See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/261758783

Hardware-in-the-loop simulation of pressure-

difference-limiting modulation of the
hydraulic brake for regenerative br....

Article in Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part D Journal of Automobile Engineering · April
2014
DOI: 10.1177/0954407013516942

CITATIONS READS

25 1,236

5 authors, including:

Chen Lv Yutong Li
Cranfield University Tsinghua University
55 PUBLICATIONS 393 CITATIONS 29 PUBLICATIONS 236 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Dongsheng Sun Ye Yuan

Tsinghua University Tsinghua University
4 PUBLICATIONS 57 CITATIONS 17 PUBLICATIONS 162 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Advanced Battery/Supercapacitor Management Algorithms; Alternative-Energy Powertrain; Vehicle-

Traffic-Grid-Home Nexus View project

Special Issue on: “Recent Advances in Modelling, Control and Optimisation of Powertrains for Electric
and Hybrid Electric Vehicles”, International Journal of Powertrains. View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Chen Lv on 10 July 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical
Engineers, Part D: Journal of Automobile
Engineering
http://pid.sagepub.com/

Hardware-in-the-loop simulation of pressure-difference-limiting modulation of the hydraulic brake for

regenerative braking control of electric vehicles
Chen Lv, Junzhi Zhang, Yutong Li, Dongsheng Sun and Ye Yuan
Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part D: Journal of Automobile Engineering 2014 228: 649
originally published online 27 January 2014
DOI: 10.1177/0954407013516942

The online version of this article can be found at:

http://pid.sagepub.com/content/228/6/649

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/228/6/649.refs.html

>> Version of Record - Apr 17, 2014

OnlineFirst Version of Record - Jan 27, 2014

What is This?

Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at Tsinghua University on June 20, 2014

Original Article

Proc IMechE Part D:

J Automobile Engineering
2014, Vol. 228(6) 649–662
Hardware-in-the-loop simulation of Ó IMechE 2014
Reprints and permissions:
pressure-difference-limiting sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0954407013516942

modulation of the hydraulic brake for pid.sagepub.com

regenerative braking control of electric

vehicles

Chen Lv, Junzhi Zhang, Yutong Li, Dongsheng Sun and Ye Yuan

Abstract
Because of its significant impact on the cooperative regenerative braking performance of electrified vehicles, the modula-
tion effect of a hydraulic brake is of great importance. To improve the hydraulic brake control performance further, a
novel pressure-difference-limiting control method for hydraulic pressure modulation based on on–off solenoid valves is
proposed. The linear relationship between the coil current and the pressure difference across the valve is obtained. The
characteristics of pressure-difference-limiting modulation are simulated and analysed. Then, a cooperative regenerative
braking control algorithm based on the pressure-difference-limiting modulation of the hydraulic brake is designed.
Hardware-in-the-loop tests of the algorithm under typical braking procedures are carried out. The test results demon-
strate the validity and feasibility of the developed regenerative braking control algorithm and indicate that the proposed
pressure-difference-limiting modulation method, which has an advantage over the conventional control based on a
pulse-width-modulated signal with respect to the control accuracy of the hydraulic brake pressure, has great potential to
improve the braking performance of a vehicle.

Keywords
Pressure difference limiting, hydraulic pressure modulation, regenerative braking control, electrified vehicle, hardware-
in-the-loop simulation

Date received: 18 March 2013; accepted: 25 November 2013

Introduction
As one of the key technologies for various types of elec-
trified vehicle, regenerative braking offers the capability
to improve a vehicle’s energy efficiency by recovering
kinetic energy during decelerations. Thus, it has become
a popular topic of research and development among
automakers, parts manufacturers and researchers
worldwide.1–4
Nowadays, most commercial electrified vehicles are
equipped with regenerative braking systems. However,
to guarantee the vehicle’s deceleration performance
under various driving conditions, a mechanical friction
brake is also needed, which cooperates with the regen-
erative braking system. In a passenger vehicle, the
mechanical braking torque is provided by a hydraulic
braking system. The control performance of this system
would significantly affect the brake blending perfor-
mance, and its impact on the brake comfort, the brake
pedal feel, the brake safety and the regeneration effi-
ciency have already been validated via vehicle tests.5
Thus, researching practical, effective and accurate
methods for hydraulic pressure modulation is of great
necessity and importance for the regenerative braking
control of electric vehicles.
For hydraulic braking modulation, proportional
valves with digital control are the most effective actua-
tors.6–9 However, the high cost of proportional valves
limits their practical application. Thus, on–off valves
driven by inputs which undergo pulse width modulation
State Key Laboratory of Automotive Safety and Energy, Tsinghua
University, Beijing, People’s Republic of China
Corresponding author:
Junzhi Zhang, State Key Laboratory of Automotive Safety and Energy,
Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, People’s Republic of China.
Email: jzhzhang@mail.tsinghua.edu.cn

Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at Tsinghua University on June 20, 2014

