabling this step forward in
understanding to occur-one theoretical and one prac-
tical. First, it was recognized that theory developed to
study aircraft stability and control could profitably be
applied to the automobile. Second, the huge importance
of the main force-generating element-the tyre-had
been recognized and experimental rigs had been com-
missioned to measure the force and moment properties
of tyres. This work provided for the first time a com-
prehensive understanding of both the theory and prac-
tice of the linear handling response regime-up to
lateral accelerations of around 0.3 g - o f the automobile.
The interested student of vehicle dynamics should
refer to Segel's Keynote Address to the 1993 Institution
of Mechanical Engineers Conference on 'Vehicle Ride
and Handling'. This paper (4) provides probably the
AUTOMOBILE DIVISION
T H E INSTITUTION OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERS
rnOIHLUI
, K O I I Y X " n Y C 7°F ,YSIII"T!OH OF ""m"0II'I
RESEARCH IN AUTOMOBILE STABILITY A N D CONTROL
A N D IN TYRE PERFORMANCE
GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO A PROGRAMME OF
DYNAMIC RESEARCH
B, U i l l l s i F. MYlllum. jmn., SB.,nmd Lhvid W. WUcnnb. M.S.L. S.M.
THEORETICAL PREDICTION AND EXPERIMENTAL SUBSTANTIATION
OF THE RESPONSE OF THE AUTOMOBILE TO STEERING CONTROL
0, Len8dsacl,M&lw.
A DEVICE FOR MEASURING MECHANICAL
CHARACTERISTICS OF TYRES ON THE ROAD
s.6
By WiIItm Clm, mnd Cllnoord L MY~UY.
TYRE TESTS AND INTERPRETATION OF EXPERIMENTAL DATA
By *ILut C. F a M E . , MA
DESIGN IMPLICATIONS OF A GENERAL THEORY OF
AUTOMOBILE STABILITY AND CONTROL
B)D~~ldW.Whll~o~b.B.A.S.B..S.M..~ndW1111~mF.Mlllik~n.jun..S.B.
Fig. 1 Front cover of 'The IME Papers'
Proc Instn Mech Engrs Vol210
84
best review written to date of the development of the
subject written with the perspective of an engineer
whose own contribution between 1950 and 1990 was
of enormous significance. Table 1 provides a brief
summary of progress using the periods suggested by
Segel.
The following decades saw lots of vehicle dynamics
activity as manufacturers recognized that ride and
handling behaviour were critical in making a competi-
tive product. Consumers in different countries took dif-
ferent views of how the ride and handling compromises
of their cars were set-a powerful reminder of the
importance of subjective evaluation in vehicle dynamics.
Computer codes were developed to enable ever-
increasing levels of complexity to be modelled. In par-
ticular, the use of multibody system (MBS) dynamics
codes (for example ADAMS, DADS) became com-
monplace, allowing the formulation of equations of
motion for complex models which could never have
been tackled by hand.
In the practical world, testing using ride meters,
special surfaces, steering pads, lane change, J turn
manoeuvres etc. become more sophisticated and an
understanding of non-linear, limit handling behaviour
was developed.
The next landmark, however, in vehicle dynamics was
the development of active suspension control. Again,
this was a classic example of theory into practice; the
fundamental ideas and laws were probably first brought
together best by Thomson (5) although much of the
basic work had occurred in the early 1960s and Lotus
(6) are credited with the introduction of the first proto-
type system on a vehicle in the early 1980s. The concept
of using actively controlled elements to influence vehicle
dynamic behaviour opened up a vast new range of pos-
sibilities; previously, all vehicle dynamics development
had relied on tuning of passive components, for
example springs, dampers, bushes, etc.
Once interest in controlled systems had been awak-
ened, a vast range of ideas flourished-particularly in
theoretical studies aimed at developing sophisticated
control laws and predicting the potential benefits
offered. The key to implementing these ideas, however,
Table 1 Summary of progress during the early years of
vehicle dynamics using the periods suggested by
Segel(4)
Period I (up to the early 1930s)
Empirical observations about vehicle dynamic behaviour
Concerns about wheel shimmy
Ride comfort recognized as an important aspect of vehicle
performance
Period I1 (from the early 1930s to 1952)
Simple tyre mechanics/slip angle understood
Understeer/oversteer defined
Steady concerning understood
Simple two degree of freedom equations developed
Ride experiments begun, KZrig and ‘flat ride’ ideas proposed
Independent front suspensions introduced
Period HI (1952 onwards)
Understanding of tyre behaviour developed through rig results
and modelling
Three degree of freedom equations developed
Analysis extended to include stability and directional response
properties
Ride predictions using random vibration theory initiated
Part D: Journal of Automobile Engineering
Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on October 16, 2014
D A CROLLA
turned out to be the practical designs of the actuators
and associated control elements, for example electrohy-
draulic valves. Even today, it is the cost-effectivenessof
these components which remains the biggest challenge
to the widespread introduction of active systems.
The subject of vehicle dynamics has, therefore, devel-
oped enormously over the past 60 years. The fundamen-
tals have been firmly established, the importance of tyre
forces recognized and engineers now have at their dis-
posal powerful computing tools, for example MBS
packages, which enable them to use hugely complicated
vehicle models involving tens or even hundreds of
degrees of freedom. And now, to add to that, they have
control design software which facilitates the design of
actively controlled elements within the vehicle system
model.
