Proceedings of IMECE2008
ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress & Exposition
MODELING OF ACTIVE DIFFERENTIAL DYNAMICS
Joko Deur
University of Zagreb, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and
Naval Architecture, I. Luia 5, HR-10002 Zagreb, Croatia
ABSTRACT
Active differentials are increasingly being used in high-end
vehicles in order to improve the overall performance of vehicle
dynamics control systems. The active differentials can be
divided into active limited slip differentials and torque
vectoring differentials. This paper presents the development of
a generalized mathematical model of active differential
dynamics using the bond graph modeling technique. Different
levels of model complexity are considered, starting from a
second-order model with lumped input and output inertia
towards high order models including the gear inertia and
halfshaft compliance. The paper also presents typical model
simulation results and their comparative analysis with respect
to drivability and time response features.
INTRODUCTION
Active differentials provide a controlled left/right or
front/rear torque distribution to the wheels, thus enhancing the
traction control and yaw rate control performances without
being intrusive for the driver [1,2]. The active differentials can
be divided into two main groups [1-6]: (i) Active Limited Slip
Differentials (ALSD) and (ii) Torque Vectoring Differentials
(TVD). The ALSD utilizes a single clutch to transfer the torque
to the slower wheel. The TVD can transfer the torque to both
slower and faster wheel by using two clutches.
The available papers in the field (see e.g. [2-6]) are mostly
oriented to active differential design features and kinematics
analyses. However, from the standpoint of analysis of transient
phenomena (e.g. drivability or response time analyses) and
related differential and vehicle dynamics control studies, there
is a need to develop accurate and computationally efficient
models of active differentials dynamics.
As an extension of the active differential kinematics
models developed and analyzed in [7], this paper presents a
generalized, control-oriented dynamic model of the ALSD and
three common types of TVDs from [2-5]. The developed model
can be easily adapted to different configurations of active
differential/driveline dynamics (e.g. model with or without
1 Copyright 2008 by ASME
October 31 - November 6, 2008, Boston, MA, USA
IMECE2008-69248
Matthew Hancock and Francis Assadian
Jaguar Cars Ltd., Gaydon Engineering Centre,
Banbury Road, Gaydon, Warwick, CV35 0XJ, UK
halfshaft compliance included). The bond graph modeling
technique [8] is used to develop the model. The main
advantages of this approach include a direct correlation
between the structure of the modeled system and the bond
graph, and a straightforward way of transforming the bond
graph into the state-space model including ease of handling the
redundant state variables [8-11]. The developed model is used
for a comparative simulation analysis of active differential
dynamics.
MODELING OF PASSIVE DIFFERENTIAL DYNAMICS
The kinematic scheme of traditional bevel-gear passive
differential is shown in Fig. 1a. The corresponding bond graph
model is shown in Fig. 1b [9,10] (see Appendix A for
description of bond graph elements). The output (wheel) shafts
are allowed to rotate at different speeds 1 and 2, while the
output torques are equal (1 = 2). The input speed and torque
are given by i = i(1 + 2)/2 and i = (1 + 2)/i, respectively,
where i is the bevel gear speed ratio (final drive ratio).
i
c i i
TF : i 1
1 2 c c
TF : 2
1 2
1 2
0
1 2
(a) (b)
Fig. 1. Kinematic scheme (a) and bond graph (b) of passive
differential.
 The bond graph model in Fig. 1b is extended in the
e
following subsections with dynamic effects (cf. [9,10]). &1 1
& = A B t1 . (6)
Models including input inertia and wheel inertia
2 t 2
Adding the lumped differential input inertia Ii (i.e. the
lumped transmission output inertia) and the output/wheel with the inertia matrix A and the input matrix B given by
inertia Iw1,2 to the model in Fig. 1b gives the bond graph model
shown in Fig. 2a. The tire resistance element Rt is such that the i2 i2 i
I w1 + I i Ii 1 0
tire force-related wheel load torque t is calculated from the A= 4 4 , B = 2 .
wheel/tire speed t (torque causality; see Fig. 10 below).
2 2 i
i
I w2 + I i
i 0 1
Assigning the other bond causalities in Fig. 2a (see Appendix 4 I i 4 2
A) indicates that the input inertia Ii has derivative causality.
This means that the input speed i=e is a redundant state In the case that that the transmission is connected to the
variable, which is algebraically coupled with the (real) state differential by means of a clutch, the input part of the bond
variables 1 = t1 and 2 = t2. The model equations are (Fig. graph model from Fig. 2a is replaced by the one shown in Fig.
2a, Appendix A): 2b. Since the clutch resistance element Rif has torque causality
(if = f(if = e), see Fig. 8 below), the input inertia element Ii
I i& i = e i , (1)
turns out to have the integral causality. Hence, the overall
I w1&1 = 1 t1 , (2) model is of third order:
I w2& 2 = 2 t 2 ; (3)
I i& e = e i
i i
1 = 2 = i , (4) I w1&1 = i t1 . (7)
2 2
1 + 2 i
e = i = i c = i . (5) I w2& 2 = i t 2
2 2
The state redundancy of the model (1)-(5) can be resolved as Assuming that the clutch is permanently locked leads to the
follows basic model configuration explained with Fig. 2a. The state
i i i i i & + & 2 variable e = if becomes redundant in that case. This can be
I w1&1 = i t1 = e I i& i t1 = e I i i 1 t1 resolved by using the Karnopp (clutch) friction modeling
2 2 2 2 2 2
approach [12,13]:
Writing the analogous equation for I w2& 2 and rearranging both
i
equations gives the following final state-space model: fi = 0 & fi = 0 & e = (&1 + & 2 )
2
1 i 1 i 1 i
Se ( e i ) = i t1 + i t 2 ,
Se Ii 2 I w1 2 I w2 2
e e
e e
thus leading to the following alternative formulation of the
R : bis 1 I : Ii model (6)
1 I : Ii Se
is i Ii i Ii
if if = e e e e + t1 + t2
2 I w1 2 I w2
1 0 i =
0 R : Rif 1 I : Ii i 2 Ii i2 Ii
1+ +
i i i i i i 4 I w1 4 I w2
C : kis1
i
TF : i 1 I w1&1 = i t1 . (8)
(b) (c) 2
c c i
I w1 I w2 I w 2& 2 = i t 2
.. .. 2
I TF : 2 I
Considering again the model configuration in Fig. 2a and
Rt1 Rt 2 taking into account the input shaft compliance gives the input
.. t1 1 2 t2 .. part of the bond graph model shown in Fig. 2c. In the presence
R 1 0 1 R
t1 1 2 t 2 of input compliance, the input inertia again turns out to have
(a) the integral causality, but the model order is increased to fourth
order:
Fig. 2. Bond graph model of passive differential dynamics
for different input configurations: (a) rigid input shaft,
(b) input clutch, (c) input compliance.

