Sunteți pe pagina 1din 8

Speed control design for a vehicle system using fuzzy logic

.Introduction
Engine and other automobile systems are increasingly controlled electronically. This has led to
improved fuel economy, reduced pollution, improved driving safety and reduced manufacturing
costs. However the automobile is a hostile environment: especially in the engine compartment,
where high temperature, humidity, vibration, electrical interference and a fine cocktail of
potentially corrosive pollutants are present. These hostile factors may cause electrical contacts to
deteriorate, surface resistances to fall and sensitive electronic systems to fail in a variety of modes.
Some of these failure modes will be benign, whereas others may be dangerous and cause accidents
and endanger to human life.
A cruise control system, or vehicle speed control system can keep a vehicles speed constant on
long runs and therefore may help prevent driver fatigue !"#$%. &f the driver hands over speed
control to a cruise control system, then the capability of the system to control speed to the set
value is 'ust as critical to safety as is the capability of the driver to control speed manually. So the
cruise control system design is imperative and important to an automobile.
. Design requirements
a(. )esigning controller using fu**y logic+
b(. ,aking the automobile-s speed keep constant.
. Model description of the automobile
The dynamics of the automobile !.% are given as follows
"
.
/ ( / / ( / ((
p
t A t d f t
m
= + &
.
/ ( / / ( / (( f t f t u t

= +
&
0here
u
is the control input / 1 u > represents a throttle input and 1 u < represents a brake
input(, .211 m kg = is the mass of the vehicle,
1.2
p
A =
" "
3 Ns m
is its aerodynamic drag,
.11 d N = is a constant frictional force, f is the driving3braking force, and 1." = sec is
saturated at .111N (.
0e can use fu**y control method to design a cruise control system. 4bviously, the fu**y cruise
control design ob'ective is to develop a fu**y controller that regulates a vehicle-s speed / ( t to a
driver#specified value / (
d
t .
. Speed control design using fuzzy logic
5u**y control logic and neural networks are other e6amples of methodologies control
engineers are e6amining to address the control of very comple6 systems. A good fu**y control
logic application is in cruise control area.
.( )esign of 7& fu**y controller
Suppose that we wish to be able to track a step or ramp change in the driver#specified speed
value / (
d
t very accurately. A 87& fu**y controller9 can be used as shown in 5ig. .. &n 5ig. ., the
fu**y controller is denoted by +
1, .
g g
and
"
g are scaling gains+ and / ( b t is the input of the
integrator.
5ig. . Speed control system using a 7& fu**y controller

5ind the differential e:uation that describes the closed#loop system. ;et the state be
. " 2
! , , % ! , , %
T T
x x x x f b = = and find a system of three first#order ordinary differential e:uations
that can be used by the <unge#=utta method in the simulation of the closed#loop system. is
used to represent the controller in the differential e:uations.
5or the reference input, three different test signals can be used as follows:
a: Test input . makes / (
d
t >.?m3sec /@1.2 mph( for 1 .1 t and / (
d
t "" m3sec
/@A." mph( for .1 21 t .
b: Test input " makes / (
d
t >.?m3sec /@1.2 mph( for 1 .1 t and / (
d
t increases
linearly /a ramp( from .? to "" 3 sec m by "$sec t = , and then / ( ""
d
t = for "$ 21 t .
c: Test input 2 makes / (
d
t >"" for 1 t and we use /1( x as the initial condition /this
represents starting the vehicle at rest and suddenly commanding a large increase speed(.
Bse /1( !.?,.AC.", "1%
T
x = for test input . and ".
)esign the fu**y controller to get less than "D overshoot, a rise#time between $ and C sec,
and a settling time of less than ? sec /i.e., reach to within "D of the final value within ? sec( for
the 'ump from .? to "" 3 sec m in 8test input .9 that is defined above. Also, for the ramp input
/8test input"9 above( it must have less than . mph /1.@@C 3 sec m ( steady#state error /i.e., at the
end of the ramp part of the input have less than . mph error(. 5ully specify the controller /e.g., the
membership functions, rule#base defu**ification, etc.( and simulate the closed#loop system to
demonstrate that it performs properly. 7rovide plots of / ( t and / (
d
t on the same a6is and / ( u t
on a different plot. 5or test input 2 find the rise#time, overshoot, "D settling time, and steady#state
error for the closed#loop system for the controller that you designed to meet the specifications for
test input . and ". Bsing the <unge#=utta method and integration step si*e of 1.1., the simulation
results can be shown as follows.
Test input .
5ig. " Eehicle speeds and the output of fu**y controller using test input .
Test input "
5ig. 2 Eehicle speeds and the output of fu**y controller using test input "
Test input 2
5ig. @ Eehicle speeds and the output of fu**y controller using test input 2
"( )esign of 7) fu**y controller
Suppose that you are concerned with tracking a step change in / (
d
t accurately and that you
use the 7) fu**y controller shown in 5ig. $. To represent the derivative, simply use a backward
difference
/ ( / (
/ (
e t e t h
c t
h