650
(PWM) are widely used in the braking control systems
of vehicles, which effectively reduce the cost and the
complexity of the system. However, because the PWM
duty cycle is regulated, pressure modulation is not a
continuous process, and only the mean opening degree
of the valve can be controlled. Therefore, the output
pressure obtained under PWM control of a valve is
non-linear and imprecise.
To improve the control performance of the hydrau-
lic brake pressure further, researchers worldwide have
carried out comprehensive research on PWM control
methods and algorithms for on–off solenoid valves.
Choi et al.10 proposed a PWM method combined with
sliding-mode control to compensate for the discrete
nature of the actuator dynamics by duty control, and
experiments showed a significant improvement in the
hydraulic pressure control performance. Wu and Shih11
designed a hybrid sliding-mode PWM pressure control-
ler for anti-lock braking control. Dynamic testing
showed the excellent tracking capability of the pro-
posed controller, which successfully eliminated the
chattering phenomenon found in traditional switching
control systems. Jeong and Kim12 studied the impacts
of three major system variables (namely the on and off
times of the valve and the system configuration coeffi-
cient) on the mean pressure and the pressure ripple
amplitude under PWM control. Wang and Song13
studied a simulation model of an on–off valve with an
anti-lock braking system and an electronic stability
program using PWM control with a high modulation
frequency of 2–4 kHz and discussed the proportional
function of the valve under different duty cycles. The
present authors studied the rates of increase in the pres-
sure under different PWM duties for on–off valves14
and developed a regenerative braking control algorithm
based on the PWM regulation of on–off valves.5,15
Nevertheless, the existing approach to hydraulic pres-
sure modulation based on PWM control of the on–off
valves can hardly achieve a linear characteristic, mainly
owing to the inherently non-linear and discrete beha-
viour of the on–off valves and the flow.
To enhance the control accuracy of the hydraulic
brake further and to improve the cooperative control
performance of the regenerative braking of electric
vehicles, a linear hydraulic pressure modulation method
(i.e. pressure-difference-limiting (PDL) modulation) is
proposed in this article. The linear relationship between
the coil current and the limited pressure difference
across the on–off valve is illustrated, and the propor-
tional characteristic of hydraulic pressure modulation is
obtained. Based on the dynamic valve models that were
built, the linear characteristics of PDL modulation are
simulated and analysed. A cooperative regenerative
braking control algorithm based on PDL modulation
of a hydraulic brake is proposed. Hardware-in-the-loop
(HIL) tests under typical braking procedures are car-
ried out. Some of the test results and analyses are pre-
sented in this article.
Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at Tsinghua University on June 20, 2014
Proc IMechE Part D: J Automobile Engineering 228(6)
Linear relationship between the pressure
difference and the coil current in the
critical balanced state of the valve
As mentioned in the first section, electrified vehicles
should be equipped with a mechanical brake system to
guarantee the vehicle’s deceleration performance.
Taking one wheel’s hydraulic brake circuit as an exam-
ple, a schematic diagram of a hydraulic braking system
is shown in Figure 1. The inlet valve (normally open)
and the outlet valve (normally closed) are set upstream
and downstream respectively of the wheel cylinder. pm
is the master cylinder pressure, and pw is the wheel
cylinder pressure. The structure of the wheel cylinder is
simplified to a piston and spring. For an electrified
vehicle during the regenerative deceleration process,
when the driver depresses the brake pedal, the brake
pressure pm will be generated in the master cylinder,
which can indicate the total brake demand of the vehi-
cle. The regenerative braking torque provided by the
electric motor will be exerted on the drive axle.
Meanwhile, to assist the overall braking operation, the
expected brake pressure pw can be obtained and applied
to the wheel cylinder by modulating the inlet valve.
Since the hydraulic fluid flows through the inlet
valve from the master cylinder to the wheel cylinder
during the build-up process of the brake pressure, accu-
rate control of the inlet valve is of great importance for
the modulation performance of the hydraulic brake
pressure. The configuration of the inlet valve is shown
in Figure 2. The coil is located outside the magnetic iso-
lation tube; the valve core is rigidly connected to the
moving iron via a pushrod, and a return spring is
located between the valve core and the seat. When the
coil is not energized, the valve core does not touch the
valve seat because of the restoring force of the spring,
thus keeping the valve normally open. Once the coil is
energized, the core will fall down on the valve seat as a
result of the electromagnetic force generated by the
moving iron, closing the valve and cutting off the pres-
sure delivery between the master cylinder and the wheel
cylinder.
Figure 1. Schematic diagram of the hydraulic braking system.
Lv et al. 651

Figure 3. Diagram of the coordinate system of the inlet valve.

After linearizing equation (3), the electromagnetic

Figure 2. Configuration of the inlet valve of the hydraulic force can be represented as
braking system.
∂Fe ∂Fe
Fe = I(t) + xv (t)
∂i ∂xv ð4Þ
Regarding the end point of the valve core in the = Ki I(t) + Kxv xv (t)
valve-closed state as the origin, the OX coordinate sys-
tem is established, as presented in Figure 3. OX is the where Ki is the current-force coefficient, Kxv is the
movement direction of the valve core, pointing displacement-force coefficient and xv is the displace-
forwards. ment of the valve core.
After being energized, the normally open valve Under the critical balanced state described above,
closes, and the core contacts the valve seat. The electro- the valve opening xv = 0; thus,
magnetic force, the restoring force of the return spring,
the hydraulic force and the supportive force of the Fe = Ki I(t) ð5Þ
valve seat are exerted on the valve core. The axial bal-
ance equation of the valve core in the valve-closed state For a normally open valve, in the coordinate system
can be expressed as defined, the spring force can be given by the relation