2 Copyright 2008 by ASME

 I i& e = e is Se
&is = kis (e i ) + bis (& e & i ) e e
i
I w1&1 = is t1 . (9) 1 I : I i* = I i + i 2 I c
2
i i
i
I w 2& 2 = is t 2
2 b1 k11 TF : i 1 b2 k21
.. ..
where i = i (1 + 2) / 2, as given by Eq. (5). R C c c
..
R
..
C
I w1 I1 I2 I w2
Model extended with halfshaft compliance .. .. .. ..
I 1 I TF : 2 I 1 I
The model in Fig. 2a can be further extended with the
halfshaft compliance as shown in Fig. 3. The halfshaft damping Rt1
.. t1 1 Rt 2
is neglected, because it is typically of much smaller influence hs1 2 hs 2 t2 ..
R 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 R
than the tire damping [9,10,13]. The causality rules show that t1 1 1 2 2 t 2
the input inertia Ii has integral causality, but one of the halfshaft
compliance elements C (the left-hand side compliance in Fig. Fig. 4. Bond graph model of passive differential dynamics
including halfshaft compliance and differential inertia.
3) takes on the derivative causality. This is because the left and
right halfshaft torque state variables are equal to each other
(1 = 2 = ): Model extended with differential inertia
& = &1 = k1 (1 t1 ) , Extending the model in Fig. 3 with the differential output
and input inertias I1,2 and Ic leads to the model shown in Fig. 4.
& = &2 = k 2 ( 2 t 2 ) . Both halfshaft compliance elements C are of integral causality,
Dividing these two equations by k1 and k2, respectively, but the input inertia element Ii switches again to the derivative
summing up them, and using Eq. (5) gives the below halfshaft causality. Observing that the model in Fig. 4 can be represented
torque state equation. The other state equations are readily by the model in Fig. 2a extended with the halfshaft+wheel
derived from Fig. 3. subsystem, where Iw1,2 and t1,2 are substituted by I1,2 and hs1,2,
respectively, the model can be described by (cf. Eq.(6)):
2
& = k e e t1 t 2 e
i 1 1
2 = A B hs1
I i& e = e . (10) 2 hs 2
i
I w1& t1 = t1 &hs1 = k1 (1 t1 ) + b1 (&1 & t1 )
I w 2& t 2 = t 2 &hs 2 = k 2 ( 2 t 2 ) + b2 (& 2 & t 2 ) . (12)
The equivalent halfshaft stiffness coefficient ke is given by I w1& t1 = hs1 t1
1 I w 2& t 2 = hs 2 t 2
1 1 kk
k e = + = 1 2 . (11) with
k1 k 2 k1 + k 2
i2 * i2 * i
I1 + I i Ii 1 0
Se A= 2 4 4 , B = 2 .
i * i2 *
i

e e
4 I i I2 + Ii 2
0 1

4
1 I : Ii
i i hs1
k1
1
TF : i
c c
I w1 k 1 k 21 I w2 (1 t1 )dt
.. ..1 .. ..
I C TF : 2 C I Backlash zone

Rt1 Rt 2
.. t1 1 2 t2 ..
R 1 0 0 0 1 R
t1 1 2 t 2
Fig. 3. Bond graph model of passive differential dynamics Fig. 5. Static characteristic of halfshaft including backlash
including halfshaft compliance. zone.

