applied

sciences
Article
Robust Control for Active Suspension of Hub-Driven
Electric Vehicles Subject to in-Wheel Motor Magnetic
Force Oscillation
Hang Wu 1,2 , Ling Zheng 1,2, *, Yinong Li 1,2 , Zhida Zhang 1,2 and Yinghong Yu 1,2
1 College of Automotive Engineering, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400044, China;
[email protected] (H.W.); [email protected] (Y.L.); [email protected] (Z.Z.);
[email protected] (Y.Y.)
2 State Key Laboratory of Mechanical Transmission, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400044, China
* Correspondence: [email protected]




Received: 27 April 2020; Accepted: 3 June 2020; Published: 5 June 2020


Featured Application: The aim of this study is to provide an accurate model reference for the
analysis of vibration characteristics of hub-driven electric vehicles with permanent magnet
synchronous motors (PMSM) and the optimization, control and improvement of its vibration
performance. It can be applied to intelligent suspension design of hub-driven electric vehicles.

Abstract: In this paper, after investigating the coupling effect in a permanent magnet synchronous
in-wheel motor, a robust control method for active suspension of hub-driven electric vehicles (EVs) to
enhance the performance of the in-wheel motor and the vehicle is proposed. Based on the electric
vehicle model addressing the coupling effect between the electromagnetic excitation of the permanent
magnet synchronous motor (PMSM) and the transient dynamics in EVs, the influence of the coupling
effect on the motor and the vehicle performance is analyzed. The results reflect that the coupling
effect in in-wheel motors intensifies the magnetic force oscillation, aggravates the eccentricity of the
rotor, deteriorates the motor operation performance, and worsens the ride comfort. To suppress the
magnetic force oscillation in motor and enhance the vehicle comfort, the active suspension system
considering five aspects of suspension performance is introduced. Simultaneously, on the basis of
Lyapunov stability theory, a reliable robust H∞ controller considering model uncertainties, actuator
failure and electromagnetic force interference is designed. The simulation results reflect that the
robust H∞ feedback controller can not only achieve better ride comfort, but also restrain the coupling
effect in the motor. Meanwhile the other requirements such as the road holding capability, the actuator
limitation, and the suspension deflection are also maintained. The proposed robust control method
demonstrates a potential application in the practice of EV control.

Keywords: robust control; active suspension; in-wheel motor; unbalanced electromagnetic force;
actuator failure

1. Introduction
Due to the aggravation of environmental pollution and the energy crisis, automotive products are
required to be energy-saving, highly efficient, and environmentally-friendly [1–3]. Compared with
traditional diesel locomotives, electric vehicles (EVs) which have several advantages such as no CO2
emission and energy efficiency have caught widespread attention in recent years [4,5]. The propulsion
configurations of EVs can be classified as a distributed motor driven layout and a centralized driven
layout. Compared with centralized driven layout EVs, in-wheel motor (IWM) propelling EVs, as the
distributed propulsion system, enjoy various additional structure and control merits [6,7]. As in the

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 3929; doi:10.3390/app10113929 www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 3929 2 of 26