 Fe + Fs + Fh + FN sin a = 0 ð1Þ Fs = ks (x0 + xm  xv ) ð6Þ

where Fe is the electromagnetic force, Fs is the spring
force, Fh is the hydraulic force, FN is the supportive
force and a is the cone angle of the valve seat.
However, by adjusting the electromagnetic force, the
valve can reach a ‘critical balanced state’, where the
valve is still closed (the displacement xv of the valve
core is zero), but it is just about to open, with the core
being released from the valve seat. The supportive force
acting on the valve core from the seat will disappear
(FN = 0), and equation (1) can be expressed as
where x0 is the pre-tension displacement of the return
spring in the normally open state of the valve, xm is the
maximum displacement of the return spring corre-
sponding to the displacement of the core when the
valve is fully open and ks is the stiffness coefficient of
the return spring.
In the valve’s critical balanced state (xv = 0), the
spring force can be expressed as
Fs = ks (x0 + xm ) ð7Þ

 Fe + Fs + Fh = 0 ð2Þ The hydraulic force acting on the valve core in the

closed state is determined by the pressure difference Dp
The electromagnetic force acting on the valve core is across the valve and the axial surface area As of the
mainly determined by the coil current I, the number N valve core that is exposed to hydraulic fluid, which can
of turns, the air gap length l and the magnetic reluc- be expressed as
tance Rg of the air gap. The electromagnetic force can
be expressed by the relation16 Fh = Dp As ð8Þ

(IN)2 As = pR2v ( cos a)2 ð9Þ

Fe = ð3Þ
2Rg l Dp = pm  pw ð10Þ

Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at Tsinghua University on June 20, 2014

652
Figure 4. Linear relationship between the coil current and the
limited pressure difference of the cross valve.
Figure 5. The state machine of PDL control of an on–off valve.
where Rv is the spherical radius of the valve core and
Dp is the pressure drop across the valve.
Thus, under the ‘critical balanced state’ described
above (xv = 0; FN = 0), the axial balance equation
of the valve core shown in equation (2) can be repre-
sented as
 Ki I + ks (x0 + xm ) + pR2v ( cos a)2 Dp = 0
According to the above equation, a linear relation-
ship between the pressure difference and the coil current
in the ‘critical balanced state’ of the valve can be found.
It can be expressed as
Ki ks (x0 + xm )
Dp = I
pR2v ( cos a)2 pR2v ( cos a)2
The simulation results and the experimental data for
the linear relationship between the limited pressure dif-
ference and the coil current of the on–off solenoid valve
can be seen in Figure 4. The percentage of the error
between the simulation results and the experimental
data is within 2%.
Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at Tsinghua University on June 20, 2014
Proc IMechE Part D: J Automobile Engineering 228(6)
Therefore, if the master cylinder pressure (the input
pressure) can be detected, the linear characteristic of the
expected wheel cylinder pressure (the output pressure)
can be obtained on the basis of the limited pressure dif-
ference, as shown by
pw = pm  Dp
Ki ks (x0 + xm ) ð13Þ
= pm  I+
pR2v ( cos a)2 pR2v ( cos a)2
The state machine of PDL control of an on–off valve
is shown in Figure 5. We assume that one operating
point that makes the valve reach the critical balanced
state is (I0 , Dp0 ), as phase 1 shows. If the inlet pressure
is reduced, the pressure difference will decrease accord-
ingly, and the valve will be closed completely with the
output pressure being maintained (phase 2). If the inlet
pressure is increased with the coil current remaining
unchanged, the pressure difference across the valve will
become greater, leading to the loss of the critical bal-
ance, and the valve will open (phase 3) with the operat-
ing point changing to (I0 , Dp). After flow commences,
as the inlet pressure decreases and the outlet pressure
increases, the pressure difference will gradually become
smaller. Once the pressure difference recovers to Dp0 ,
the critical balanced state of the valve core will again be
entered (phase 1). The valve will close again, and the
working point will return to (I0 , Dp0 ).
In this way, the valve can be modulated in a PDL
mode; under the critical balanced state of the valve
(xv = 0; FN = 0), the pressure difference across the
valve is linearly correlated with the coil current. The lin-
ear relationship described above has great potential to
be utilized to improve the control precision and accu-
racy of the hydraulic pressure.
Modelling and simulation of pressure-
difference-limiting control
System modelling
To study further the characteristics of the PDL control
method introduced in the second section, simulations
and analyses are required. Thus, the appropriate valve
dynamics and models of the valve flow and output pres-
ð11Þ sure need to be constructed.
Valve dynamics. Figure 6 shows the valve core and flow
in the valve’s open state. Based on the OX coordinate
system defined in the second section, the axial dynamic
balance equation of the valve core can be expressed as
ð12Þ
d2 xv
m =  Fe + Fs + Fh  FB  Ff ð14Þ
dt2
where m is the mass of the valve core and plug, FB is the
viscous force and Ff is the frictional force.
The electromagnetic force and spring force were ana-
lysed in the second section. The viscous force is a resis-
tance exerted on the core when flow commences. Its
Lv et al. 653

dqv
Fh trans =  rL ð21Þ
dt
where L is the damping length.
Since the pressure between the moving iron and the
magnetic isolation tube and the pressure between the
valve core and the valve body are very small, and since
the valve is surrounded by fluid, the frictional force Ff
acting on the valve is very small and can thus be
neglected.13
The hydrodynamic force can be given by

Fh = Fh st = pR2v ( cos a)2

+ Fh trans
dqv ð22Þ
Dp  2C2d Dp cos a Aj  rL
dt

Valve flow. The flow depends on the difference between

the pressure at the valve inlet and the pressure at the
valve outlet, which can be expressed as
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
2 Dp
qv = C d A j ð23Þ
r

where Cd is the flow coefficient.