But the big question remains ‘Is this wealth of theory
being exploited in practice? Opinion is somewhat
divided. It is an undisputed fact that one cannot design
complicated vehicle dynamics systems without a funda-
mental understanding of their behaviour. In this sense,
therefore, there is nothing as practical as theory. Yet it
is equally true that the vast majority of practical vehicle
dynamics development of new model ranges is done in
practice by subjective assessment. All major vehicle
manufacturers still rely on teams of test engineers with
highly developed skills in subjective assessment. So
despite all the developments in theory, there is not a
vehicle manufacturer in the world for whom theory has
replaced their elaborate programmes of practical testing
and subjective evaluation.
This paper aims to contribute to the debate of how
theoretical dynamics has contributed to practical
vehicle design and to review the recent advances in so-
called ‘intelligent’ systems which may ultimately lead to
further improvements in practical vehicle dynamics.
2 SCOPE
Vehicle dynamics covers a vast range of subject material
since strictly it refers to the study of anything that moves
relating t o vehicle systems. The scope will, however, be
restricted in this paper to concentrate on just two areas;
ride and handling. These two subjects have largely
developed separately and the first dynamics question to
address is a rather fundamental one, ‘How can this be
justified when it is clear in the real world that vehicles
are subject to ride and handling inputs simultaneously?
The answer lies in a combination of theory and prag-
matism. Firstly, it can be argued that the vehicle modes
which dominate ride (bounce, pitch, roll, wheel vertical
motions) are weakly coupled in a dynamics sense with
those which dominate handling (lateral, yaw, forward
speed, roll). In practical terms, this theoretical idea sug-
gests that the forcing inputs in the vertical direction
dominate motions in that direction (ride) and have little
influence on lateral or yaw motions. Equally, lateral
forces generated at the tyres completely dominate the
handling response and have little effect on ride vibra-
tion. Of course, this decoupling argument is not per-
fectly true and most vehicle engineers recognize that roll
motion is a significant factor in coupling ride and hand-
ling motions together. Also, the two motions are inextri-
cably linked in another practical sense; there is an
Q IMechE 1996
 VEHICLE DYNAMICS-THEORY
inevitable compromise or trade-off in vehicle design
between the ride and handling behaviour. Secondly, the
pragmatic influence is simply that it is too difficult to
analyse all the vehicle dynamics at once. There are also
some missing bits of tyre dynamics data which preclude
this anyway. Hence, if the studies are concerned with
gaining some understanding and insight into vehicle
dynamic response in order ultimately to influence prac-
tical design features, then it is justifiable to deal with
ride and handling separately.
3 RIDE DYNAMICS
The important performance properties associated with
ride dynamics are shown in Fig. 2. The designer has to
achieve good ride comfort for driver and passengers,
acceptable control of the body attitude and adequate
control of the dynamic tyre loads within the constraint
of only having a restricted amount of suspension
working space available. The simplest mathematical
model to analyse these issues appears to be the seven
degree of freedom system shown in Fig. 3. However, for
various subtle dynamics reasons, it transpires that the
fundamental features which dominate suspension design
are actually captured in the apparently trivial single
wheel station or ‘quarter car’ model (Fig. 4), which has
two degrees of freedom.
Ride comfort of Control of body
occupants attitude - pitch, roll
Control of dynamic
tyre loads
Fig. 2 The main performance criteria for vehicle ride
dynamics
/
f/
Fig. 3 Schematic seven degree of freedom ride model (body
bounce, lateral, roll and four vertical wheel motions)
Q IMechE 1996
Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on October 16, 2014
INTO PRACTICE 85
Despite the apparent simplicity of this model, the
interpretation of predicted results which leads to useful
design information is not straightforward. For example,
take the situation in Fig. 4 in which this model is
excited by a realistic, random road input. There are
three performance criteria and these may be sum-
marized by their root mean square values in response to
the random road input. However, a designer will imme-
diately wish to repeat such calculations for lots of alter-
native values of spring stiffness and damping. Typical
results are shown in Fig. 5 for the rear wheel station of
a luxury car on a typical minor road at 20 m/s. The
compromise between, for example, body acceleration
and suspension working space can be conveniently
quantified, and through the study of such theoretically
generated information, an insight into the performance
implications of various design choices can be obtained.
These issues are normally classified as ‘primary ride’
and this example can be proposed as a successful case of
theory into practice. Of course, such studies do not
provide the complete picture of the ride vibration
environment in a real vehicle. A host of other aspects
influence the occupant’s subjective assessments of ride,
for example, higher frequency response ( > 15 Hz),
harshness, effect of suspension bushes, response to lon-
gitudinal inputs from bumps, potholes, human response
to vibration, etc. These are often referred to as ‘second-
ary ride’ effects and mathematical modelling is nowhere
