Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Luis Silva1,*, Diego Delarmelina2,*, Sergio Junco1, Nacer K. MSirdi3, Hassan Noura3
1
Departamento de Electrnica, 2 Escuela de Ingeniera Mecnica Facultad de Ciencias Exactas, Ingeniera y Agrimensura Universidad Nacional de Rosario Robamba 245 Bis S2000EKE Rosario Argentina
Laboratoire des Sciences de lInformation et des Systmes (LSIS) Domaine Scientifique de St Jrme Avenue Escadrille Normandie Nimen, 13397 Marseille Cedex 20, France sjunco@fceia.unr.edu.ar, nacer.msirdi@lsis.org, hassan.noura@lsis.org
*
Keywords: Vehicle dynamics, fault detection and isolation, analytical redundancy, diagnostic bond graphs. Abstract: This paper applies the model-based ARR technique, implemented on the so-called Diagnostic Bond Graph, to the problem of detecting and isolating faults in vehicle suspensions. A fourteen degrees of freedom (DoF), fourwheeled vehicle Bond Graph model adapted from models available in the literature is used as starting point. The main contribution of the paper is the proposition of a simplified Diagnostic Bond Graph that, on the ground of the chosen measurements, allows solving the FDI problem on a reduced subsystem decoupled from the wheel dynamics. This renders unnecessary using the complex and uncertain ground-tire interaction model. The simulation results presented illustrate the method ability of monitoring and isolating all the possible suspension faults considered.
1. INTRODUCTION
The great complexity of current technical systems and processes calls for the development of methods for fault detection and isolation (FDI), aimed at helping in the assurance of the systems safety of operation. This is important because of economic, human safety, and environmental reasons, among others. Model-based FDI (MB-FDI), one of the answers to this challenge, has evolved to a discipline with extensive theoretical studies and many applications. A main reason for this is the fact that MB-FDI not only provides techniques for direct online application, but also allows the off-line study of a plenty of faulty scenarios without any risk for the real system. One of the most popular MB-FDI methods is the Analytical Redundant Relationships or ARR-approach. It generates residuals from constraints (usually equations) among known (measured) system variables, which are parameterized by coefficients whose nominal values in normal system operation are known to a good level of approximation. If the evaluation of the residuals
2. ARR-BASED FDI ON BG
The scheme of Figure 1 outlines a typical MB-FDI system. There, the block MM stands for some mathematical model producing an output whose evaluation and further processing allows to diagnose the fault. How to do it using the ARR technique on Bond Graphs is explained next.
To illustrate all of this, consider again the quarter car model. The DBG given in Fig. 3 uses only a submodel of the BG in Fig. 2, because its purpose is diagnosing faults only in the suspension (composed by damper and spring) and, as the wheel speed V1 is measured, the wheel submodel is unnecessary (and so the road profile related input V0). Throughpower 1- and 0-junctions have been added next to the MSf:V2 and MSe:FKs respectively, in order to capture the residuals Res1 (2) and Res2 (3) with the usual convention on BGs (cf. Remark 1). The presence of only Ks in Res2 indicates its ability to detect a fault in the spring but not in the damper, while the opposite happens with Res1. Thus, the conditions for the Monitorability (Mb) and Isolability (Ib) of both faults are given. This is shown by the Fault Signature Matrix in Table 1.
(1) (2)
Component Ks Bs
Res1
& + V V Res2 = (1 / K s ) F Ks 2 1
(3)
Mb 1 1 Ib 1 1
road profile
normal operation
5% decrease in Ks
normal operation
The injection of a sinusoidal road profile on the scheme of Fig. 3 has been simulated with 20sim [12] as shown in Fig. 4. Instead of the (real and instrumented) Vehicle-and-road-system its BG model as in Fig. 2 has been used. The correspondence between the entries of Table 1 and the residuals is clearly seen.
Remark 2. A full FDI scheme would need complements and refinements such as observers to obtain non measurable variables, adaptive thresholds for residuals to cope with model uncertainties and measurement noise, etc. None of these issues is considered here, but the derivation of the basic scheme for FDI of suspension faults on a full 4-wheeled vehicle BG model.
Fx = m v x + m y v z m z v y Fy = m v y + m z v x m x v z Fz = m v z + m x v y m y v x Tx = I xx x + y I zz z z I yy y T y = I yy y + z I xx x x I zz z Tz = I zz z + x I yy y y I xx x
(4)
(5)
Vertical dynamics
The tire-suspension vertical dynamics shown in Fig. 7 replicates the BG of Fig. 2 at each vehicle corner, where the suspension is attached to the complex body model instead of being just to a simple I-storage.
The force Fz exerted on the body center of mass is computed in (6), where Fzi is the i-th suspension force.