Figure 6. Schematic diagram of the valve core and flow.

value is affected by the viscosity of the fluid and the Wheel cylinder pressure. The build-up process for the
movement velocity of the valve core, as shown by17 wheel cylinder pressure can be divided into two phases:
first, the elimination of the gap between the brake pad
dxv and the brake disc; second, the brake pad pressing the
FB = B ð15Þ
dt disc, which results in an elastic deformation and gener-
where B is the viscous damping coefficient. ates the brake pressure.
After flow starts, the axial hydraulic force acting on The pressure of the wheel cylinder is given by
the core will become the hydrodynamic force, instead 
dpw k dx ( xc 4 xw m )
of the hydrostatic force. It can be divided into two = dxwc c ð24Þ
dt D E (x c . xw m )
parts, namely the stationary part and the transient part, Ð
as given by qv dt
xc = ð25Þ
Aw
Fh = Fh st + Fh trans ð16Þ
where kw is the stiffness of the wheel cylinder spring,
The stationary part of the hydrodynamic force is xw m is the maximum displacement of the wheel cylin-
caused by the non-time-varying flow. According to the der spring, xc is the displacement of the caliper, D is the
momentum theory, it can be calculated as thickness of the brake lining, E is the elastic modulus of
the friction materials and Aw is the cross-sectional area
Fh = Dp As  rqv (vj cos a  v0 )
st ð17Þ
of the wheel cylinder.
qv qv
vj = , v0 = ð18Þ
Aj A0
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi Simulation and analysis of pressure-difference-
pdm d2 limiting modulation
Aj = R2v  m xv ð19Þ
Rv 4
Based on the system models built in MATLAB/
where r is the density of the hydraulic fluid, Aj is the Simulink and the valve parameters listed in Table 1,
flow area of the orifice, dm is the average diameter of simulations of the PDL control method are carried out,
the valve seat and qv is the fluid flow across the valve. and its characteristics are analysed as follows.
Therefore, it can be expressed as

Fh = pR2v ( cos a)2 Dp  2C2d Dp cos a Aj
st
The transient hydrodynamic force, which is caused
by the time-varying flow and is related to the opening
xv , can be calculated using the relation
ð20Þ Characteristics of pressure-difference-limiting modulation under
different inlet pressures. The responses of the limited
pressure differences under different input pressures (dif-
ferent master cylinder pressures) are researched. In the
simulation, the input pressures are taken as ramp

Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at Tsinghua University on June 20, 2014