3 Copyright 2008 by ASME

Alternatively, the model (12) can utilize the submodel (8) halfshaft damping elements can be included in a
instead of the submodel (6). The differential backlash can be straightforward way.
easily incorporated by including the backlash zone in the above Based on the above analysis, the following model
torque state equations, as used in [9,10], and illustrated in Fig. 5 configurations are further considered for the active differential
for the case of zero halfshaft damping coefficient. modeling:
Discussion on model selection 1. Second-order model given by Fig. 2a and Eq. (6)
A constant gear operation is typically considered for 2. Sixth-order model given by Fig. 4 and Eq. (12)
various vehicle dynamics control simulations (see e.g. [1]). The former is characterized by a high computing efficiency,
Therefore, the transmission clutches, such as the one used in and may be convenient for various vehicle dynamics control
Fig. 2b, are typically not included in the overall model. studies. The latter can be used for drivability analyses. As
Similarly, considering the compliant input shaft (Fig. 2c, Eq. shown in the previous subsection, once the second-order model
(9)) is generally not convenient, because the model is then is developed for a particular differential type, it can be readily
extended by two stiff state equations (for rather stiff differential extended into the sixth-order model by using the last four state
input shaft). Between the variants (6) and (8) of the simplest, equations of Eq. (12).
second-order model in Fig. 2a, the one given by Eq. (8) might
appear more convenient, because the state equations preserve MODELING OF ACTIVE DIFFERENTIAL DYNAMICS
the original, simple form (2)-(3). However, in the case of active
Active differentials comprise one or two clutches to
differential, calculation of the input torque i will depend on the provide the possibility of transferring the torque from left to
stick-slip state of the active differential clutches (cf. Karnopp right wheel, or vice versa.
friction modeling examples in [12,13]). Since this would
complicate the model development and implementation, the Description of active differentials
model variant given by Eq. (6) is considered more convenient Fig. 6 shows the kinematic schemes of four common types
for active differential modeling. of active differentials. The Active Limited Slip Differential
When dealing with the halfshaft compliance, the sixth- (ALSD, Fig. 6a) includes a clutch that connects the rotating
order model (Fig. 4, Eq. (12)) should generally be preferred differential case with one of the output shafts. Since the clutch
over the simpler fourth-order model (Fig. 3, Eq. (10)), because torque transfer is always directed from the faster to slower
the output inertia I1,2 can be rather large for some of the active clutch shaft and the case speed is equal to the average left/right
differentials, and the independent left-right backlash and wheel speed, Eq. (5), the
i ALSD always transfers the
i i torque from faster to slower
i wheel.
c c z
z2 3 The torque vectoring
F
differential (TVD) in Fig. 6b
F F [2] comprises two
2 1 1 2 2
1 z1 z4 superposition clutches and
additional gearing, in order to
1 provide the torque transfer to
1 2 2
both slower and faster wheel.
The gearing speeds up the
input shaft of right clutch and
(a)
slows down the input shaft of
(c) left clutch. Therefore, the
i torque is transferred to the
i i
i right wheel by engaging the
F1 F2 right clutch and to the left
wheel by engaging the left
c zr
clutch. The torque can be
F1
1 zs 2 transferred to the faster wheel,
1 z1 z2 z3 F2 2 provided that the faster wheel
speed does not exceed the
1 2 slower wheel speed by more
1 2 than the Allowable Wheel
Speed Difference (AWSD)
z4 z5 z6 factor, whose typical value is
about 20% [2,1,7].
(b) (d) The TVD in Fig. 6c [3]
includes two stationary
Fig. 6. Kinematic schemes of active differentials: (a) ALSD, (b) superposition clutch TVD,
(c) stationary clutch TVD, (d) 4WD TVD.
clutches (brakes) and two

4 Copyright 2008 by ASME

 double planetary gears. Again, activation of the right clutch device with the gear ratio g = 1.05 [4,5,7]. Like the TVD in Fig.
gives the torque transfer to the right wheel, and the left clutch 6c, the 4WD TVD in Fig. 6d comprises two stationary clutches
transfers the torque to the left wheel. The main difference (brakes) and two planetary gears. The main difference is that
between the TVDs in Figs. 8b and 8c is that the former utilizes the 4WD TVD is not built around the traditional bevel gear
high-torque/low-speed clutches and the latter comprises low- passive differential. When the clutches are disengaged, the
torque/high-speed brakes [6,7]. output torque is equal to zero, and the vehicle operates in the
The 4WD TVD in Fig. 6d [4,5] is used as an active rear front differential-based 2WD configuration without torque
differential along with the passive front differential. The vectoring. Activation of the left or right clutch results in the
transmission (and front differential) are connected to the rear torque transfer to left or right wheel, respectively. A 4WD
TVD through a double planetary gear-based speed increasing mode is provided by locking both clutches.