near as successful in predicting these effects accurately.
To take one example, the perceived harshness rating of
a suspension in response to a discrete input such as a
pothole involves the dynamic response of the tyre as it
deforms around the input, both the longitudinal and
vertical (non-linear) dynamics of the suspension and the
response properties of the driver. There are so many
uncertainties surrounding each of these three areas that
manufacturers must rely on subjectively-based develop-
ment using experienced test drivers. However, that is
not to suggest that modelling does not have its place; it
can still be used to provide designers with insight into
trends of behaviour. A classic example related to
responses to discrete events would be to pursue non-
linear modelling of a short, stiff bumpstop design versus
a longer, more flexible version to try to understand the
relationships between their energy absorption charac-
teristics and driver ratings.
The subtlety of some of the effects which are per-
ceived subjectively can be illustrated by another
example. Currently, the best quantitative measure of
ride performance is obtained using a ridemeter in which
information from a range of accelerometers and rate
gyroscopes is processed with each translational and
rotational motion being filtered and summed according
to empirical expressions derived from human response
to vibration tests. However, recent results show that
vehicles assessed by this relatively sophisticated objec-
tive test would not typically be ranked in the same
order by subjective assessments of a group of experi-
enced ride engineers. Clearly, there is still a future
research need to investigate the correlation between
theoretical predictions, objective measurements and
subjective assessments of ride dynamics.
Turning to the potential for actively controlled ele-
ments in ride vibration, the first theoretical work dates
back to the early 1960s (5). This proved the potential for
Proc Instn Mech Engrs Vol 210
86
Fig. 4 The single wheel station model which captures the primary suspen-
sion issues
the so-called ‘fully active’ system (Fig. 6) in which the
passive suspension components are replaced by a high-
bandwidth actuator. In practice, this would typically be
a hydraulic actuator and servohydraulic valve system
with a frequency response up to perhaps 100 Hz.The
theoretical challenge was to derive a control law which
controlled the demand force across the actuator in such
a way that the suspension delivered better performance
than was possible with the passive components. The
solution now looks rather simple though it represented
a significant achievement at the time. The control force
is simply a function of the system state variables
u = klx, + k 2 21 + k , i, + k 4 Z z + k , 2 2
where kl to k , are constants which were first calculated
using linear optimal control theory in order to minimize
a performance index which, not surprisingly, contained
the three parameters already discussed in Fig. 4. Note
that this is a more generalized form of the force gener-
ated by a passive system
u = k(2, - z 2 ) + c(i, - 52)
and note also that the active control force involves the
difficulty of measuring the road input, xo .
However, it was clear from the wealth of popular
technical literature at the time that misconceptions were
rife and all sorts of extreme performance claims were
made which the systems could never deliver. The key
point is that because the actuator must still be con-
nected between the body and the wheel, the design
problem still involves a compromise between the three
performance parameters. Realistically with such
systems, improvements of around 35 per cent (Fig. 7) in
ride comfort plus control of the body attitude during
cornering and braking are achievable. These are
Part D: Journal of Automobile Engineering
Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on October 16, 2014
D A CROLLA
undoubtedly significant improvements but they can
only be achieved at significant costs-both in hardware
as shown in Fig. 8 (7)and power consumption. After
their brief but high-profile introduction into racing and
after a huge volume of prototype testing and develop-
ment by the world’s vehicle manufacturers, fully active
systems have been dropped-a case of theory not
coming into practice.
However, following further theoretical work looking
at the fundamental mechanisms (8) by which improve-
ments were obtained with controlled systems, a much
more promising alternative system was proposed-the
limited bandwidth active system (commonly, but some-
what misleadingly referred to as ‘slow active’ in the
literature) shown in Fig. 9. In simplistic terms, this
system operates by using active control in the low-
frequency range (up to 5 or 6 Hz)and reverting to a
conventional passive system above this frequency when
the valve can no longer respond. Thus, it retains the
benefits of controlling body attitude and primary ride
around body resonances, without attempting to provide
control at higher frequencies, for which it transpires
that passive systems are optimal anyway. Such systems
still have major cost, power and reliability implications
but are now accepted as being the preferred technical
solution from a theoretical viewpoint and likely to be
engineered using hydropneumatic components (9) from
a practical viewpoint as illustrated in Fig. 10.
4 HANDLING DYNAMICS
Coincidentally, the simplest model which leads to a fun-
damental understanding of vehicle handling also has
two degrees of freedom. In this case (Fig. ll), they are
the lateral and yaw velocities with the forward speed
assumed constant.
Q IMechE 19%
 VEHICLE DYNAMICS-THEORY INTO PRACTICE 87