IWM the brake and the reducer are integrated into the rim, the mechanical transmission system of
hub-driven EVs is simpler and more efficient. Moreover, by controlling the torque of each electric
motor precisely and independently, hub-driven EVs have played a significant role in enhancing the
performance of existing vehicle stability/motion control systems, such as electronic stability control
systems (ESC) and traction control systems (TCS) [8]. However, the development of hub-driven EVs
has introduced some new technical problems. The integration of the driving system into the rim leads
to an increase in the unsprung mass, which deteriorates road handling capacities and the ride comfort
of vehicles [9,10]. What is more, the road surface roughness excitation and the coupling effect in IWM
make the magnet gap deformed. The deformed magnet gap then leads to magnetic force oscillation
which is a critical vibration source for vehicle dynamics [11,12].
In the past decades, some passive and active methods, such as optimization of the vibration
isolator, redesign of the IWM, and active control for suspension systems, have been adopted to suppress
magnetic force oscillation and improve the ride comfort. However, there are some deficiencies which
remain to be solved. Luo et al. [12] proposed a novel IWM topology scheme and studied the coupling
effect of the IWM system. By mounting rubber bushings in the IWM device, the vibration energy from
the road surface was absorbed and the deformation of magnet gap was restricted. However, the life of
the rubber bushing was short due to the severe operating environment of the IWM, making it difficult
for practical use. Moreover, due to neglect of the permanent magnet brushless direct current (PMBDC)
motor model which could provide the phase current for calculating the unbalanced electromagnetic
force (UEF), the established coupling model was simple and inaccurate. The transient characteristics
of electromechanical coupling effect cannot be effectively studied under vehicle running conditions.
Zhao et al. [13] designed the motor mount, making the motor mass as dynamic vibration absorber.
The results show that the ride comfort was improved. However, there was a distinct axis relative
displacement between the rotor and the stator, prompting magnet gap deformed and magnetic force
oscillation. The active suspension control methods have been proposed to suppress the magnetic
force oscillation. Nevertheless, the majority of the active suspension system of hub-driven EVs are
based on switched reluctance in-wheel driven motors [14,15] or neglect the negative electromagnetic
coupling effect in IWM [16–19]. Different from switched reluctance motors (SRM), the magnetic field
in permanent magnet synchronous motors (PMSM) is provided by permanent magnets. Consequently,
as a permanent magnet synchronous IWM, more complex multi-field coupling effects need to be
studied to enhance the ride comfort of EVs. In brief, it is meaningful to suppress magnetic force
oscillation and improve the ride comfort. However, for the PMSM, the passive methods to suppress
magnetic force oscillation have some defects and the active methods are rarely studied. Furthermore,
the electromagnetic coupling model of hub-driven electric vehicle based on PMSM that has been
established by Luo is inaccurate [12]. It is necessary to establish the complete electromagnetic coupling
model, investigate the coupling mechanism of PMSM and study the active control methods for the
suspension system of hub-driven electric vehicle to solve the negative coupling effect of the PMSM.
Besides, failures of electrical components, sensors, and the actuator are fairly common to active
suspension systems, which will lead to a series of problems, such as system instability, performance
degradation, and even disaster traffic accidents. Therefore, it is of great significance to design the active
suspension considering actuator failures. Choi et al. [20] proposed a robust controller for a semi-active
suspension system with actuator saturation. The vehicle vibration attenuation problem under two
cases was addressed, namely, without actuator fault and with base oil leakage in MR damper. Liu
et al. [21] proposed a new adaptive fault tolerant control scheme by employing adaptive feed-back
stepping technique which ensured the boundedness in probability of the considered systems. Alain
et al. [22] presented an application of a diagnosis and a fault-tolerant control method for an active
suspension system. This method could improve the vehicle performance in the presence of road
disturbances by identifying an actuator fault and reconfiguring the controller. In the literature [23–25],
the fault-tolerant control was proposed for an active suspension system with an actuator fault. The
results showed that the control effects of the active suspension system deteriorated without considering
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 3929 3 of 26

the actuator failure. Similarly, the control effects will be unsatisfactory if the model parameter
uncertainties are neglected. In the literature [26–28], the robust control was proposed for vehicle
active suspensions. The comparative simulations presented the availability of the designed controllers
considering the model uncertainties. In addition, some other control methods were also proposed
to suppress disturbance and obtain the better performance of the system, such as u-synthesis [29],
neural network method [30], mixed H∞ /H2 [31], slide-mode control [32–36], adaptive control [37],
and nonlinear control [38,39]. However, most of the control strategies are proposed for conventional
vehicles and rarely for PMSM-driven EVs. From the existing studies, the issues of active suspension
systems associated with actuator fault tolerance, model parameter uncertainties, and coupling effect in
IWM based on PMSM have not been well studied in previous research.
This paper focuses on the coupling effect in permanent magnet synchronous IWM and the robust
control for active suspension of hub-driven EVs. The challenges and technical contributions are
summarized as follows: (1) unlike studies in Ref. [11,12], in which the established electromechanical
coupling model was simple and inaccurate, in this paper, according to the electromagnetic field theory,
the complete electromechanical coupling model of the hub-driven EVs composed of four sub-models is
established. The transient characteristics of electromechanical coupling effect can be effectively studied
under vehicle running conditions; (2) unlike studies in Ref. [15,16,24], in which the authors proposed
active suspension controller for the SRM driven electric vehicle, the electric vehicle neglecting the
coupling effect or the conventional vehicle, in this study, a multi-objective control is designed for
the PMSM driven EV to obtain better ride comfort and restrict coupling effect of in-wheel PMSM.
Meanwhile, the other performances such as actuator limitation, small suspension deflection and
road holding capability are also maintained; (3) the suspension parameter uncertainties and actuator
fault are simultaneously considered and a reliable robust H∞ controller is designed to attenuate
the effects caused by the magnetic force oscillation, parameter uncertainties, the actuator fault and
road disturbances.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, the mathematical model of a hub-driven
electric vehicle is established and the coupling effect is analyzed. In Section 3, a reliable robust H∞
controller is presented. The simulation results are described in Section 4 and key conclusions are given
in Section 5.