Se
e e
Se
1 I : I i* = I i + i 2 ( I c + I s1 + I s 2 )
e e
i i
1 I : I i* = I i + i 2 I c I c1 Ic2
TF : i 1
.. ..
i i I I
h1 c c h2
TF : i 1 Rf1 h1 1 h2 1
.. f1 c1 .. s1 s2 .. c 2 f 2 R..f 2
c c R
f1
1
c1
TF 0
s1
1
s 2
0 TF
c 2
1
f 2 R
f
1 0 R : Rf
f z1z3
c* TF : h1 TF : 2 TF : h2 h1 = h2 =
I w1 + I1 = I w* 1 I w* 2 = I w2 + I 2 z2 z4
.. .. r1 r1 r 2 r 2
I TF : 2 I Rt1 R
.. t1 t 2 ..t 2
R 1 0 1 R
Rt1 Rt 2 t1 1 t 2
.. t1 1 2* 2 t2 .. 2
R 1 0 1 1 R
t1 1 2 t 2
I w1 + I1 + I r1 = I w* 1 : I I : I w* 2 = I w2 + I 2 + I r 2
(a)
(c)

Se Rf1 Rf 2
.. ..
e e R R
f1 f1 f2 f2
1 I : I i* = I i + i 2 ( I c + I gc ) I s1 : I I : I s2
1 1
i i s1 s1
Rear s 2 s 2
TVD
1
TF : i I : I gc 1 + h1 TF : h1 I : I r1 I : I ir I : Ir2 TF : h2 1 + h2
c c Rt1 h1 h2 R
Ic .. t1 1 .. i1 i2 .. 2 t 2 ..t 2
.. R 1 TF 0 1 1 1 0 TF 1 R
I 1 1 t1 1 2 t 2

I : I w* 1 = I w1 + I c1 TF : g / ir I w2 + I c 2 = I w* 2 : I
z1z6
h1 = TF : h11
z4 z3 TF : 2 TF : h2 ir ir
e g
2
zz Se 1 I : I i* = I i + ( I ir + I r1 + I r 2 ) + i 2f I cf
h2 = 1 5 R Rf 2 e ir
z4 z2 f 1 ..f 1 f 2 ..
0 R 0 R if if
f1 f 2
Rt1 Rt 2 Passive TF : i f 1 zr1
.. t1 1 2 t2 .. h1 =
R 1 0 1 1 R front c c zs1
t1 1 2 t 2 diff I w3 + I 3 = I w* 3 I w* 4 = I w4 + I 4 z
..
TF : 2
.. h2 = r 2
I I zs 2
I : I w* 1 = I w1 + I1 I : I w* 2 = I w2 + I 2
Rt 3 t 4 R..t 4
.. t3 3 4
(b) (d) R
1 t3 3
0
4
1
t4
R

Fig. 7. Bond graph models of active differential dynamics: (a) ALSD, (b) superposition clutch TVD,
(c) stationary clutch TVD, (d) 4WD TVD.

5 Copyright 2008 by ASME

 A more detailed description of the structures and operating
modes of the active differentials in Fig. 6 is given in [7]. The
same reference presents the bond graph models of the active
differentials kinematics. Those models are extended in Fig. 7
with the differential dynamics effects.
Bond graph models
One of the main advantages of the bond graph modeling
method is that the bond graph directly reflects the structure of
the modeled system. For example, the passive differential bond
graph model in Fig. 2a is easily extended in Fig. 7a by the
clutch resistance element Rf to reflect the ALSD structure in
Fig. 6a. Similarly, the bond graph model (Fig. 7b) of the
superposition clutch TVD (Fig. 6b) includes two clutch
resistance elements and the corresponding gear ratio
transformers. The bond graphs of the stationary clutch TVD
and the 4WD TVD are shown in Figs. 7c and 7d, respectively.
The corresponding planetary gear bond graphs are explained in
[7] (see also [9,10]). Note that in addition to the rear active
differential state variables 1 and 2, the overall 4WD TVD
driveline model includes the front passive-differential state
variables 3 and 4.
normal force, center speed, and slip angle. The clutch and tire
models are described in the next section. The matrices A, B, and
F of Eqs. (13) and (14) are given in Appendix B for the
particular active differential models shown in Fig. 7.
If the halfshaft compliance is taken into account (cf. Fig.
4), the model (13) is modified based on the following
substitutions (see also Fig. 7):
t hs
*
I wi I *wi -I wi , i = 1,2 (or i = 1,...,4 for 4WD TVD) (15)
and the model is extended with the halfshaft+wheel state
equations (cf. Eq. (12)):
& hs = k ( t ) + b(& & t )
. (16)
I w & t = hs t
This full model is used in the simulation section below.
CLUTCH AND TIRE MODELS
Clutch and tire models give the components of torque
vectors f and t of the overall differential model (13).