Damping ratio,d = 0.1 -

0.1
=0,3 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .
= 0.5 ........... .
d=o.7 z2 t
-
d = 0.9 -
I"
Control
force
demand

1"
z' t
xo t
Fig. 6 Principle of a fully active suspension system in which
a controllable actuator replaces the passive suspen-
sion

0 1 2 3 4 cussion of vehicle handling behaviour. The analysis

shows that this important under/oversteer balance
depends on the stability margin, which is defined as
bC, - aC,
in which a and b define the centre of gravity (c.g.)
position and Cf and C, are the front and rear tyre
cornering stiffnesses. If this term is positive the vehicle

01 I I I
0 1 2 3 4

Sprung mass natural frequency -

fn
Hz
Fig. 5 Comprehensive set of root mean square (r.m.s.) results
from a single wheel station model, fn = (spring
stiffness/body mass)'''

The vehicle is subject to a force system which is

dominated by the tyre forces (Fig. 12). The only other
forces are due to aerodynamic effects; these are nor-
mally of secondary importance but can easily be added
as the analysis becomes more elaborate. When the tyres
operate at slip angles, that is with a combination of L

forward and sideslip velocities, they generate lateral

forces which are responsible for guiding, controlling and 1.6 -
stabilizing the vehicle. Note interestingly from Fig. 13
that the driver does not have direct control over these
forces! The driver only has indirect control by varying
the steer angle applied at the front wheels. Note also 1.4 -
that the complete system involves the dynamics of the
driver who is physically present in the feedback control , , , I , 1 , , , , , , , 1 , , , , , , , , ,
loop. This raises some interesting control issues but 1.2 1.4 1.6
since engineers cannot become involved in the 'design' R.m.s. tyre load variation
of human properties, they have understandably focused kN
on the design of the vehicle. Fig. 7 Predicted r.m.s. results for various controllable sus-
The equations of motion and subsequent analysis pension systems assuming same conditions as for Fig.
lead to the fundamental idea of understeer and ouersteer, 5 and-a constant maximum r.m.s. workspace usage of
terms which are synonymous with any technical dis- 30 mm
Q IMcchE 1996 Proc Instn Mech Engrs Vol210

Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on October 16, 2014

88 D A CROLLA

Sensors: pressure sensors, height

sensors

radiator, filter
Fig. 8 Typical implementation of an active suspension control system (7)

is understeer; if it is negative the vehicle is oversteer. All these design parameters can be used to tune the
This result appears to be fairly trivial since it derives under/oversteer balance and their qualitative effects can
from such a simple model. However, it incorporates a be established from the simple two degree of freedom
crucial notion which enables it to be applied powerfully model. Theory provides a crucial important insight into
outside the strict terms of the reference of the model. practical issues at this level and further explanation is
The first term is proportional to the ‘force generation provided in reference (10).
capacity at the rear wheels’ (more strictly, it is the This analysis provides a building block which leads
moment of that force around the c.g.) and the second on to more elaborate models. The appropriateness of
term to the ‘force generation capacity at the front any model is not simply linked to the level of detail
wheels’. The designer can, therefore, use and extrapolate
this term to understand the effects of
(a) c.g. positions, vehicle loading conditions;
(b) tyre cornering stiffnesses, effect of tyre size and pres-
sure;
(c) camber angles front and rear;
(d) load transfer across each axle;
(e) roll steer effects;
(f) compliance steer effects.

Suspensiondisplacement
I
Body acceleration
Body mass

Fig. 9 Principle of the limited bandwidth (slow active) Fig. 10 Two potential implementations of the limited band-
control system width active system
Part D: Journal of Automobile Engineering Q IMechE 19%

Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on October 16, 2014

 VEHICLE DYNAMICS-THEORY INTO PRACTICE 89

involved, but also to the particular aspect of handling

under investigation. There are three regimes of interest :
(a) linear, low lateral acceleration ( < 0.39);
Axis system A, (b) non-linear, up to limiting lateral acceleration ( z0.8s
moving with the typically);
(c) non-linear, combined cornering and braking/
accelerating manoeuvres.
The first of these can usefully be investigated with a
model of moderate complexity-using perhaps up to
seven degrees of freedom for which the equations can be
developed manually. To be useful in a practical design
context it would need to include body lateral, yaw and
roll motions, suspension kinematic effects, main suspen-
Ground-fixed sion compliance effects, steering system, etc. and aero-
axis system, G dynamic force and moment data would be needed for
high-speed straight running studies. Such models have
Y been used successfully in practice to quantify the effects
Fig. 11 Plan view of the two degree of freedom vehicle of the design parameters mentioned earlier (see for
model showing the lateral velocity u and yaw veloc- example Table 2). For the second and third regimes, the
ity r variables and constant forward speed u derivation of non-linear equations is generally too com-
plicated to do manually and it is now commonplace to
use one of the MBS codes.
Front tyre cornering stiffness = Cf
The question then arises of what potential benefits
can active systems offer to handling dynamics. There
are two types of system; active suspension control and
active steering control. The first type has already been
introduced in the ride dynamics section. Controlling the
Front tyre vertical suspension motion has at least three potential
lateral force
handling advantages:
(a) no roll cornering;
(b) control of the balance of load transfer distribution
between front and rear axles;
(c) better dynamic tyre load control.
Experience suggests that the first of these is rated
very highly from subjective evaluations. The quantitat-
ive benefits would not appear to be so dramatic; there is
slightly less load transfer as a result of eliminating roll
Rear tyre angle, suspension kinematic effects are removed and, in
lateral force transient manoeuvres, no energy is ‘wasted‘ in exciting
the vehicle roll mode. Simpler methods of achieving roll
control during cornering have been studied in prototype
Rear tyre cornering stiffness = C, form over the last few years. Most of them rely on intro-
Fig. 12 Tyre forces acting on the vehicle during turning ducing an additional moment into the anti-roll bar in
(forces for two wheels assumed to be summed order to counteract body roll. This can be done, for
together) example, with a rotary actuator in the middle of the bar

Desired
motion Steer Slip 5re - Vehicle Vehicle motion
angle - angles - forces dynamics F

Feedback information, e.g. visual, lateral acceleration

I
Fig. 13 Block diagram of the driver-vehicle system indicating the driver’s
indirect control over the tyre force system
fQIMechE 1996 Proc Instn Mech Engrs Vol 210

Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on October 16, 2014

90 D A CROLLA

Table 2 Typical range of steady state results from a four degree of freedom vehicle handling model
Understeer parameter contribution
dedg
Ford On-off-road vehicle Volvo
Term Description Pinto Granada Laden Unladen 264 760
~~ ~~ ~

1 Tyre cornering stiffness 0.6 1 0.43 -0.51 0.08 0.3 1 0.99

2 Front tyre camber stiffness 1.61 0.05 -0.64 -0.40 0.12 0.13
3 Front roll steer 0.34 -0.17 0.79 0.48 0.30 0.20
4 Steering system compliance 2.68 0.93 1.02 0.74 3.25 1.54
4 Front camber and steering system 0.53 0 - 0.10 -0.05 0 0
6 Rear roll steer 0.81 0.10 0 0 0.08 -0.08
Total understeer parameter (deg/g) 6.58 1.33 0.56 0.84 4.06 2.79
Roll gain (deg/g) 8.6 4.8 20 12 3.8 4.1

or with an additional actuator at the end of the bar as
shown in Fig. 14. The first system to be introduced
commercially by Citroen is of this latter type and adds
approximately E10o0 to the cost of a mid-range pass-
enger car.
The second advantage would be predicted to be sig-
nificant; the limit handling behaviour of a vehicle is
largely dictated by the way in which load transfer is
distributed across front and rear axles and hence which
tyres reach saturation first. At present, this has to be
achieved with passive elements, for example anti-roll
bars, with a certain degree of subtlety arising from the
judicious choice of non-linear effects. Active systems
allow complete freedom to adjust the distribution as a
function of, for example, lateral acceleration and
achieve an optimum handling balance right up to the
limit.
The third potential advantage is probably of least
importance, though a sound theoretical understanding
is somewhat hampered by the shortage of tyre dynamic
response data, that is lateral force and moment gener-
ation when both the vertical load and slip angle are
fluctuating.
Active steering systems offer the possibility of indi-
rectly controlling the forces generated at the rear of the
vehicle in addition to the conventional driver control of
the front wheel steer angle (11). In fact, control over the
rear wheels can also be achieved passively; the rear
steering can be mechanically or hydraulically linked
directly to the front wheel or alternatively the rear
wheels can be allowed to steer in response to lateral
forces arising from cornering. The potential benefit of
active control is that it allows the rear wheels to be con-
trolled independently of the front. This is another
classic example of theory being put into practice. From
the mid-1980s until the present day, a large number of
theoretical studies aimed at deriving control strategies
for rear steering were published and a number of com-
mercial systems have now appeared, particularly on
Japanese cars. For low-speed manoeuvring (up to
around 20 mile/h) the rear wheels steer in the opposite
direction to those at the front, thus assisting with
parking manoeuvres at the expense of allowing the rear
end to swing out or 'off-track'. For high speeds, the rear
wheels are arranged to steer in the same sense as those
at the front. The control unit which controls the steer
angle demand to the rear steering actuator typically has
inputs of vehicle speed and front wheel steer angle and
uses either a law or an empirically derived map to select
an appropriate rear steer angle which will typically be
in the range 0-2". Safety checks are of paramount
importance for a control that intervenes in the vehicle's
steering system, and some systems incorporate a model
reference calculation using the classic two degree of
freedom model as a parallel safety check.
The primary advantages of four wheel steer (4WS)
systems are:
(a) improved transient response;
(b) improved yaw damping following a transient
manoeuvre;
(c) reduced peak yaw rates;
(d) reduced lateral acceleration phase lag; and
(e) reduced body sideslip angles (see Fig. 15).
These advantages arise in principle from the ability to
influence the rear tyre forces independently. For

