Professional Documents
Culture Documents
=
=
+ =
=
( )
) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) 1 ( ) 1 | ( ) ) ( )( 1 ( ) 1 | ( ) (
) ( ) 1 | ( ) (
) ( ) ( ) 1 | ( ) 1 | ( ) | (
, ) (
1 1 1 1 0 0 1
1
1
1 1 1 1 0 1
2
k W k v k v k W k k P C k W I k k P k P
k S C k k P k W
k v k W k k x k k x k k x
g k V if
T T
T
| | | |
| |
+ + =
=
+ + =
<
=
=
2002 PATH Conference
Example: Range and Range Rate Sensors
Level of Modeling
Detailed sensor models based on manufacturers specs and experimental
data
Communication system modeled as constant delay (fairly good
assumption since using token-ring procotol)
Lead vehicle modeled as double integrator with bounded acceleration,
while following vehicle has ideal spacing dynamics using fused estimate
in feedback
Simulation Conditions
Two car platoon with lead vehicle following sinusoidal desired acceleration
(a
des
= 0.5sin(0.1t))
Second vehicle follows at 40m spacing, with incorrect initial condition
Faults occur in following vehicles Denso Lidar (3m bias in range) after 30
seconds, and magnetometer (miss 4 markers) after 35 seconds
2002 PATH Conference
Relativ e States
Prev ious Velocity
Current Velocity
Prev ious Position
current Position
Vehi cl e Model
radar
To Workspace8
mag
To Workspace7
dgps
To Workspace2
l i dar
To Workspace1
Fault
Radar Faul t
Magnetometer Faul t
Prev Velocity
Current Velocity
Prev Position
Current Position
Relativ e State
Magnet+Comm Pseudo-Sensor
Fault
Li dar Faul t
Prev Velocity
Current Velocity
Prev Position
Current Position
Relativ e States
Li dar
Measurements Fused Estimate
Integrate FDI
and Sensor Fusi on
Prev Velocity
Current Velocity
Prev Position
Current Position
Relativ e States
Eaton
VORAD
Prev Velocity
Current Velocity
Prev Position
Current Position
Relativ e States
DGPS+Comm Pseudo-Sensor
Current Velocity
Current Position
Fault
DGPS Faul t
2
2
2
2
8 2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Simulation Model in Matlab/Simulink
2002 PATH Conference
Sensor Measurements
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
R
a
n
g
e
R
a
t
e
(
m
/
s
)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Time (sec)
R
a
n
g
e
(
m
)
Denso Lidar
Eaton Vorad
DGPS + Comm
Magnetometer + Comm
True State
2002 PATH Conference
Sensor Fusion
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
R
a
n
g
e
R
a
t
e
(
m
/
s
)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
R
a
n
g
e
(
m
)
Time (sec)
fused
true
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
-0.5
-0.4
-0.3
-0.2
-0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
E
r
r
o
r
i n
R
a
n
g
e
R
a
t
e
(
m
/
s
)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
E
r
r
o
r
i n
R
a
n
g
e
(
m
)
Time (sec)
2002 PATH Conference
Fault Detection and Identification
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Symptoms
M
a
g
n
e
t
o
m
e
t
e
r
+
C
o
m
m
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
E
a
t
o
n
V
o
r
a
d
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
D
e
n
s
o
L
i
d
a
r
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
D
G
P
S
+
C
o
m
m
Time (sec)
2002 PATH Conference
Integrated Longitudinal Controller and Fault
Classification
Controllers goal to provide good regulation/tracking despite
uncertainties and disturbances, including some types of faults
Benefits of integrated controller and fault classification
Design robust controller to provide fault-tolerant performance in a
limited way, i.e., include fault-insensitivity in the controller at the
design stage
Maximize controllers robustness to faults using knowledge of
controller performance, modeling uncertainty, and fault effects
Better to avoid frequent switching between the reconfigurable
controllers when faults have small impact on closed-loop performance
Prerequisites for the integrated method
Control model including the modeling uncertainty
Controller design
Fault characteristics
2002 PATH Conference
0
20
40
60
80
100
50
100
150
200
250
300
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
Throttle (%)
Engine Speed (rad/s)
E
n
g
i
n
e
T
o
r
q
u
e
(
N
m
)
Control Model
Longitudinal Vehicle Dynamics
Engine model for 280HP CNG
Cummins engine
Pneumatic brake with EBS
bf
T
a m
wf
af
R
trf
F
rf
F
g m
wf
g m
c
a m
c
ar
R
af
R
a
F
90
d
T
br
T
a m
wr
ar
R
trr
F
u
rr
F
g m
wr
m
eq
a r g b g e
f
J
mg F F h R T R T
v
1
) sin (
A +
+ +
=
u
{ }
m e e map
e
e
f T T T
2
) , (
1
A + = o e
t
>
=
otherwise 0
if ) (
o b o b b
b
P P P P K
T
| |
| |
A +
A +
=
emptying for ) (
1
filling for ) (
1
3
3
m w
be
m w
bf
w
f P t
f P t
P
|
t
|
t
e
t
Truck Model Validation
Engine Retarder - Low
Engine Retarder - High
2002 PATH Conference
Dynamic Surface Control Design
Applied to passenger vehicles -
Gerdes(1996), Hedrick and Yip
(2000)
Implemented successfully on
the California PATH passenger
vehicles in DEMO97 (San
Diego, CA)
Developed analysis and design
methodology to provide stability
and robustness to modeling
uncertainty Song (2002)
Can extend the method to the
faulty system?