State-space models Clutch model

Using the bond graph methodology ([8], Appendix), the The clutch torque f may be expressed as [13]:
active differential bond graph models in Fig. 7 can be f ( h , f ) = h f ( f ) , (17)
straightforwardly transformed to the following generalized
state-space model (cf. Eq. (6)): where h is the so-called "hydraulic" torque which is
A& = B , (13) proportional to the clutch normal force, and depends on the
clutch friction surface radii and friction coefficient, while
where f ( ) is the normalized Stribeck curve shown in Fig. 8.
[1 2 3 4 ]T , for 4WD TVD
& = , f
[1 2 ]T , otherwise TS
and
e TC = 1
f
= t ,

f
with
[ t1 t 2 t 3 t 4 ]T , for 4WD TVD
t = ,
[ t1 t 2 ]T , otherwise Fig. 8. Normalized clutch friction curve.

f , for AWSD
f = e
[ ]
. f Linear
f 1 f 2 , otherwise
T
differential t
Integrating the state equation (13) gives the speed state vector model
. The vector is then used to calculate the clutch slip speed
vector f.: f
f , for AWSD h Friction s Stiction stick
f = F , f =
[ ]
. (14) torque
model fslip
f 1 f 2 , otherwise
T
model

The slip speed vector f represents the input of a clutch model

which gives the clutch torque vector f. Similarly, the wheel
torque vector t is obtained from a tire model based on the Fig. 9. Principal block diagram of overall active differential
wheel speed vector t = and other wheel/tire variables such as model based on Karnopp clutch friction model.

6 Copyright 2008 by ASME

 The friction curve in Fig. 8 is not uniquely defined in the
zero-speed (stiction) region. This can be overcome by using the
classical friction model with a steep straight-line stiction
approximation, the Karnopp model, or a dynamic friction
model [12-14]. This work follows [13] and use the Karnopp
clutch friction model due to its physical background and good
computing efficiency. Fig. 9 depicts the overall differential
model based on the Karnopp model for clutch friction. Linear
differential model is given by Eqs. (13) and (14). Friction
model incorporates Eq. (17) and the Stribeck curve in Fig. 8.
Stiction torque model calculates the stiction torques as linear
relations of the external and slipping clutch torques for different
clutch stick-slip combinations given by the binary vector s. A
detailed explanation of the approach is given in [13].
Tire model
The longitudinal tire force Ft, i.e. the corresponding wheel
load torque t = rFt in the model (13) (r = effective tire radius) is
a complex function of various tire parameters such as tire
center speed v, angular speed t, normal force Fz, and lateral
force Fy (Fig. 10, [15]). In order to avoid implementation/
simulation of the overall tire/vehicle dynamics model, one may
assume that the tire operates in the adhesion region with an
approximately constant center speed v. In that case the tire
behavior may be described by the linearized tire model [9,10]:
~
~ = rF = rb ~ ,
t t t t (18)
where the tire damping coefficient bt is given by
dFt dFt d r 1000
bt = = = kt ,
SIMULATION RESULTS
The ALSD time response with respect to stepwise change
of the input torque i (at t = 0.1 s) and the clutch torque demand
(at t = 0.5 s) is shown in Fig. 11. The initial wheel speed
difference is t0 = t10 t20 = 2 rad/s at t10 = 80 rad/s, and
the torque transfer to the left (slower) wheel is demanded ( =
hs1 hs2 > 0). The power train and clutch actuator dynamics are
approximately described by first-order lag terms with the time
constant of 40 ms (see the e and h responses in Fig. 11), and
the Coulomb clutch friction model is assumed ( TS = TC , see
dash-dot line in Fig. 8). The halfshaft compliance is taken into
account.
The input torque change in Fig. 11 excites the shuffle
vibration mode with the frequency of 18.9 Hz (cf. [9,10]),
while the clutch torque change excites a high frequency mode (f
= 165 Hz) which is visible only in the speed signals. The torque
transfer response = hs1 hs2 is characterized by the accurate
steady-state response and a fast transient. However, it is
important to note that, compared to the fast exponential
response of "hydraulic" torque h, the torque transfer response
is delayed somewhat and have a ramp-like form in a
relatively short period after the torque demand step change.
This is because the clutch slip speed f = 1 2 temporarily
drops to zero due to the halfshaft compliance and the abrupt
clutch torque transient at a relatively small wheel speed
difference. The clutch remains uncontrollable during this
(19) h
In Trq [Nm]

dt d dt v 500 e

with kt = dFt / d denoting the tire static curve gradient and is 0

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
the longitudinal slip (Fig. 10). The symbol ~ in Eq. (18) denotes
variations of the tire model variables around their operating 0
points:
f [Nm]