2. System Modelling and Problem Formulation

As magnetic force oscillation worsens the performance of EV, the electric vehicle model considering
the coupling effect of IWM is established to explore the influence of the coupling effect on vehicle
performance and provide a theoretical basis for designing active suspension controller later.

2.1. Hub-Driven Electric Vehicle Modelling

To obtain more precise results, an electric vehicle model considering coupling effect in IWM is
developed. It consists of four sub-models: a UEF model, permanent magnet brushless direct current
(PMBDC) motor model, driving model and vertical vibration model. The information exchange among
them is depicted in Figure 1 and described in detail in following sub-models.
The electric vehicle model consists of two controllers: a PMBDC motor proportional-integral-
derivative (PID) controller and an active suspension controller in a vertical vibration model. The active
suspension controller is designed to improve the performance of the motor and the vehicle. The PID
controller is used to calculate the pulse width modulation (PWM) duty cycle according to the vehicle
speed error between the current and the reference. Then, the driving torque of IWM is adjusted based on
PWM duty cycle.
 Active
Vehicle dynamic
suspension Unbalanced electromagnetic
controller responses
force (UEF)
Vertical ed (z) (zr-zs) UEF model
Vibration Model
Current
Road excitation Tire dyn- Wheel
ua amic load ia, ib, ic A phase voltage
speed ωr
PMBDC Power
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 3929 Driving Model 4 of 26
motor model convertor
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW
Vehicle Driving B phase voltage PWM driving
4 of 25
speed ua Torque Te C phase voltage cycle signal
PWM signal
Active
suspension Reference ˟
Vehicle dynamic
controller speedresponses Error
PID controller
force (UEF)
PWM duty
Unbalanced electromagnetic
cycle signal
generator

Vertical ed (z) (zr-zs) UEF model

Vibration Model
Figure 1. Hub-driven electric
Tire dyn- Current vehicle model.
Road excitation Wheel
ua amic load ia, ib, ic A phase voltage
speed ωr
PMBDC Power
The electric vehicle model consists
Driving Model of two controllers:
a PMBDC convertormotor proportional-integral-
motor model
derivative (PID) controller andVehicle
an activeDriving suspension controllerB phase voltagein a PWMvertical
driving vibration model. The
speed u Torque T e
C phase voltage cycle signal
a
active suspension controller is designed to improve the performance PWM signal
of the motor and the vehicle.
The PID controller is used toReference
calculate
speed
˟ the
Error
PID controller
pulse width modulation
PWM duty
cycle signal
(PWM)
generator duty cycle according to
the vehicle speed error between the current and the reference. Then, the driving torque of IWM is
Figure 1. Hub-driven electric vehicle model.
adjusted based on PWM duty cycle.
2.1.1. Unbalanced Electromagnetic Force of Model
2.1.1.The electric vehicle
Unbalanced model consists
Electromagnetic Force Model two controllers: a PMBDC motor proportional-integral-
derivative (PID) controller and an active
The dynamic vibration in vehicle and UEF (calculatedsuspension controller
by the UEFin amodel)
verticalcan
vibration
evoke a model.
magnet Thegap
The dynamic vibration in vehicle and UEF (calculated by the UEF model) can evoke a magnet
active suspension
deformation whichcontroller is designed
results in magnetic force to oscillation
improve the performance
as shown of 2a,
in Figure the where
motorOand s andthe
O vehicle.
are the
gap deformation which results in magnetic force oscillation as shown in Figure 2a, where Osr and Or
The PID controller is used to calculate the pulse width modulation (PWM)
geometric center of the stator and the rotor, respectively. In this paper, we are mainly concerned about duty cycle according to
are the geometric center of the stator and the rotor, respectively. In this paper, we are mainly
the rotor
vehicle speed error
eccentricity between
in the verticalthedirection.
current and Hence,the thereference.
unevenThen,magnetthegap
driving
of IWM torque of IWM of
is a function is
concerned about the rotor eccentricity in the vertical direction. Hence, the uneven magnet gap of
adjusted based
angle am and itson PWM duty
expression is cycle.
IWM is a function of angle am and its expression is
δe (am ) = δ − ed (z) cos(am ) (1)
2.1.1. Unbalanced Electromagnetic Force δ e (Model
a m ) = δ − ed ( z ) cos ( a m ) (1)
where ed (z) denotes relative displacement between the rotor and the stator. It can be provided by
where The
vertical dynamic
(z) denotes
edvibration vibration
modelrelative
of thein vehicle
withand
displacement
EVs IWMs. UEF (calculated
between the rotorbyand the the
UEFstator.
model) It can be
evoke a magnet
provided by
gap deformation
vertical vibration which
model results
of the EVsin magnetic
with IWMs. force oscillation as shown in Figure 2a, where Os and Or
are the geometric center of the stator and the rotor, respectively. In this paper, we are mainly
concerned about the rotor eccentricity in the vertical direction. Hence, the uneven magnet gap of
IWM is a function of angle am and its expression is
δ e ( a m ) = δ − ed ( z ) cos ( a m ) (1)
where ed (z) denotes relative displacement between the rotor and the stator. It can be provided by
vertical vibration model of the EVs with IWMs.