Low-pass
Filter
Nonlinear
System
Uncertainty
MSS
(S
1i
, S
2i
)
DSC
P
f
S
f
A
f
m
y
{ }
wdes edes d
P T x , = { }
w e
P T x , =
{ }
des des d
u | o , =
u
x
f A
des
v
2002 PATH Conference
Fault Characteristics
Actuator fault
Partial failure of airbrake system
due to wrong adjustment of
slack adjuster and wear
The brake failure contribute to
nearly one-third of all the
accidents involving commercial
vehicles
Parametric fault
Change of effective radius due
to tire pressure drop
h = (1 f
P
) h
1 ) ( 0 where
otherwise 0
if ) )( 1 (
s s
>
=
t f
P P P P f K
T
A
o b o b A b
b
2002 PATH Conference
Switched error dynamics in a matrix form
(Song et al. 2002)
Passive Fault Tolerance of DSC
Extensibility to the faulty system
Convex optimization problems to check the quadratic stability numerically can
be formulated as long as a magnitude of the fault is known
Passive fault tolerant approach
Fault tolerant for a certain class of faults due to robustness of DSC
i.e. no difference between the class of faults and uncertainty in the
viewpoint of the controller
| |
| |
T
i fi m i f
T
i i i i
i r i f i w i A P i i
f f f f w
S S z
b e i r B w B z f f A z
1 2 1 ,
2 2 1
, , ,
where
, for ) , (
A A + A =
=
= + + =
Extended
Perturbation
Linear Error
Dynamics
P
f
r
f
w
z
A
f
d
u
u
2002 PATH Conference
Fault Classification & Handling
FDD
DSC
Isolatable
fault
Detectable
fault
Tolerable
fault
Specific
Warning
Severity
Indication
Intolerable
fault
Reconfig-
uration
Emergency
Handling
Controller reconfiguration
Intolerable sensor or
parametric faults, which
cannot be handled by Sensor
fusion using hardware
redundancy
State estimation based
controller
Parameter identification (or
estimation) based controller
Intolerable actuator faults
Optimal trajectory
reconfiguration using actuator
capability information
Emergency Handling
Performed by the fault
management system and
coordination layer (or higher
layer)
Performance status
Quadratic function level
Actuator capability
Fault classification
Fault severity indication
Isolatability on FDD
2002 PATH Conference
Simulation Results: No Fault
Include parametric uncertainties and unmodeled dynamics
Assume normal distribution for the parametric uncertainties
0.2(degree) road grade disturbance
10% parametric uncertainty on effective radius
20% parametric uncertainty on C
a
30% parametric uncertainty on K
b
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
16
18
20
22
24
V
e
l
o
c
i
t
y
(
m
/
s
)
v
v
des
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
-0.1
-0.05
0
0.05
0.1
V
e
l
o
c
i
t
y
E
r
r
o
r
(
m
/
s
)
Time (second)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
0
50
100
P
e
d
a
l
P
o
s
i
t
i
o
n
(
%
)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
0
500
1000
1500
T
b
(
N
m
)
Actual
Desired
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
0
0.5
1
Time (second)
V
(
z
)
2002 PATH Conference
Simulation Results: Fault Classification
Tolerant faults
Intolerable faults
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
-0.1
-0.05
0
0.05
0.1
V
e
l
o
c
i
t
y
E
r
r
o
r
(
m
/
s
)
0 10 20 30 40
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
E
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
r
a
d
i
u
s
(
m
)
30% Parametric Fault
0 10 20 30 40
0
5
10
15
B
r
a
k
e
C
o
e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
(
K
b
)
40% Actuator Fault
0 10 20 30 40
0
0.5
1
Time (sec)
Q
u
a
d
r
a
t
i
c
F
u
n
c
t
i
o
n
L
e
v
e
l
V
(
z
)
0 10 20 30 40
0
500
1000
1500
T
b
(
N
m
)
Time (sec)
Actual
Desired
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
-0.1
0
0.1
0.2
V
e
l
o
c
i
t
y
E
r
r
o
r
(
m
/
s
)
0 10 20 30 40
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
E
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
r
a
d
i
u
s
(
m
)
50% Parametric Fault
0 10 20 30 40
0
5
10
15
B
r
a
k
e
C
o
e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
(
K
b
)
60% Actuator Fault
0 10 20 30 40
0
0.5
1
Time (sec)
Q
u
a
d
r
a
t
i
c
F
u
n
c
t
i
o
n
L
e
v
e
l
V
(
z
)
0 10 20 30 40
0
500
1000
1500
2000
T
b
(
N
m
)
Time (sec)
Actual
Desired
2002 PATH Conference
Conclusions & Future Work
Integrated sensor fusion and FDD
Transit buses have considerable amount physical redundancy that
can be leveraged for improved reliability and accuracy
For range and range rate sensors, PDAF is an effective framework
for integrated design of diagnostics and sensor fusion
Integrated longitudinal control and fault classification
Fault classification Indicates the fault severity in the viewpoint of the
closed loop system
Integrated design allows us to maximize controllers robustness to
faults in the presence of uncertainties
A great deal of work before the Demo 2003, but in the
near term:
Tests for model validation of 40 ft CNG bus as well as sensor
processing are scheduled in November at Crows Landing