-500

~ = ,
t t t0 -1000
~
Ft = Ft Ft 0 . 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

1000
Out Trq [Nm]

hs1
500 hs2
0
Ft kt
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
84
Diff Spd [rad/s]

1
Longitudinal force

Fz 82 2
e/i
80

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

Fy , 0
f [rad/s]

-0.5
r v
= t -1
v 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
0 Longitudinal slip
83
Whl Spd [rad/s]

82

Fig. 10. Longitudinal tire static curve. 81 t1

80 t2
79
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Time [s]

Fig. 11. Response of ALSD model.

7 Copyright 2008 by ASME

 (a) 0 = 20 rad/s 200 h1

In Trq [Nm]
h2
100
e
1000
0
[Nm]

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

500

Cltch Trq [Nm]

100
f1
50 f2
0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0
Time [s] 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
(b) 0 = 80 rad/s 1000

Out Trq [Nm]

400
500
hs1
300 0 hs2
[Nm]

k / k = 0.5
0 -500
200 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
1
2

Diff Spd [rad/s]

100 5 82

80
0 1
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5
78 2
Time [s]
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9e/i 1
Fig. 12. Comparative ALSD responses for different initial 100 f 1

Cltch Spd [rad/s]

speeds 0 and halfshaft stiffness k (t0 = 0.5 rad/s). f 2
80

(locked clutch) period, and the torque response is determined 60

only by the wheel speed difference and the halfshaft stiffness (a 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
82
t1

Whl Spd [rad/s]

halfshaft winding effect). The lower the wheel speed difference
81 t2
and the lower the halfshaft stiffness, the slower the response.
80
The effect would not be predicted by the basic second-order
model due to the lack of halfshaft compliance description. 79
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Fig. 12 further illustrates the characteristics of the ALSD Time [s]

torque transfer response in the "critical" case of very small Fig. 13. Response of stationary clutch TVD model.
wheel speed difference (t0 = 0.5 rad/s). For the expected
300
(nominal) value of halfshaft stiffness k = k0 and the small wheel
In Trq [Nm]

200 h1
(vehicle) speed of 20 rad/s, the torque transfer response is very
100 h2
slow (Fig. 12a). If the halfshaft stiffness is further decreased (k e
0
= 0.5k0), the response is further slowed down, and even worse it
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
exhibits a steady-state inaccuracy. The steady-state inaccuracy
Cltch Trq [Nm]

is caused by the fact that the wheel speed difference tends to 0

f1
zero and the clutch is locked (uncontrollable) during the whole -100
f2
transient (not temporary locked as it was in Fig. 11). For larger -200

vehicle speeds (Fig. 12b) the response is faster, but it is more -300
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
prone to exhibit the steady-state error. This is because the tire 1000
Out Trq [Nm]

damping coefficient bt in Eq. (19) decreases with the speed hs1

500
hs2
increase, thus making the wheels more prone to come at the 0 hs3
same speed during the torque transfer transient. Fig. 12 hs4
-500
illustrates that increase of the halfshaft stiffness k improves the 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
84
response speed without affecting the steady-state accuracy.
Diff Spd [rad/s]

82 1
Fig. 13 shows the time response of the stationary clutch 2
80
TVD. The torque can now be transferred to the faster wheel as 3

well (t0 = +0.5 rad/s > 0 for the same positive sign of ). The 4
78
e/if
torque transfer response accurately follows that "hydraulic"
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Cltch Spd [rad/s]

clutch torque h even though the wheel speed difference is very 0 f 1

f 2
small. This is because the additional (planetary) gearing (Fig. -10

6c) makes the clutch slip speed quite different than zero even -20
for zero wheel speed difference. Hence, the clutch cannot 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
become locked/uncontrollable and, accordingly, the response 82
Whl Spd [rad/s]

t1
cannot become slower, unless the wheel speed difference 81 t2
reaches the AWSD. Regarding the drivability features, Fig. 13 80
t3
t4
shows that the shuffle mode frequency is similar as in the case 79
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
of ALSD. However, the mode excited by the clutch torque has Time [s]
the frequency of 11.4 Hz, which is by an order of magnitude
Fig. 14. Response of 4WD TVD model.