654
Table 1. Parameters of the inlet valve.
Parameter (units)
Coil resistance R (O)
Number N of turns in the coil
Mass m of the valve core (g)
Sphere radius Rv of the valve core (mm)
Stiffness coefficient ks of the spring (N/mm)
Maximum displacement xm of the spring (mm)
Pre-tension displacement x0 of the spring (mm)
Cone angle a of the valve seat (deg)
Big-endian diameter d2 of the valve seat (mm)
Little-endian diameter d1 of the valve seat (mm)
Figure 7. Variation in the limited pressure difference under
different inlet pressures.
inputs stabilizing at 1.5 MPa, 2.5 MPa, 3.5 MPa and
4.5 MPa, which correspond to a driver’s different brak-
ing demands, from mild braking to heavy braking, dur-
ing daily driving. The coil current is taken as a fixed
value at 140 mA, which corresponds to a limited pres-
sure difference across the valve at 1.2 MPa.
The simulation results are shown in Figure 7. Under
the four different inlet pressures, although the outlet
pressures vary from 0.3 MPa to 3.3 MPa at the begin-
ning, each corresponding limited pressure difference
finally levels off at the same value of 1.2 MPa. The final
pressure difference is not related to the initial input
pressure, validating the linear characteristic of the PDL
control analysed in the second section. However, it does
take longer for the pressure modulation to reach the
stable state under a higher inlet pressure.
According to Figure 8, as the inlet pressure increases,
the displacement of the valve core becomes larger,
Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at Tsinghua University on June 20, 2014
Proc IMechE Part D: J Automobile Engineering 228(6)
causing the flow area of the orifice to become greater,
and the period that the valve is fully open becomes lon-
Value ger. The amplitude of the hydrodynamic force acting
7.4 on the core also increases, but it eventually converges to
450 the same value as the amplitude of the hydrostatic
2.1 force.
0.794
0.34
0.3 Characteristics of pressure-difference-limiting modulation under
3.1
114
different coil currents. The variation in the limited pres-
1.2 sure differences under different coil current inputs is
0.65 also studied. In the simulation, the input pressures are
taken as a ramp input stabilizing at 3 MPa, corre-
sponding to a medium braking demand of the driver
during a normal deceleration process. Different values
are used for the coil current (130 mA, 150 mA, 170 mA
and 190 mA), corresponding to different limited pres-
sures, which can be regarded as different modulation
requests for the wheel cylinder pressure during the nor-
mal braking process.
The simulation results are shown in Figure 9. With
an increase in the coil current, the outlet pressure
decreases from 2.1 MPa to 0.7 MPa, causing the corre-
sponding limited pressure difference to increase from
0.9 MPa to 2.3 MPa. The simulation results indicate
that, under PDL modulation, a larger coil current input
results in a higher limited pressure difference.
Figure 10 shows the responses of the core’s displace-
ment and the hydrodynamic force under different coil
currents. If the coil current rises, the amplitude of the
hydrodynamic force increases because of the positive
correlation to the pressure drop between the valve inlet
and the valve outlet. Furthermore, the orifice passage
area becomes smaller, whereas the modulation period
becomes shorter.
Regenerative braking control algorithm
based on the pressure-difference-limiting
modulation of the hydraulic brake
For an electrified vehicle, the total braking torque Tb is
cooperatively provided by the regenerative braking tor-
que and friction braking torque according to
Tb = i0 ig Tregen + Thydraulic ð26Þ
The overall brake demand Tb need of the vehicle can
be indicated by the master cylinder pressure18 pm , as is
shown by
4mb rb f Aw
Tb need = pm ð27Þ
b
Considering the transmission ratio, the motor’s
regenerative braking torque Tregen can be regarded as
an equivalent brake pressure19 pregen , which is given by
i0 ig Tregen
pregen = ð28Þ
4mrb f Aw
Lv et al.
Figure 8. Simulation results under different inlet pressures.
Because the friction braking can be derived from the
front-wheel cylinder pressure pw , the overall brake force
provided by the regenerative and friction brakes can be
expressed as
pm = pregen + pw
According to equation (29), during the cooperative
regenerative braking control, a target value exists for
the difference between the master cylinder pressure and
the wheel cylinder pressure (i.e. the pressure difference
across the inlet valve), which can be expressed as
Dptgt = pm  pw
= pregen
Thus, the target value for the wheel cylinder
pressure can be calculated on the basis of the master
cylinder pressure and the expected pressure difference,
as shown by
Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at Tsinghua University on June 20, 2014
655
pw tgt = pm  Dptgt
ð31Þ
= pm  pregen
Hence, the proposed PDL modulation method can
be applied to the cooperative regenerative braking con-
ð29Þ trol of an electrified vehicle. A logic diagram of the pro-
posed regenerative braking control algorithm is shown
in Figure 11. With a driver operating the brake pedal,
the total braking demand Tb need of a vehicle can be cal-
culated via the master cylinder pressure based on equa-
tion (27). Based on the feedback signal of the braking
torque of an electric motor, the equivalent brake pres-
sure pregen of the regenerative braking torque can be cal-
ð30Þ culated according to equation (28). As equation (30)
shows, during the regenerative deceleration, the
expected difference between the master cylinder pres-
sure and the wheel cylinder pressure, namely Dptgt , is
equal to the equivalent brake pressure pregen of the elec-
tric motor. Taking Dptgt as an input, the target coil
656
Figure 9. Variation in the limited pressure difference under
different coil currents.
current for the inlet valve can be calculated on the basis
of the linear relationship between the coil current and
the limited pressure difference and exerted on the inlet
valve. Therefore, the target pressure difference Dptgt
between the master cylinder pressure and the wheel
cylinder pressure can be reached and kept consistent
with the change in the regenerative torque of the elec-
tric motor, which makes it possible to achieve the target
wheel cylinder pressure pw tgt accurately, as equation