(b)

Figure 2. (a) Magnet gap deformation of the in-wheel motor (IWM) (air-gap exaggerated) and (b) the
winding
Figure 2. distribution of the
(a) Magnet gap permanentofmagnet
deformation brushless
the in-wheel direct
motor contact
(IWM) (PMBDC)
(air-gap motor. and (b) the
exaggerated)
winding distribution of the permanent magnet brushless direct contact (PMBDC) motor.
Rotor eccentricity leads to the change of the permeance in magnet gap, and it can be calculated by:
Rotor eccentricity leads to the change
u0
of theu permeance u0
in magnet δ
gap, and it can be calculated
by: λ e = δ e ( am )
= 0
δ−ed (z) cos(am )
= δ · δ−ed (z) cos(am )
(2)
= λ · δ−e (z)δcos(a ) = λξδ (b)
u0 u0 d um δ
λe =
= = 0⋅
δ e ( am ) δ − ed ( z ) cos ( am ) δ δ − ed ( z ) cos ( am )
where ξδ is2.the
Figure correction
(a) Magnet gap coefficient
deformationfor thein-wheel
of the permeance.motor In this(air-gap
(IWM) study, exaggerated)
the 27-slot/24-pole surface
and (b) the (2)
δ
PMBDC motor is adopted. =
The λ ⋅
analytical
winding distribution of the permanent = λξ
expressions of the radial and the tangential flux density
δ − e ( zmagnet
) cos ( a )brushless direct contact (PMBDC) motor.
δ

(B_pru (r, am , t) and B_ptu (r, am , t)) of thed slotlessm field model in the middle of the air gap (r = Rs − g/2)
produced
where ξδ isby
Rotor thecorrection
the permanent
eccentricity leads magnets
coefficient (PMs)
to the change ofcan
for the thebepermeance
given byIn in
permeance. magnet
this study,gap,
the and it can be calculated
27-slot/24-pole surface
by:
PMBDC motor is adopted. The analytical expressions of the radial and the tangential flux density
X∞
B_pru (r, am , t) u=0 KBu0(n) · fBr (ru)0 · cos[np(δam − ωr t − θ0 )] (3)
λe = = = ⋅
δ e ( amn)=1,3,5...
δ − ed ( z ) cos ( am ) δ δ − ed ( z ) cos ( am )
(2)
δ
=λ⋅ ∞ = λξδ
δ − ed ( z ) cos ( am )
X
B_ptu (r, am , t) = KB (n) · fBt (r) · sin[np(am − ωr t − θ0 )] (4)
where ξδ is the correction n = 1,3,5...
coefficient for the permeance. In this study, the 27-slot/24-pole
surface
PMBDC motor is adopted. The analytical expressions of the radial and the tangential flux density
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 3929 5 of 26

where p denotes the rotor pole-pair number, αm denotes the angular position, and ωr denotes angular
velocity of the rotor. The parameters of IWM are listed in Appendix A. (The details about the motor
can be found in the literature [40,41]).
The winding distribution of the PMBDC motor is shown in Figure 2b. The radial and the tangential
flux density (B_aru (r, am , t) and B_atu (r, am , t)) produced by 3-phase winding of the IWM in the middle
of the air gap can be calculated as
(
∞ 9 h i 9 h i
P P 2π P 2π
B_aru (r, am , t) = Bvr IA (t) sAi cos v am − Qs (aAi
− 1) + IB (t) sBi cos v am − Qs (aBi − 1)
v=1 i=1 i=1 ) (5)
9 h i
P 2π
+IC (t) sCi cos v am − Qs (aCi − 1)
i=1