8 Copyright 2008 by ASME

lower than in the case of ALSD. This is because the clutch and
carrier inertia becomes relatively large when referred to the
differential output shaft due to a large double planetary gear
ratio r / c = 1 / (h 1) = 8 (cf. Fig. 7c). The superposition clutch
TVD has a comparable time response as that shown in Fig. 13
for the stationary clutch TVD, except that the mode excited by
the clutch torque has as large frequency (165 Hz) as in the case
of ALSD response in Fig. 11 (low-speed, superposition
clutches are used).
The 4WD TVD response is shown in Fig. 14. Unlike with
the previously described active differentials, in the 4WD TVD
driveline the input torque and the clutch torque excite both
shuffle and clutch (high-frequency) mode, where the former is
present in the front passive differential speed/torque output
variables (subscripts 3,4), while the latter occurs in the rear TVD
variables (subscripts 1,2). The clutch mode frequency (41 Hz) is
smaller than that of the ALSD (165 Hz) since the stationary
clutches are used in the 4WD TVD, and it is larger than the one
of the stationary clutch TVD (11.4 Hz) since the clutch gear
ratio is smaller (c / s = 1 + h = 3.6, Fig. 7d) for the 4WD TVD.
Similarly as with the previous TVDs, the 4WD can transfer the
torque to slower wheel (t0 > 0 for > 0), and the torque
transfer response is fast even for small wheel speed differences.
The torque vectoring-related generation of the driving rear left
torque hs1 = (and related tire force) is compensated by the
total reactive braking torque hs3 + hs4 of the front axle (and
related front tire forces). The reactive braking torque is by 1 g
= 0.05 = 5% greater than the rear wheel driving torque.
CONCLUSION
A generalized state-space model of common types of
active differentials has been developed using a unified
approach based on the bond graph modeling technique. A
proper handling of the redundant state variables has resulted in
a minimum-realization model, which is convenient for various
algebraic analyses, efficient computer simulations, and control
design studies. The model can be easily switched from the
computationally efficient second-order form to the more
accurate sixth-order form which takes into account the halfshaft
compliance and differential gear inertia.
The model has been used for a comparative simulation
analysis of active differential dynamics. The drivability
analysis has shown that the shuffle mode features are
comparable for all differentials. On the other hand, another
vibration mode excited by the clutch torque is most critical for
the TVDs with stationary clutches, because the clutch and gear
inertia can become large when referred to the differential output
shaft via a large gear ratio. The time response analysis has
pointed out that the ALSD has two main disadvantages
compared to its TVD counterparts: (i) it cannot transfer the
torque to the slower wheel, and (ii) the time response can be
slow and/or steady-state inaccurate for very small wheel speed
differences. The ALSD response can be speeded up without
affecting the steady state-accuracy by increasing the halfshaft
stiffness.
9 Copyright 2008 by ASME
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
It is gratefully acknowledged that this work has been
supported by Jaguar Cars Ltd.
REFERENCES
[1] Hancock, M., 2006. "Vehicle Handling Control Using
Active Differentials", Ph.D. Thesis, University of
Loughborough, UK.
[2] Sawase, K, and Sano, Y., 1999. "Application of Active
Yaw Control to Vehicle Dynamics by Utilizing
Driving/Braking Force", JSAE Review, 20, pp. 289-295.
[3] Mimura, K., "Differential Gear", 2000. US Patent
#6120407.
[4] Mori, A., and Shibahata, Y., 2005. "Drive Force Control
Method for Four-Wheel Drive Vehicle", EP #1582390A2,
[5] ..., 2005. "Development of SH-AWD (Super-Handling All-
Wheel Drive) System", PPT presentation, Honda/Tochigi
R&D Center, Vehicle Dynamics EXPO, 2005.
[6] Sawase, K., Ushiroda, Y., and Miura, T., 2006. "Left-Right
Torque Vectoring Technology as the Core of Super All
Wheel Drive Control (S-AWC)", Mitsubishi Motors
Technical Review, No. 18, pp. 16-23.
[7] Deur, J., Hancock, M., and Assadian, F., 2008. "Modeling
and Analysis of Active Differential Kinematics", 2008
ASME Dynamic Systems and Control Conference
(submitted), Ann Arbor, MI.
[8] Karnopp, D. C., Margolis, D. L., and Rosenberg, R., 1990.
System Dynamics - a Unified Approach, John Wiley and
Sons, New York, 1990.
[9] Hrovat, D., and Tobler, W. E., 1991. "Bond Graph
Modeling of Automotive Power Trains," Journal of the
Franklin Institute, 328, pp. 623-662.
[10] Hrovat, D., Asgari, J., and Fodor, M. G., 2000.
"Automotive Mechatronics Systems," In Mechatronics
Systems, Techniques and Applications, C. T. Leondes, Ed.,
Gordon and Breach Science Publishers, pp. 1-98.
[11] Deur, J., Petri, J., Asgari, J., and Hrovat, D., 2006.
"Recent Advances in Control-Oriented Modeling of
Automotive Power Train Dynamics", IEEE/ASME
Transactions on Mechatronics, 11, No. 5, pp. 513-523.
[12] Karnopp, D. C., 1985. "Computer Simulation of Stick-Slip
Friction in Mechanical Dynamic Systems", ASME Journal
of Dynamical Systems, Measurement, and Control, 107,
pp. 100-103.
[13] Deur, J.; Asgari, J.; Hrovat, D.; and Kova, P., 1006.
"Modeling and Analysis of Automatic Transmission
Engagement Dynamics - Linear Case", ASME Journal of
Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control, 128, pp.
263-277.
[14] Armstrong-Hlouvry, B., Dupont, P., and Canudas de Wit,
C., 1994. "A Survey of Models, Analysis Tools and
Compensation Methods for the Control of Machines with
Friction", Automatica, 30, pp. 1083-1138.
[15] Pacejka, H. B., 2002. Tyre and Vehicle Dynamics,
Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford.
APPENDIX A - Bond graph elements