(31) shows. Thus, the regenerative brake and hydraulic
brake are applied together to meet the total decelera-
tion requirement of the vehicle.
Under PDL modulation, during the pressure build-
up process, the outlet valve in the downstream side of
the circuit is not energized but remains in its normally
closed state. Once the wheel cylinder pressure needs to
be decreased, the outlet valve will be open, with the inlet
valve closed, and the fluid in the wheel cylinder will go
into the low-pressure accumulator.
Because the expected pressure difference is equal to
the equivalent pressure of the braking torque of the
electric motor, the wheel pressure can be estimated via
the motor torque and the master cylinder pressure.
Thus, the front-wheel pressure sensor can be removed
to reduce significantly the development cost.
Hardware-in-the-loop tests
To test and verify the regenerative braking control
strategy developed above and to evaluate the control
performance of PDL modulation, HIL tests are
carried out.
Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at Tsinghua University on June 20, 2014
Proc IMechE Part D: J Automobile Engineering 228(6)
Some researchers have carried out simulations and
HIL tests to investigate the regenerative braking perfor-
mance of electric vehicles and hybrid electric vehicles,
verifying the control effect of the developed stability
control algorithm on the vehicle’s lateral dynamic
motion.20,21 However, the lateral motion control of a
vehicle under critical driving situations is not involved
in the present research, which mainly focuses on the
brake blending performance during the vehicle’s longi-
tudinal motion under a normal deceleration process.
Hardware-in-the-loop test platform
As shown in Figure 12, the entire test platform consists
of a real-time simulation system, an electric control
unit and the hydraulic brake actuators. The real-time
simulation system is AutoBox from dSPACE. Virtual
models of the key components of an electric vehicle,
including the vehicle dynamics, battery, tyre and elec-
tric motor, are built and run in AutoBox. The vehicle
parameters are presented in Table 2. An electric control
unit that contains the control strategy and algorithm is
adopted. It communicates with dSPACE via a control-
ler area network bus. The real brake actuators include
a brake pedal, a master cylinder, wheel cylinders and a
hydraulic pressure modulator. Figure 13 is a photo-
graph of the test bench, which shows the overall experi-
mental set-up.
Hardware-in-the-loop test results for the developed
regenerative braking control algorithm
Utilizing the regeneration strategy based on PDL mod-
ulation, HIL tests under typical braking processes,
including mild braking, medium braking and dynamic
braking, are carried out. In these HIL tests, the initial
braking speed is set at 80 km/h, and the road is assumed
to have a dry surface with a high adhesion coefficient
of 0.8.
The HIL tests results for mild braking are shown in
Figure 14. At approximately 1 s, the driver depresses
the brake pedal, and the master cylinder pressure
increases. The electric motor is controlled as a genera-
tor, gradually exerting the regenerative braking torque
on the front axle and recovering the kinetic energy of
the vehicle. The recovered energy is converted into elec-
tricity, which is used to charge the battery pack.
According to the increase in the motor’s braking tor-
que, the coil current starts to increase from 147 mA to
165 mA. After 2.5 s, the master cylinder pressure
remains stable at about 2 MPa. Because of PDL con-
trol of the inlet valve, the front-wheel pressure reaches
only 0.6 MPa. The outlet valve is not controlled during
the pressure build-up process, remaining in its normally
closed state. At 8 s, the vehicle speed decreases to a rel-
atively low value, and the regenerative braking torque,
which is restricted by its full-load characteristic, quickly
drops to zero. The coil current of the inlet valve falls to
zero simultaneously with the inlet valve being fully
Lv et al.
Figure 10. Simulation results under different coil currents.
open, and the hydraulic brake takes over the total
braking operation of the whole vehicle.
An HIL test of the medium-braking process is shown
in Figure 15. During the whole braking procedure, the
coil current responds quickly, resulting in accurate
modulation of the hydraulic brake pressure.
Based on the HIL test results for the normal decel-
eration procedures illustrated above, the blended brakes
at the front wheels follow the target brake pressure well,
validating the feasibility and effectiveness of PDL mod-
ulation of the hydraulic brake pressure. Furthermore,
the estimated front-wheel pressure coincides with the
real value, indicating that the front-wheel pressure sen-
sor can be removed to reduce the development cost.
Comparison of pressure-difference-limiting
modulation with pulse width modulation control
The superior braking performance and control accu-
racy of PDL modulation are evident from comparison
with PWM control, which is the most widely used mod-
ulation method for on–off solenoid valves. HIL test
Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at Tsinghua University on June 20, 2014
657
results for PWM-based control of valves for regenera-
tive braking during two typical braking processes are
shown in Figure 16.
In the left-hand plot of Figure 16, the master cylin-
der pressure is about 2 MPa, which represents a light
deceleration request of the driver. During the braking
process, since the brake demand is relatively small, the
regenerative braking torque of the electric motor can
provide the majority of the deceleration request, and
the hydraulic brake pressure of the wheel cylinder is
under PWM control at only 0.6 MPa, a very low level.
In the right-hand plot, the master cylinder pressure
remains at nearly 4 MPa, corresponding to a heavier
braking operation during daily driving. As the vehicle
speed drops, the regenerative braking ability of the
motor gradually decreases, so that the hydraulic brake
is PWM regulated to supplement the overall braking
demand of the vehicle.
Based on the HIL test results analysed above, under
PWM control of the inlet valves, although the hydrau-
lic brake cooperates well with the motor’s regenerative
brake, the control accuracy of the overall braking force
658 Proc IMechE Part D: J Automobile Engineering 228(6)