Upper mount reacted

on the suspension Top of connecting link
reacted on suspension
Lonvenuonar
anti-roll bar 0

/
Connecting link
replaced by small hydraulic
cylinder
Fig. 14 An active roll control scheme of the type pioneered by Citroen
Part D: Journal of Automobile Engineering Q IMechE 19%

Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on October 16, 2014

 VEHICLE DYNAMICS-THEORY INTO PRACTICE 91

6.0 example, consider the response of a front wheel steer

(FWS) car to a step steer input. The front steer angle
results in a front slip angle; thus a front lateral force is
generated and the vehicle begins to respond in the side-
4.5 slip and yaw directions. Only when the vehicle has
actually responded and the rear wheels are, therefore,
constrained to operate at a sideslip angle can force be
generated at the rear tyres. In contrast, for the 4WS car,
3.0 front and rear slip angles are generated simultaneously,
the rear tyre forces are generated at the same time as
those at the front and the transient response of the
vehicle is consequently improved. Also, the effective yaw
moment is reduced so that in a lane change manoeuvre
1.5
for example, the peak yaw rate response of the vehicle
Vehicle 2 might be reduced by up to 50 per cent compared with
the FWS performing an equivalent manoeuvre.
0
0 1.25 2.5
-
Time
S
5 FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS
The past decade has seen a lot of activity in developing
actively controlled systems and integrating them with
the dynamics of the passive vehicle system. Future work
is likely to occur in both these active and passive areas.

5.1 Active controls

-
Time
S tions. This requires further fundamental work to apply
Time
S (a)
Fig. 15 Predicted results of the advantages offered by four
wheel steering in lane change manoeuvres at a speed
of 40 m/s and steering wheel input amplitude of 40"
(vehicle 1: front wheel steer; vehicle 2: four wheel
steer with yaw rate feedback control; vehicle 3: four
wheel steer with zero sideslip control)
Q IMechE 1996
From a theoretical viewpoint, there are several tech-
niques which may be used to derive satisfactory control
laws for actively suspended vehicles. However, most
studies are based on a restricted set of assumptions for
the vehicle's operating conditions whereas, in the real
world, vehicles may be subject to a vast range of surface
roughnesses, road input events, speeds, braking/
accelerating forces, etc. This raises questions about the
robustness of the controller design and about the bene-
fits of adaptation in which the controller learns with
time or tunes itself to the particular operating condi-
advanced control theory to vehicle dynamics design.
It has been shown that 'wheelbase preview' informa-
tion, that is the knowledge that the rear wheel inputs
are precisely a delayed version of those at the front, can
be exploited to offer improved suspension performance
at the rear wheel stations. This notion could be
extended further if a look-ahead preview sensor were
available to provide reliable information about the road
inputs ahead of the front wheels. The potential benefits
of this preview information should be further investi-
gated in order to judge the motivation for developing
practical sensor systems. There are already indications
that a sensor mounted on the front bumper, approx-
imately 0.8-1 m ahead of the front wheels, offers worth-
while performance gains (12).
The practical constraints which are restricting the
commercial development of limited bandwidth systems,
ranked in approximate order of importance, are;
cost;
(b) power consumption;
(c) added weight; and
(d) safety/reliability concerns.
A consensus view has emerged that hydropneumatic
technology holds the most commercial promise, but a
Roc Instn Mech Engrs Vol210

Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on October 16, 2014

92 D A CROLLA
Table 3 Comparison of some of the key features of the software packages available for vehicle dynamics studies
Software package For Against
Purpose-designed Relatively cheap Cannot change model
simulation codes Models already proven May include details which are irrelevant to a
Good for specific problems rather than particular problem
investigation of design issues
Multibody system dynamics Industry standard, e.g. ADAMS Very expensive
packages (numerical) Powerful for complex systems, e.g. full Extravagant on computer time
vehicle handling model with all compliant Limited value for investigating design
suspension details issues
Impressive animation capabilities
Pre-processors linked to CAD packages
Multibody system dynamics Efficient use of computer time Less developed than numerically based
packages (algebraic) Relatively inexpensive packages
PC versions, e.g. AUTOSIM Fewer features than numerically based
Powerful for complex problems packages
Toolkits Inexpensive Model must first be developed if it does
Good for investigating design issues not already exist
Tailored to particular applications, e.g. vehicles Inappropriate for complex systems, e.g.
Range of generic models already exists greater than 50 degrees of freedom

major breakthrough in electrohydraulic valve tech-
nology will be required leading to reduced costs if sig-
nificant further developments are to occur over the next
five years.
Substantial commercial interest will continue in con-
trolled sub-systems which offer less functionality but at
much lower costs, for example, continuously variable
dampers, roll control and self-levelling systems. In fact,
if these three sub-systems could be implemented and
integrated satisfactorily, they would together offer most
of the functionality of a limited bandwidth system with
potentially much lower costs and power requirements.
Finally, this raises the wider issue of integration of
controlled systems. Little reference has been made in
the paper to other systems which fall in the domain of
the vehicle dynamicist, for example antilock brakes
(ABS) and traction control scheme (TCS). However, it is
clear that these will, in general, interact with the other
chassis control schemes discussed here. For example,
the ABS/TCS system would inevitably interact with an
active suspension control through the vertical wheel
load dynamics. Another example is braking under split
friction conditions; control of the longitudinal forces
through the ABS can be coupled with control of the
lateral forces using the 4WS to maintain yaw moment
stability as a safety feature.
5.2 Vehicle dynamics
Considerable reference has been made to the develop-
ment of sophisticated vehicle models, the associated
powerful software packages and the widespread use of
them throughout the automotive industry (13). The
main features of the various types of packages available
are summarized in Table 3; they will not be discussed in
detail and further information can be found in reference
Part D:Journal of Automobile Engineering
(12). The general approach of the multibody system
dynamics codes is to start with a system of masses and
geometrical information and apply various types of con-
necting elements as indicated in Fig. 16 (14). The
package automatically derives the resulting set of non-
linear equations ready for solutions in the time domain.
However, some notes of caution must be sounded.
No matter how complex the actual equations are,
they are of the general form:
in which M represents a matrix of parameters such as
masses, inertias, stiffnesses, geometry, etc. The vector of
system variables which may run into several hundred is
denoted x. F is the matrix representing all the external
forcing information. The general point is that it is not
sound to put an ever-increasing amount of effort into
the accuracy of the [Ml[x] part of the equations if
uncertainties remain about the [F] side. For example,
in a handling model the [Fl matrix contains details of
the tyre forces and aerodynamic forces. The tyre forces
in particular will remain the weakest link in the equa-
tions and so continued efforts to measure, refine and
model tyre behaviour (15) will be central to the future of
vehicle dynamics.
Finally, in reviewing both ride and handling it has
become clear that some of the more subtle features of
vehicle dynamics cannot be confidently predicted
through modelling but are easily and reliably picked up
by experienced test engineers during subjective evalu-
ation. Hence, while it is clear that theoretical predic-
tions and objective measurements will always play an
important role in vehicle development, it is equally true
that currently there is no chance of them superseding
subjectively-based tuning and assessment procedures.
Clear gaps in our understanding of the interrela-
tionships between predicted, objective and subjective
(Q IMechE 19%

Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on October 16, 2014

 VEHICLE DYNAMICS-THEORY INTO PRACTICE 93
XF , YF, ZF Guide system
X. Y.Z Vehicle fixed Vehicle model
reference system
XI Y,,Z, Body fixed
1

reference system
6,d, b Pitch-, roll-,

Front wheel suspension Rear wheel suspension

Rigid bodies: Couplings:

1 Body structure 0, @ Helical springldamper
2, 3 Suspension link left, right
4.7 Spring strut left, right
0 ,@ Helical spring left, right
5 , 6 Semi-trailing arms left, right 0, @ Damper left, right
8 . 9 Stabilizer front, rear <-? vres
10, 11 Track rod
12 Gear rack
@,a,
(-6)(=~
@ Stabilizer
Strut guide left, right
@,@ Suspension link bearing left, right
0
Steering gear-bearing and hardy disc
Fig. 16 Typical example of system of masses and connecting elements ready
for input to a multibody systems dynamics package (14)

measures of vehicle behaviour exist and future research
to tackle these must be high on the priority list for
vehicle dynamicists.
6 CONCLUSIONS
The paper has examined the extent to which theory has
been put into practice in vehicle ride and handling
dynamics. Undoubtedly, the theoretical developments
over the past 60 years have led to a fundamental under-
standing of the principles governing vehicle dynamic
behaviour. It would be futile to embark on any practical
aspect of vehicle dynamics without this building block
Q IMcchE 1996
of knowledge; it also provides the technical language,
the structure and definitions which enable ride and
handling engineers to communicate effectively. Over
recent years, for example, the enormous developments in
actively controlled systems would not have taken place
without the theoretical studies which preceded them.
Yet despite all this clear evidence of theory being put
into practice, there is still universal recognition that a
vehicle’s ride and handling behaviour will be developed,
tuned and finally signed-off largely on the basis of sub-
jective assessments. If the hugely powerful computer
codes used to simulate increasingly sophisticated vehicle
models are so good, why do we still have to rely on the
Roc lnstn Mcch Engrs Vol 210

Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on October 16, 2014

94
undoubted skills of highly calibrated ride and handling
engineers? There are probably two separate threads to
the answer. Firstly, just because such models are not
‘perfect’ does not mean that they are not useful; any
analytical tool which speeds up development must be
beneficial in getting the design more nearly ‘right first
time’. Secondly, in concentrating on sophistication and
precision in modelling, the vehicle dynamics community
may have got the balance wrong. The eventual con-
sumer is the human driver and there appear to be many
subtle aspects of the human passive response to ride
dynamics and active control behaviour in handling
dynamics that we simply do not understand. One key
future area for further research is the investigation of
these subjective-objective relationships.
Finally, the use of controlled systems in vehicle
dynamics is already well established in some areas-
antilock brakes, traction control-and is expanding in
others, for example switchable dampers, roll control,
four wheel steering, etc. Although such systems are pri-
marily defined to fulfil one specific function, there are
times when integration between them is either necessary
or desirable. Research will be needed to address these
issues of integration which remain a challenge for
vehicle dynamicists in the future.
REFERENCES
1 Olley, M. Road manners of the modern car. Proc. Instn Automo-
bile Engineers, 1946-47.51, 147-182.
2 Lanchester, F. W. Motor car suspension and independent spring-
ing. Proc. lnstn Automobile Engineers, 1936,30,668-762.
3 MiUien, W. F. and Milliken, D. L. Race car uehicle dynamics,
1995 (SAE, Warrendale).
Part D: Journal of Automobile Engineering
Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on October 16, 2014
D A CROLLA
4 Segel, L. An overview of developments in road vehicle dynamics:
past, present and future. Proceedings of IMechE Conference on
Vehicle ride and handling, London, 1993, pp. 1-12 (Mechanical
Engineering Publications, London).
5 Thompson, A. G. Design of active suspensions. Proc. lMechE
Automobile Division, 1970-71, 185, 36-71.
6 Wright, P. G. and Williams, D. A. The application of active sus-
pension to high performance road vehicles. Proceedings of
IMechE Conference on Microprocessors in Juid power engineering,
University of Bath, 3-4 September 1984, paper C239/84, pp. 23-28
(Mechanical Engineering Publications, London).
7 Hillebrecht, P, Konik, D., Pfeil, D, Wallentowitz, H. and Ziegl-
meier, F. The active suspension between customer benefit and
technological competition. Proceedings of XXlV FISITA
Congress, Total vehicle dynamics, London, 1992, Vol. 2, pp. 221-
230.
8 Sharp, R. S. and CroUa, D. A. Road vehicle suspension system
design-a review. Vehicle System Dynamics, 1987, 16, 167-192.
9 CroUa, D. A. Active suspension control: review of recent applica-
tions. Proceedings of the EURMOTOR Seminar on Smart vehi-
cles, Delft, February 1995, pp. 183-202 (Swets and Zeitlinger,
Lisse, The Netherlands).
10 Crolla, D. A., Horton, D. N. L. and Firth, G. R. An introduction
to vehicle dynamics. Internal report, University of Leeds, 1991.
11 Furukawa, Y., Yuhara, N., Smo, S., Takeda, H. and Matswbita,
Y. A review of front wheel steering studies from the viewpoint of
vehicle dynamics and control. Vehicle System Dynamics, 1989,
18(-3), 151-186.
12 Tomizuka, M. Optimum linear preview control with application to
vehicle suspension-revisited. Trans. A.S.M.E., J. Dynamic
Systems, Measurement and Control, 1976,98,309-315.
13 Kortum, W. and Sharp, R. S. A report on the state of affairs on
application of multibody computer codes to vehicle system
dynamics. Vehicle System Dynamics, 1991,20(3-4), 177-184.
14 Thomson, B. and Rathgeber, H. Automated systems used for rapid
and flexible generation of vehicle simulation models exemplified by
a verified passenger car and a motorcycle model. Proceedings of
Eighth IAVSD Symposium on T h e dynamics of vehicles on roads
and on railway tracks, Cambridge, USA, 1983, pp. 64-654.
15 Pacejka, H. B. and Sharp, R. S. Shear force development by pneu-
matic tyres in steady state conditions: a review of modelling
aspects. Vehicle System Dynamics, 1991,20(3-4), 121-175.
Q IMechE 1996