0 1 3
.. 1 4 1 ..x 2 1
Se
1 2 1 TF I : I1
5 1 2 1
1 = 0 1 ..x 2 1
1 + 2 = 3 + 4 + 5
1 TF
2
1 =
I1 1dt

..0 1 3 2 = x1
1 4 1
Fig. 15. Causal bond graph Sf 2 0 1 = x 2 C : k 1
1 5 1
elements and related equations.
Note: Generally, resistance element R
1 = 0 2 1
can have opposite (speed) causality, but
torque causality is needed to describe
1 + 2 = 3 + 4 + 5 2 R 1 =
k1dt
nonlinear clutch and tire static behavior. 2 = f (2 )

APPENDIX B - Parameters of active differential models

ALSD:
* i2 * i2 * i 1
I w1 + I i Ii 1 0
1 1
A= 4 4 , B = 2 2 , F =
i I*
2
i2 i 1 2 2
4 i I w* 2 + I i* 0 1
4 2 2

Superposition clutch TVD (h1 = 0.875, h2 = 1.125):

* i2 * i2 * i h1h2 h1 h1
I w1 + I i 1 0 1
2 ,
Ii
A= 4 4 , B = 2 2 F = 2 2
i I*
2 2
i h1 h h2 h2

I w* 2 + I i* 1 1 1 2
i 0 1
4 2 2 2 2
i
4 2

Stationary clutch TVD (h1 = h2 = 1.125):

* i2 * i2 * i
I w1 + I i + H12 I c1 + H 21 I c 2
2 2
I i H11 H12 I c1 H 21 H 22 I c 2 1 0 H12 H 21 H 12 H 11
A= 2 4 4 , B = 2 , F =
i I * H H I H H I
2 i H 22
I c 2 H 21
i 1 H11 H 22
4 i I w* 2 + I i* + H11 2
I c1 + H 22
2 0
11 12 c1 21 22 c 2
4 2

h1 2 h1 h2 2 h2
with: H11 = , H12 = , H 21 = , H 22 =
2(h1 1) 2(h1 1) 2(h2 1) 2(h2 1)

4WD TVD (h1 = h2 = h = 2.6, g = 1.05, if = i, ir = ih / (1+h)):

0 1 0 0 (1 + h1 )
0 0
I w* 1 + (1 + h1 ) 2 I s1 G1 (1 + h1 ) I s1 0

0 G1 (1 + h1 ) I s1
0 1 0 0 0 (1 + h2 )
I w2 + (1 + h2 ) 2 I s 2
*
G2 (1 + h2 ) I s 2 G2 (1 + h2 ) I s 2
A=
0
, B= f
i
G (1 + h ) I 0 0 1 0 G1 G2
G2 (1 + h2 ) I s 2 I w* 3 + J J 2
1 1 s1
i
G 1 (1 + h1 ) I s1 G2 (1 + h2 ) I s 2 J I w* 4 + J f 0 0 0 1 G1 G2
2
2
( )
2
1 + h1 0 G1 G2 gh1i f gh2 i f if g
F = with G1 = , G2 = J = I i* + h12 I s1 + h22 I s 2
G2
, ,
0 1 + h2 G1 2ir 2ir 2 ir

Common parameters values: i = 2.8, Ii* = 0.1604 kgm2 , Iw = 0.8 kgm2 , k = 8600 Nm/rad, b = 0, kt = 200000 N, r = 0.3 m
Other inertia values were estimated based on the differential technical drawings

10 Copyright 2008 by ASME