Figure 11. Logic diagram of the regenerative braking control algorithm based on PDL control.
BCU: brake control unit: CAN_BUS: controller area network bus; SOC: state of charge.

Table 2. Parameters of the target electric vehicle. is not sufficiently good. Because of the non-linear dis-
crete behaviour of the on–off valve and flow, the error
Parameter (units) Value between the master cylinder pressure and the equivalent
Total mass m (kg) 1250
pressure is greater and fluctuates more frequently than
Wheelbase L (m) 2.50 that in the PDL-based method, which affects the brak-
Frontal area A (m2) 2.40 ing performance of the vehicle.
Coefficient CD of the air resistance 0.32 In order to evaluate the braking performance and
Nominal radius r of the tyre (m) 0.295 the pressure-modulating accuracy, the mean decelera-
Final drive ratio i0 3.79
Transmission ratio ig 2.10
tion of the vehicle and the r.m.s. error (RMSE)
Braking force distribution coefficient b 0.79 between the expected braking force and the real brak-
ing force are adopted as evaluation parameters

Figure 12. Configuration of the HIL test platform.

Regen: regenerative.
Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at Tsinghua University on June 20, 2014
Lv et al.
Figure 13. HIL test bench for regenerative braking control.
Figure 14. HIL test results of the PDL-based regenerative
braking control strategy for mild braking.
Veh Spd: vehicle speed.
respectively. To calculate the RMSE, the expected
braking force can be derived from the master cylinder
pressure, and the real value can be represented by the
equivalent overall braking pressure of the regenera-
tive and hydraulic braking torques. The RMSE can
be expressed as
Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at Tsinghua University on June 20, 2014
659
Figure 15. HIL test results of the PDL-based regenerative
braking control strategy for medium braking.
Veh Spd: vehicle speed.
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
1X n  2
RMSE = pequivalent (k)  pm (k) ð32Þ
n k=1
The mean deceleration and the RMSE values of the
pressure in the HIL tests under the two control methods
are listed in Table 3. During the mild-braking process,
the RMSE of the equivalent brake pressure in PDL
control is 3.105 3 1023, which is 76.98% better than in
PWM-based control, indicating the enhancement of the
modulation accuracy. Moreover, the improvements
reach the very high levels of 89.82% and 88.63% during
medium decelerations and dynamic decelerations
respectively. Because of the much more precise pressure
control of the PDL modulation, the mean deceleration
of the vehicle is increased, leading to a better braking
performance for the vehicle.
Considering the HIL test results, it becomes evident
that regenerative braking control based on PDL modu-
lation ensures better control accuracy than does the
existing PWM-based control, improving a vehicle’s
deceleration performance. Both the HIL test results
and the comparison analysis indicate that the proposed
PDL control method is well suited to hydraulic braking
modulation.
Conclusion
In this paper, a novel PDL control method for on–off
valves was proposed, which can improve the
660
Figure 16. HIL test results of the PWM-based regenerative braking control strategy.
Veh Spd: vehicle speed.
Table 3. Comparison of the two control modulation methods.
Brake scenario Mean deceleration(m/s2)
Mild PWM 1.907
PDL 2.33
Medium PWM 3.18
PDL 3.49
Dynamic PWM 2.06
PDL 2.14
PWM: pulse width modulation; PDL: pressure difference limiting.
performance and the control accuracy of the hydraulic
brake. The linear relationship between the coil current
and the limited pressure difference was illustrated and
verified by experiments. The characteristics of PDL
control under different inlet pressures and different coil
currents were simulated and analysed. Furthermore, a
regenerative braking control algorithm based on the
proposed PDL modulation was developed for electri-
fied vehicles. HIL simulations were carried out under
typical deceleration scenarios.
The HIL test results showed that, compared with
the accuracy of conventional PWM-based control, the
accuracy of hydraulic braking pressure control was
improved by 75–85% under different braking processes
by using the PDL-based regenerative braking control
algorithm, which validated the feasibility and effective-
ness of the proposed hydraulic pressure modulation
method.
Further studies will be carried out in the following
areas: the impact of the variations in the valve para-
meters on the control performance of PDL modulation
and live tests of on–off solenoid valves under PDL
control.
Funding
This work was supported by the Natural Science
Foundation of China (grant number: 51075225) and
Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at Tsinghua University on June 20, 2014
Proc IMechE Part D: J Automobile Engineering 228(6)
RMSE Accuracy improvement(%)
1.349 3 1022 76.98
3.105 3 1023
5.292 3 1022 89.82
5.385 3 1023
2.520 3 1022 88.63
2.866 3 1023
the National High Tech Project 863 (grant number:
2011AA11A243).
Declaration of conflict of interest
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.
References
1. Gao Y and Mehrdad E. Electronic braking system of EV
and HEV-integration of regenerative braking, automatic
braking force control and ABS. SAE paper 2001-01-
2478, 2001.
2. Tur O, Ustun O and Tuncay RN. An introduction to
regenerative braking of electric vehicles as anti-lock brak-
ing system. In: 2007 IEEE intelligent vehicles symposium,
Istanbul, Turkey, 13–15 June 2007, pp. 944–948. New
York: IEEE.
3. Aoki Y, Suzuki K, Nakano H, et al. Development of
hydrodynamic servo brake system for cooperative control
with regenerative brake. SAE paper 2007-01-0868, 2007.
4. von Albrichsfeld C and Karner J. Brake system for hybrid
and electric vehicles. SAE paper 2009-01-1217, 2009.
5. Zhang JZ, Lv C, Gou JF and Kong DC. Cooperative
control of regenerative braking and hydraulic braking of
an electrified passenger car. Proc IMechE Part D: J
Automobile Engineering 2012; 226(10): 1289–1302.
6. Vaughan ND and Gamble JB. The modeling and simula-
tion of a proportional solenoid valve. Trans ASME, J
Dynamic Systems Measmt Control 1996; 118(1): 120–125.
Lv et al. 661