(
∞ 9 h i 9 h i
P P 2π P 2π
B_aru (r, am , t) = Bvt IA (t) sAi cos v am − Qs (aAi
− 1) + IB (t) sBi cos v am − Qs (aBi − 1)
v=1 i=1 i=1 ) (6)
9 h i
P 2π
+IC (t) sCi cos v am − Qs (aCi − 1)
i=1

where IA (t), IB (t), and IC (t) denote three phase winding current. The detailed derivation of Equations (5)
and (6) are referred to in the literature [42,43].
The flux density can be decomposed as the superposition of stator and rotor magnetic fields in the
linear case [34]. Thus, the total radial and the tangential flux density (B_ru (r, am , t) and B_tu (r, am , t))
neglecting the slotting effect can be deduced as

B_ru (r, am , t) = B_pru (r, am , t) + B_aru (r, am , t) (7)

B_tu (r, am , t) = B_ptu (r, am , t) + B_atu (r, am , t) (8)

R
It can be found that B_ru and B_tu are functions of phase currents (IA , IB , IC ), rotor position ωr dt.
By introducing the correction coefficient for the permeance ξδ , the radial and the tangential flux density
(B_er (r, am , t) and B_et (r, am , t)) considering the influence of rotor eccentricity can be deduced as [44]

B_er (r, am , t) = B_ru (r, am , t)λa ξδ + B_tu (r, am , t)λb ξδ (9)

B_et (r, am , t) = B_tu (r, am , t)λa ξδ − B_ru (r, am , t)λb ξδ (10)

where λa and λb denote the influence factors of the stator slotting [45,46]. On the basis of Maxwell
magnet stress tensor theory, the radial and tangential magnetic force density distribution (Per and Pet )
under polar coordinate can be calculated [47,48].

Per (r, am , t) = 2u1 0 B_er (r, am , t)2 − B_et (r, am , t)2

h i
(11)
Pet (r, am , t) = u10 [B_er (r, am , t) · B_et (r, am , t)]

The magnetic force density distribution in Cartesian coordinate can be obtained according to
coordinate transform relationship. Thus, the UMF (Fr ) that acts on the stator and the rotor in vertical
direction is calculated as

Z2π
Fr = Lr (Per (r, am , t) cos(am ) − Pet (r, am , t) sin(am ))dam (12)
0

where L is the axial gap length of IWM.

2.1.2. PMBDC Motor Model

The PMBDC motor model offers driving torque to promote EV movement and provides phase
current for the UEF model to calculate an unbalanced electromagnetic force, as shown in Figure 1.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 3929 6 of 26

When three-phase winding is star connected, the circuit equations of three windings in phase variables
can be expressed as [49]

d
dt IA = 3L1 s (2vAB + vBC − 3Rs IA + λpωr (−2eA + eB + eC ))
d
dt IB = 3L1 s (−vAB + vBC − 3Rs IB + λpωr (eA − 2eB + eC )) (13)
d
dt IC = −( dtd IA + dtd IB )

where IA , IB and IC denote three phase winding current. ωr represents the rotor angular velocity. vab
and vbc represent phase voltage of AB and BC, respectively. p represents the number of pole pairs.
λ represents the amplitude of the flux induced by permanent magnets. Rs and Ls represent stator
winding resistance and winding inductance, respectively. λ, Rs , and Ls can be obtained by means of
Ansoft–Maxwell analysis. eA , eB , and eC denote electromotive force, respectively, which has trapezoidal
shapes. Therefore, the driving torque Te produced by IWM can be calculated.

Te = pλ(eA IA + eB IB + eC IC ) (14)

2.1.3. Driving Model

The driving model provides the rotor velocity ωr for the UEF model and PMBDC motor model.
Simultaneously, it also offers the vehicle velocity for the vertical vibration model to produce the road
excitation. The dynamic equation of rotation motion of the IWM can be deduced as

dωr
= (Te − Fd f Rr − f W )/J (15)
dt
where J represents the rotational inertia of the total rotor; W represents wheel load which consists of
static load and dynamic load, which can be obtained by vertical vibration model; f denotes rolling
resistance coefficient; Rr denotes wheel rolling radius; ωr denotes the angular velocity of the wheel or
the rotor; and Fdf denotes reaction force between the road and tire which can be calculated using Magic
Formula [50]. In addition, Fdf refers to the driving force that promotes EV move, i.e.,
.
Fd f = MEV ua + Fw + Fi (16)

where MEV (MEV = mb + ms + mr ) and ua represent the total vehicle mass and vehicle velocity,
respectively. Assuming that the wind speed is small and the road is horizontal, the wind resistance Fw
and the gradient resistance Fi could be ignored.