Fz =
i=4 i =1
Fzi
(6)
Lateral dynamics
The total component Fy over the body results from the contribution of each lateral force, each of them being determined by Pacejkas lateral model. In the following equations FzNi is the i-th tire normal force, and sai is the i-th slip angle.
x X = y Y Z z
v x v X = v v y Y v v Z z
(7)
According to [9], the equations for the slip angles (frontal and rear) are the followings: vy vy b. z a. z ; sa3, 4 = + sa1, 2 = 2 2 2 2
vx vx + v y vx vx + v y
The inverse chain of transformations is necessary to apply the total vehicle weight (WeightZ, aligned with the Z-axis) to the body (in its local frame). In this way, Weightx Weighty and Weightz are added to the total forces over each axis. The overall inverse transformation can be easily obtained knowing that inverse and transposed matrices can be exchanged because dealing with orthogonal matrices.
Weight x 0 t t t = Weight 0 y Weight Weight Z z
Longitudinal dynamics
The total force Fx in (8) is composed by all the longitudinal forces of the tires and the projection of the two lateral forces (Flat1 and Flat2) over the x-axis. The model also considers the aerodynamic force, whose value depends on the longitudinal speed Vx.
(8)
slipi =
The coefficient Cx stands for the aerodynamic resistance; for the air density; and A for the vehicles total frontal area.
Tx = ( Fy1 + Fy 2 + Fy 3 + Fy 4 ).h + ( Fz1 + Fz 3 ).(c) + ( Fz 2 + Fz 4 ).d Ty = ( Fx1 + Fx 2 + Fx3 + Fx 4 ).(h R ) + ( Fz1 + Fz 2 ).(a ) + ( Fz 3 + Fz 4 ).b + TM Tz = ( Fx1 + Fx 3 ).c + ( Fx 2 + Fx 4 ).(d ) + ( Fy1 + Fy 2 ).a + ( Fy 3 + Fy 4 ).(b)
(9)
Coordinate transformation
In order to evaluate the evolution of the vehicle respect to the ground it is necessary to convert the variables (x,y,z) of the local frame into the variables (X,Y,Z) of the global frame. This renders possible the calculation of the angular and linear speeds in the global frame. The overall transformation can be thought as a chain of the three rotations , and , which rotate the amount of the roll, the pitch and the yaw angle, respectively [2]. These transformations operate on any vector via succesive multiplication of the three component vector by the corresponding rotation matrices , and .
Fig. 9. Overview of diagnostic scheme used in this study.
DBG generation
The BG-based FDI-scheme is shown in Fig. 10. The bottom part is the vehicle model (or the vehicle itself, in the case of an implementation), and the upper part in the box gives an overall view of the DBG. The latter receives the corner speed (Zi_speed) (each corner speed being calculated from the three sensed body variables and the body dimensions), the
wheels center of mass speed (mui_speed) and the spring effort (Ksi_effort) of each suspension, with i = 1-4. The DBG of the suspension, the only shown in detail in Fig. 10, is completed with the oval box labelled DBG BODY, whose details are brought in by Figs. 11 (the DBG of the Eulers equations) and 12 (the DBG of the transformers). Looking into the details it is seen that all storages are in derivative causality, which makes the DBG insensitive to the system initial conditions.
and Fz4 (where prime is there to distinguish these forces from the real ones in the faulty system model). Fig. 11 shows the sub-BG of Eulers equations in derivative causality. It outputs the forces Fx,y,z and the torques Tx,y,z, which are used to compute the efforts F1,2,3,4 over the DBG of the coupling sub-BG corresponding to the transformer set TF of Fig. 8. This is done by the DBG of Fig. 12, which deserves some explanation.
Fig. 10. Total DBG and total vehicle bond graph model.
As suggested in Fig. 10, two residuals are obtained for each suspension, as follows: 1 d Res1 = ( Ks1 _ effort ) ( Z1 _ speed mu1 _ speed ) Ks1 dt 1 d Res 2 = ( Ks 2 _ effort ) ( Z 2 _ speed mu2 _ speed ) Ks 2 dt 1 d Res3 = ( Ks3 _ effort ) ( Z 3 _ speed mu3 _ speed ) Ks3 dt
Res 4 = 1 d ( Ks 4 _ effort ) ( Z 4 _ speed mu4 _ speed ) Ks 4 dt
The efforts in (11) -defined from the set of effort equations (10) (cf. (9)et(6))-, are used to calculate the desired set of corner_speed efforts with the TF DBG of Fig. 12. There, the assumption of small angular displacements has been done, which results in a linear BG parameterized by the body dimensions [11]. The sub-BG implementing (11), necessary to couple the DBGs of Figs. 11 and 12, is not shown.