7. Amirante R, Moscatelli PG and Catalano LA. Evaluation Aw cross-sectional area of the wheel
of the flow forces on a direct (single stage) proportional cylinder
valve by means of a computational fluid dynamic analysis. A0 flow area of the valve inlet port
Energy Conversion Managmt 2007; 48(3): 942–953. B viscous damping coefficient
8. Dasgupta K and Watton J. Dynamic analysis of propor- Cd flow coefficient
tional solenoid controlled piloted relief valve by bond- D thickness of the brake lining
graph. Simulation Modelling Practice Theory 2005; 13(1): dm average diameter of the valve seat
21–38. d1 little-endian diameter of the valve
9. Cristofori D and Vacca A. The modeling of electro-
seat
hydraulic proportional valves. Trans ASME, J Dynamic
Systems Measmt Control 2011; 134(2): 021008-1–021008-13.
d2 big-endian diameter of the valve
10. Choi S and Cho DW. Control of wheel slip ratio using seat
sliding mode controller with pulse width modulation. J E elastic modulus of the friction
Veh System Dynamics 1999; 32: 267–284. materials of the brake device
11. Wu MC and Shih MC. Hydraulic anti-lock braking con- FB viscous force acting on the valve
trol using the hybrid sliding-mode pulse width modula- Fe electromagnetic force
tion pressure control method. Proc IMechE Part I: J Ff frictional force
Systems and Control Engineering 2001; 215: 177–187. Fh hydraulic force of the valve core
12. Jeong HS and Kim HE. Experimental based analysis of Fh st stationary part of the hydrodynamic
the pressure control characteristics of an oil hydraulic force
three-way on/off solenoid valve controlled by PWM sig-
Fh trans transient part of the hydrodynamic
nal. Trans ASME, J Dynamic Systems Measmt Control
2002; 124(1): 196–05.
force
13. Wang W and Song J. High speed on-off solenoid valve FN supportive force of the valve core
with proportional control based on high frequency PWM Fs spring force of the valve core
control. J Tsinghua Univ 2011; 51(5): 715–719. i0 final drive ratio
14. Zhang JZ, Lv C, Qiu MZ, et al. Braking energy regenera- ig transmission ratio
tion control of a fuel cell hybrid electric bus. Energy Con- I coil current
version Managmt 2013; 76: 1117–1124. ks stiffness coefficient of the return
15. Zhang JZ, Lv C, Yue XW, et al. Development of the spring
electrically-controlled regenerative braking system for kw stiffness coefficient of the wheel
electrified passenger vehicle. SAE paper 2013-01-1463, cylinder spring
2013.
Ki current-force coefficient
16. Lin R. Research and digital simulation of high speed on/off
valve. Master’s Thesis, Wuhan University of Technology,
Kxv displacement-force coefficient
Wuhan, Hubei, People’s Republic of China, 2005. l length of the air gap
17. Meng AH, Wang WW, Song J, et al. Extending of the L damping length
duty ratio range of pulse width modulation control on high m mass of the valve core and plug
speed on-off valve. J Mech Engng 2012; 48(10): 167–172. N number of turns in the coil
18. Li SB. Regenerative braking and traction control of electri- pequivalent equivalent pressure of the master
fied vehicles. Master’s Thesis, Chinese Academy of cylinder
Sciences, Beijing, People’s Republic of China, 2010. pm pressure of the master cylinder
19. Gou JF. Research on regenerative braking and anti-skid pregen equivalent brake pressure of the
control strategy of electric car. PhD Thesis, Chinese Acad- regenerative braking torque
emy of Sciences, Beijing, People’s Republic of China, 2012.
pw pressure of the wheel cylinder
20. Kim DH, Kim JM, Hwang SH and Kim HS. Optimal
brake torque distribution for a four-wheel drive hybrid
pw tgt target value of the pressure of the
electric vehicle stability enhancement. Proc IMechE wheel cylinder
Part D: J Automobile Engineering 2007; 221(11): qv hydraulic fluid flow across the valve
1357–1366. Rg magnetic reluctance of the air gap
21. Kim D, Kim C, Hwang SH and Kim H. Hardware in the Rv spherical radius of the valve core
loop simulation of vehicle stability control using regen- r nominal radius of the tyre
erative braking and electro hydraulic brake for hybrid rb f effective friction radius of the front-
electric vehicle. In: 17th IFAC world congress, Seoul, wheel brake disc
Republic of Korea, 6–11 July 2008, pp. 5664–5669. Red Tb total braking torque of the vehicle
Hook, New York: Curran Associates. Tb braking torque demand of the
need
vehicle
Appendix 1 Thydraulic hydraulic braking torque
Tregen regenerative braking torque
Notation
Tregen cmd command value of the regenerative
Aj flow area of the valve orifice braking torque
As axial surface area of the valve core Tregen act actual value of the regenerative
exposed to hydraulic fluid braking torque

Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at Tsinghua University on June 20, 2014

662 Proc IMechE Part D: J Automobile Engineering 228(6)

vj flow velocity through the valve a cone angle of the valve seat
orifice b braking force distribution coefficient
v0 flow velocity at the valve inlet port between the front axle and the rear
xc displacement of the brake caliper axle
xm maximum displacement of the valve Dp pressure difference cross valve
return spring Dptgt target value of the pressure
xv displacement of the valve core difference between the master
xw m maximum displacement of the wheel cylinder pressure and the wheel
cylinder spring cylinder pressure
x0 pre-tension displacement of the mb friction coefficient of the brake disc
valve return spring r density of the hydraulic fluid

Downloaded from pid.sagepub.com at Tsinghua University on June 20, 2014

View publication stats