2.1.4. Vertical Vibration Model

Figure 3a shows the main structure of an IWM driving system. According to the structure, a
quarter vehicle model is employed to analysis the influence of the magnetic force oscillation in IWM,
as depicted in Figure 3b.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 3929 7 of 26
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 25

Suspension arm
Type
Control cable
zb
mb
Import and export Rim
ks Fa cs
of the cooling fluid

Electronic zs
control device Stator ms
Hub bearing
Hub bearing
km Fr
Hydraulic
drum brake
zr Rim
Stator of motor Rotor and tire
mr
PMBDC motor kt
air gap Rotor of motor ct
zg
(a) (b)

Figure
Figure 3. IWM-driven
3. IWM-driven system
system without
without a speed
a speed reducer.
reducer. (a) Main
(a) Main structure.
structure. (b) Quarter
(b) Quarter vehicle
vehicle model.
model.
In the model, the hub and the motor bearings connect the stator and rotor. They are simplified
and equalized
In the model,as antheequivalent
hub and the springmotor km bearings
in the vertical connect direction, as shown
the stator in Figure
and rotor. Fr and F a.
3b. simplified
They are
and equalized as an equivalent spring km in the vertical direction, as shown in Figure 3b. Fr and Fto
represent UEF and actuator force, respectively. The dynamics equations can be described according a.

Newton’sUEF
represent second
andlaw as follows.
actuator force, respectively. The dynamics equations can be described according
to Newton’s second law  as.. follows. . .
 mb zb + ks (zb − zs ) + cs (zb − zs ) − Fa = 0
.. . .

mbszzbs ++kks (sz(bzs−−zs z) b+)c+

s (zcbs (−zzss−) −zbF)a + = 0km (zs − zr ) − Fr + Fa = 0 (17)

m z.. + k (z − z ) + c (z. − z. ) + k (z − z ) + F = 0



 s s
r
z r + k s (tz s −
r zb ) +
g cs ( 
z st − z
r b ) + gk m ( z s −
m z r )r− Fr s+ Fa = r0 (17)
m z + k ( z − z ) + c ( z − z ) + k ( z − z ) + F = 0
where mb , ms , and mrdenote r r t r
body g
mass, t r
stator g
mass, m r
ands rotor r
mass in the motor, respectively. kt ,
c
where, k , and c denote tire stiffness, tire damp,
t s mb, ms s, and mr denote body mass, stator mass, and rotor mass in suspension stiffness and suspension
the motor,damp, respectively.
respectively. kt, ct,
kzsb, ,and
zs , and zr represent
cs denote the displacements
tire stiffness, tire damp, suspension of mb , ms , and stiffnessmr , respectively;
and suspension zg refers
damp,torespectively.
road excitationzb,
represented by filtered white noise model
zs, and zr represent the displacements of mb, ms, and mr, respectively; zg refers to road excitation
represented by filtered white noise . model  p
z g t) = −2π f0 z g t) + 2π G0 ua w(t) (18)
z g (t )=-2 π f 0 z g (t )+2 π G0 u a w (t ) (18)
where w(t), f 0 G0 represent white noise, low cutoff frequency and roughness coefficient, respectively.
where w(t), f0 G0 represent white noise, low cutoff frequency and roughness coefficient, respectively.
ua refers to vehicle velocity obtained by Equation (16).
ua refers to vehicle velocity obtained by Equation (16).
2.2. Characteristics of UEF and Its Influence on the Vehicle Performance
2.2. Characteristics of UEF and Its Influence on the Vehicle Performance
In this paper, the rotor pole-pair number of PMBDC motor adopted is 12. Thus, rotational angular
of theInrotor
this ispaper,
2π/12 the
= 0.52rotor
(rad)pole-pair
in one PWM numberdutyofcycle, PMBDC motorin adopted
as shown Figure 2b.isRFor
12. above-mentioned
Thus, rotational
angular
mathematical of theformulas,
rotor is 2π/12
it can=be 0.52 (rad)that
found in one
UMFPWM duty cycle,
is a function as shown
of rotor in Figure
position ωr dt, 2b. Forcurrents
phase above-
(IA , IB , IC ) and eccentricity ed (z). Figure 4a shows the influence of the eccentricity and rotor position,
mentioned mathematical formulas, it can be found that UMF is a function of rotor position
phase
on UEF currents
when the (IA, phase
IB, IC) and
currenteccentricity
is 20A. Itedcan (z). beFigure 4a shows
observed the mean
that the influence
value of of
theUEF
eccentricity and
rises rapidly
rotor
with theposition
minoron UEF when
increase of the theeccentricity.
phase current is 20A.Figure
Similarly, It can be
4b observed
presents thethatrelationship
the mean value of UEF
between the
rises rapidly with the minor increase of the eccentricity. Similarly,
rotor eccentricity, phase current and UMF when the rotor eccentricity is 0.1 mm. The mean value and Figure 4b presents the relationship
between
amplitude thevalue
rotorofeccentricity,
the UEF rise phase
as the current
phaseand current UMFincreases.
when theBy rotor eccentricity
examining is 0.1 mm.ofThe
the influence the
mean value and amplitude value of the UEF rise as the phase current
eccentricity, rotor position and the phase current on the UEF, it can be noted that the sensitivity of theincreases. By examining the
influence
eccentricity of is
thegreater
eccentricity,
than the rotor positionofand
sensitivity the therotor phase current
position andon the UEF,
phase it can
current. be means
This noted that
that the
the
sensitivity
discussion of of the eccentricity is
the eccentricity is of
greater than the sensitivity of the rotor position and phase current.
great significance.
This means that the discussion of the eccentricity is of great significance.
unbalanced electromagnetic