(10)
Fz = Fz1 + Fz 2 + Fz 3 + Fz 4 + Weight z
(11)
ResA= F1 (Ks1 _ effort) Bs1 (Z1 _ speed mu1 _ speed) (Ks2 _ effort) Bs2 (Z2 _ speed mu2 _ speed) ResB= F2 ResC = F3 (Ks3 _ effort) Bs3 (Z3 _ speed mu3 _ speed) (Ks4 _ effort) Bs4 (Z 4 _ speed mu4 _ speed) ResD= F4
The symbols F1,2,3,4 in the expressions of ResA,B,C,D stand for the efforts calculated by the block DBG BODY after processing the four corner speeds, z , Vx, Vy, and TM. For a reason that will become apparent next, these efforts are not, as a-priori expected, the four corner vertical forces Fz1, Fz2, Fz3
body, the components where a fault may occur are those corresponding to the suspensions. According to [6], if the component fault is shown at least in a residual, then it can be monitored (Mb=1). If the residuals combination is unique, the fault is also isolable (Ib=1).
This means that the residuals ResA,B,C,D will remain different from zero even under non-faulty condition. But this can be easily solved if the residuals are generated as the linear combination (12) of the former residuals. Indeed, the new residuals are zero under non-faulty conditions.
Sensitivity analysis
The final part of any FDI method consists in processing the residuals. The processing algorithm depends on how the full FDI system is implemented (chosen system model, kind of sensors, sensing method, noise presence, etc). This paper addresses only the core FDI-algorithm, and does not present any further processing except for the calculation of the sensitivities respect to the parameters that are likely to suffer a fault. It is concluded from the equations below that no fault can be detected while the suspensions are in their steady state.
S1, Ks1 = S 2, Ks 2 = 1 Res1 d = ( Ks1 _ effort ) Ks1 Ks1 2 dt 1 Res 2 d = ( Ks 2 _ effort ) 2 dt Ks 2 Ks 2 1 Res3 d = ( Ks3 _ effort ) Ks 3 Ks 3 2 dt 1 Res 4 d = ( Ks 4 _ effort ) 2 dt Ks 4 Ks 4
Res5 = ResA+ ResB = F1 (Ks1 _ effort) Bs1 (Z1 _ speed mu1 _ speed) + + F2 (Ks2 _ effort) Bs2 (Z 2 _ speed mu2 _ speed) Res6 = ResA+ ResC = F1 (Ks1 _ effort) Bs1 (Z1 _ speed mu1 _ speed) + + F3 ( Ks3 _ effort) Bs3 (Z3 _ speed mu3 _ speed) Res7 = ResA+ ResD = F1 + (Ks1 _ effort) + Bs1 (Z1 _ speed mu1 _ speed) + + F4 (Ks4 _ effort) Bs4 (Z 4 _ speed mu4 _ speed)
S 3, Ks 3 = S 4, Ks 4 =
S 5, Bs1 = S 5, Bs 2 =
Res5 = ( Z1 _ speed mu1 _ speed ) Bs1 Res5 = ( Z 2 _ speed mu 2 _ speed ) Bs 2 Res6 = ( Z1 _ speed mu1 _ speed ) Bs1 Res6 = ( Z 3 _ speed mu 3 _ speed ) Bs3 Res7 = ( Z1 _ speed mu1 _ speed ) Bs1 Res7 = ( Z 4 _ speed mu 4 _ speed ) Bs 4
(12)
S 6, Bs1 = S 6, Bs 3 = S 7, Bs1 = S 7, Bs 4 =
5. SIMULATION RESULTS
In order to verify its performance, the FDI scheme presented above has been intensively studied via simulation under very different drive conditions in both normal and faulty
situations. For all possible faults the residual evolutions were as predicted by the fault signature matrix. All the simulations have been performed using the software 20-sim [12], that allowed for a specification of the simulation problem directly in the BG language for both of its main components, the complex system BG and the DBG. The results of three different simulation experiments out of the whole set are presented next. All of them were generated with the vehicle being initially at rest and receiving the same inputs: Motor torque on each of wheels 1 and 2 = 95.0 Nm; motor torque on each of wheels 3 and 4 = 0.0 Nm; road vertical speed 1 = sin(20.t) m/s; road vertical speed 2 = 0.25 sin(30.t) m/s; road vertical speed 3 = 0.3 sin(25.t) m/s; road vertical speed 4 = 0 m/s; steering angle command: the last curve plotted in figure 14.
second maneuver (cf. the third term on the right-hand side of & + m.y.Vz - m.z.Vy , knowing that during the force Fx = m. V x the curve Vy0 and at high speed z is high) and the rather irregular shape of Vy (the suspensions are strongly loaded during this second interval). Fig. 15 plots the X-Y trajectory described by the vehicle in the global frame. The next two figures illustrate the residuals evolution in faulty conditions. Fig. 16 shows the effects of the following faults in the springs of the first and third suspensions: 5% reduction in Ks1 during the time interval (5s, 11.5s), and 5% increase in Ks3 from 15 to 22 seconds. Fig. 17 shows the effects of faults in the dampers of the second and first suspensions: 15% increase in Bs2 from 5 to 10 seconds, and 5% reduction in Bs1 from 15 to 21 seconds.