=
0here h is the integration step si*e in your simulation /or it could be your sampling period in an
implementation(.
5ig. $ Speed control system using a 7) fu**y controller
)esign a 7) fu**y controller to get less than "D overshoot, a rise#time between C and .1 sec.
and a settling time of less than .1 sec for test input . defined in a(. Also, for the ramp input / test
input " in .(( it must have less than . mph steady#state error to the ramp /i.e., at the end of the
ramp part of the input, have less than . mph error(.
5ully specify your controller and simulate the closed#loop system to demonstrate that it
performs properly. 7rovide plots of / ( t and / (
d
t on the same a6is and / ( u t on a different plot.
&n the simulations, the <unge#=utta method is used and an integration step si*e of 1.1..
Assume that /1( !.?,.AC."%
T
x = for test inputs . and " /hence we ignore the derivative input
in coming up with the state e:uations for the closed#loop system and simply use the
appro6imation for c/t( that is shown above so that we have a two#state system(. As a final test let
/1( 1 x = and use test input 2 defined in .(.
Test input .
5ig. F Eehicle speeds and the output of fu**y controller using test input .
Test input "
5ig. C Eehicle speeds and the output of fu**y controller using test input "
Test input 2
5ig. ? Eehicle speeds and the output of fu**y controller using test input 2
. Summary
To keep an automobile-s speed constant, a speed control design method using fu**y logic is
presented. 7& fu**y controller and 7) fu**y controller design schemes are given to regulate a
vehicle-s speed to a driver#specified value. The simulation results show the validity and of the
proposed techni:ue.
The control design procedure can be summari*ed as follows:
. ,odeling and performance ob'ectives
Gasically, the role of modeling a fu**y control design is :uite similar to its role in
conventional control system design. &n fu**y control there is a more significant emphasis on the
use of heuristics. Honventional feedback controller design entails constructing a controller to meet
the closed#loop specifications /such as disturbance re'ection properties, insensitivity to plant
parameter variations, stability, overshoot, steady#state error et al(, which is also applied to fu**y
control design.
" 5u**y controller design
5u**y control design essentially amounts to /.( choosing the fu**y controller inputs and
outputs /"( choosing the preprocessing that is needed for the controller inputs and possibly
postprocessing that is needed for the outputs, and /2( designing the four components of the fu**y
controller: /a( The fu**ification interface simply modifies the inputs so that they can be interpreted
and compared to the rules in the rule#base. /b( The 8rule#base9 holds the knowledge, in the form of
a set of rules, of how best to control the system. /c( The inference engine evaluates which control
rules are relevant at the current time and then decides what the input to the plant should be. And
/d( the defu**ification interface converts the conclusions reached by the inference engine into the
inputs to the plant.
2 Homputer simulation
To prove the effectivity of the controller design and check up whether the design
re:uirements are reali*ed or not.
References
!.% =. ,. 7assino and S. Iurkovich/.AAC(. 5u**y control, .st edn, Addision 0esley ;ongman,
Holifornia.
!"% 0ard, ). .AAA. Gerlit* complete guide to cruising and cruise ships "111. 7rinceton, Jew
Kersey: Gerlit* 7ublishing Hompany.
!2% &oannou, 7.A.+ Hhien, H.H. LAutonomous &ntelligent Hruise Hontrol,L &EEE Trans. on
Eehicular Technology, @"/@( :F$C M FC", .AA2.
!@% ,ayr, <. 8&ntelligent cruise control for vehicles based on feedback lineari*ation9. 7roc. of
American Hontrol Honference, pp. .F#"1, .AA@.
!$% ,ayr, <.+ Gauer, 4. 8Safety issues in intelligent cruise control9. 7roc. 4f .AAA &EEE
&ntelligent Transportation Systems, pp. AC1 M AC$, .AAA.

S-ar putea să vă placă și