unbalanced electromagnetic

300 400 20A 50A 80A

Vertical component of

Vertical component of

250 380
200 360
force (N)

force (N)

150 340
100 320
50 300
0 280
0 0.1
0.2 0.05 260
0.4 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
0.6 0
(b) Rotor position (mech.rad)
(a)
rises rapidly with the minor increase of the eccentricity. Similarly, Figure 4b presents the relationship
between the rotor eccentricity, phase current and UMF when the rotor eccentricity is 0.1 mm. The
mean value and amplitude value of the UEF rise as the phase current increases. By examining the
influence of the eccentricity, rotor position and the phase current on the UEF, it can be noted that the
sensitivity of10,the
Appl. Sci. 2020, eccentricity is greater than the sensitivity of the rotor position and phase current.
3929 8 of 26
This means that the discussion of the eccentricity is of great significance.

unbalanced electromagnetic

unbalanced electromagnetic
300 400 20A 50A 80A

Vertical component of

Vertical component of
250 380
200 360

force (N)

force (N)
150 340
100 320
50 300
0 280
0 0.1
0.2 0.05 260
0.4 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 0.6 0 8 of 25
(b) Rotor position (mech.rad)
(a)

Figure 4. The
Figure 4. The characteristics
characteristics of
of unbalanced
unbalanced electromagnetic
electromagnetic force
force (UEF):
(UEF): (a)
(a) under
under different
different rotor
rotor
position and eccentricity; (b) under different rotor position and phase current.
position and eccentricity; (b) under different rotor position and phase current.

The parameters of of the

the hub-driven
hub-drivenEV EVare arelisted
listedininthe theAppendix
Appendix. A.Based
Basedon on the
the electric vehicle
model driven by IWM established in Section 2.1, the performance of an electric vehicle with a passive
suspension was investigated at a speed of 25 km/h on a B-class road (Figure 5). Figure 5a shows the
error between
betweenthe theideal
idealand
andrealrealvehicle
vehicle speed;
speed; Figure
Figure 5b–f
5b–f describe
describe wheelwheelspeed speed
(rotor(rotor speed),
speed), slip
slip rate,
rate, A-phase
A-phase currentcurrent
of IWM,of driving
IWM, driving
torque T torque
e producedT e produced
by PMBDC by PMBDC
motor, and motor,
road and
speed road speed
excitation,
excitation,
respectively.respectively. It can bethat
It can be observed observed
all signals thatareall reasonable,
signals are reasonable,
indicating that indicating
the model thatestablished
the model
established is correct.
is correct. Figure 5g–iFigure
describe 5g–ithe
describe
vertical the vertical component
component of the UEF, of the UEF, the eccentricity
eccentricity of rotor
of rotor and the
and the acceleration of the body with or without coupling effect, respectively.
acceleration of the body with or without coupling effect, respectively. In Figure 5, the coupling effect In Figure 5, the
coupling effectifisthere
is considered considered if there
is Fr , while it is
is Fnot
r, while it is not if
considered considered
there is no if there
Fr . It iscan
no be
Fr. concluded
It can be concluded
that the
that the coupling
coupling effect exacerbates
effect exacerbates the electromagnetic
the electromagnetic force oscillation,
force oscillation, increasesincreases the eccentricity
the eccentricity of
of the rotor,
the rotor, and aggravates the acceleration of sprung mass. The eccentricity
and aggravates the acceleration of sprung mass. The eccentricity of rotor provokes UEF, as shown of rotor provokes UEF, as
shown
in Figurein 4a.
Figure 4a. Synchronously,
Synchronously, the UEFthe UEF intensifies
intensifies the eccentricity,
the eccentricity, as shown asin shown
Figure in5e.
Figure
This 5e. This
mutual
mutual
promotion promotion
phenomenon phenomenon
aggravates aggravates the electromagnetic
the electromagnetic couplingcoupling
effect, thuseffect, thus intensifying
intensifying the wearthe of
wear
bearingof bearing and shortening
and shortening the life ofthethelifemotor.
of theFurthermore,
motor. Furthermore, it aggravates
it aggravates the acceleration
the acceleration of sprung of
sprung
mass and mass and provokes
provokes cacophony, cacophony,
deterioratingdeteriorating
the vehicle thecomfort.
vehicle comfort.
Therefore, Therefore,
the couplingthe coupling
effect in
effect in IWMbeshould
IWM should be considered
seriously seriously considered
when designing when active
designing active suspension
suspension system for EVs.
system for hub-driven hub-
driven EVs.
(a) (b) (c)
27 0.05