Fig. 14. Center of mass vertical position, Vx ,Vy and steering angle.
The simulation results confirm that the residuals evolve as predicted by the fault signature matrix.
6. CONCLUSIONS
Fig. 15. X-Y trajectory.
The normal behavior of the vehicle under the action of the referred inputs is shown in Figs. 14 and 15. The center of mass vertical Z_position is shown on the top of Fig. 14, followed by Vx , Vy (as referred to the bodys local frame), and the steering angle. The transient in the Z_position during the first few seconds, which is due to the vehicles weight, is followed by the vertical oscillations induced by the ground profile (road vertical speeds). The first steering command happens at low speed (Vx 15 km/h), while the second occurs at higher speed (Vx 60 km/h). This explains the plateau in Vx during the
A model based system for fault detection and isolation in vehicle suspensions has been presented. Bond graph modeling and simulation of the four-wheel vehicle dynamics addressed in this paper not only confirmed the capability of this formalism to deal whith complex physical systems, but also allowed to solve the FDI-problem completely in the BG domain. To this aim, the diagnostic bond graph method has been used, a technique that generates residuals sensitive to the faults on the base of analytical redundant relationships. Including the vertical speed of the wheels among the measured variables enabled formulating a simpler DBG (with regards to the original vehicle full BG model) that avoids using
the complex and uncertain tire-ground interaction model and thus preserves the FDI system from uncertainties that would affect its accuracy. As confirmed by simulation results, the system designed is able to detect and isolate all the faults considered in the suspensions components (passive dampers and springs). Further work will address observer design, FDI on active suspension models as well as fault tolerant suspension control. Acknowledgments: The authors wish to thanks Dr. Norberto Nigro from the School of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, National University of Rosario, for fruitful discussions on automobile dynamics.
REFERENCES
[1] F. E. Cellier Continuous System Modeling, Springer Verlag, New York, 1991, pp.251-287. [2] Dean C. Karnopp, Donald L. Margolis, Ronald C. Rosenberg, System dynamics: Modeling and simulation of mechatronic systems, 3rd ed., Wiley Interscience, New York, 2000, pp. 297-336. [3] German Filippini, Estudio del comportamiento dinmico de vehculos terrestres mediante bond graphs, Final Degree-Project in Mechanical Engineering; School Mech. Eng., Universidad Nacional de Rosario, Argentina, 2005. [4] J. M. Mera, C. Vera, J. Flez, J. J. Esperilla, Influence of the Roll Axis Consideration in Vehicle Dynamic Bond Graph Models, Proc. ICBGM03, 2003, pp. 203-209.
[5] C. Niesner, G. Dauphin-Tanguy, D. Margolis, F Guillemard, M. Pengov. A 4 wheel vehicle bond graph model including uncertainties on the car mass and the centre of mass position, Proc. ICBGM05, 2005, pp.179184. [6] K. Medjaher, A. K. Samantaray, B. Ould Bouamama, Diagnostic Bond Graphs for Direct Residual Evaluation, Proc. ICBGM05, 2005, pp.307-312. [7] K. Sia, A. Naamane, Bond Graph: a suitable tool for component faults diagnosis Proc. ICBGM03, 2003, pp. 89-102. [8] B. Ould Bouamama, A. K. Samantaray, M. Staroswiecki, G. Dauphin-Tanguy, Derivation of Constraint Relations from Bond Graph Models for Fault Detection and Isolation, Proc. ICBGM03, Simulation Series, Vol.35, No.2, 2003, pp.104-109. [9] F. Aparicio Izquierdo, C. Vera Alvarez, V. Daz Lpez, Teora de los vehculos automviles, Ed. Madrid: Escuela Tcnica Superior de Ingenieros Industriales de Madrid, 1995. [10] S. K. Ghoshal, A. K. Samantaray, A. Mukherjee, Improvements to Single Fault Isolation using Estimated Parameters, Proc. ICBGM05, 2005, pp. 301-306. [11] D. Jos Bel Cacho, Formulacin e implementacin de una metodologa de elementos finitos para el anlisis de modelos bond graph de sistemas discretos-continuos, Tesis doctoral, Dept. Mech. Eng., Zaragoza Univ., Spain. [12] Controllab Products B.V., 20-sim, www.20sim.com/.