0.04
26.5
0.03
26 0.02

0.01
25.5
0

25 -0.01
0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4
(d) (e) (f)

Current
Chopping

(g) (h) (i)

Figure 5. The response of the electric vehicle on stochastic uneven road: (a) vehicle speed; (b) wheel
Figure
speed; 5.
(c)The
slipresponse
rate; (d)of the electric
A-phase vehicle
current; (e) on stochastic
driving uneven
torque; road:speed
(f) road (a) vehicle speed;(g)
excitation; (b)vertical
wheel
speed; (c) slip
component rate;
of the (d)(h)
UEF; A-phase current;
the rotor (e) driving
eccentricity; (i) thetorque;
sprung (f) road
mass speed excitation; (g) vertical
acceleration.
component of the UEF; (h) the rotor eccentricity; (i) the sprung mass acceleration.

2.3. Active Suspension System Modelling

The sprung mass mb includes the driver mass and passenger mass, so it usually changes with the
number of drivers and passengers. The tire stiffness kt usually varies due to tire pressure. In this
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 3929 9 of 26

2.3. Active Suspension System Modelling

The sprung mass mb includes the driver mass and passenger mass, so it usually changes with the
number of drivers and passengers. The tire stiffness kt usually varies due to tire pressure. In this study,
it is supposed that the sprung mass and the tire stiffness reside in an interval as follows:

mb = mb0 (1 + λ1 )kt = kt0 (1 + λ2 ) (19)

where mb0 and kt0 are the nominal sprung mass and the nominal tire stiffness, respectively. |λ1 | ≤ λ10
and |λ2 | ≤ λ20 are used to exhibit the interval that the sprung mass and the tire stiffness are located within.
Furthermore, mbl = mb0 (1 + λ1 ) λ1=−λ10 and ktl = kt0 (1 + λ2 ) λ2=−λ20 are, respectively, expressed as
the lower bounds of the sprung mass and the tire stiffness. Similarly, mbu = mb0 (1 + λ1 ) λ1=λ10 and
ktu = kt0 (1 + λ2 ) λ2=λ20 are expressed as the corresponding upper bounds. Therefore, the uncertain
parameter vector can be described as λ = [λ1 , λ2 ].
According to Equation (11), and defining vehicle state vector as
h . . . iT
x(t) = zb zs zr zs − zb zr − zs z g − zr (20)

the dynamic model of the vehicle can be described by the following state-space equations.
.
x(t)=A(λ)x(t)+B1 (λ)w(t)+B2 (λ)ξu(t) (21)

where

 −cs m−1 cs m−1 ks m−1

 
b b
0 b
0 0 
 
 cs m−1 −cs m−1 0 −ks m−1 km m−1 0
 
 s s s s 
  T
 0 0 −ct m−1
r 0 −km m−1
r kt m−1
r
  0 0 ct m−1
r 0 0 1 
A(λ) =  , B1 (λ) = 
 
 ,
 −1 1 0 0 0 0 

 0 m−1
s −m−1
r 0 0 0 
 

 0 −1 1 0 0 0 

 
0 0 −1 0 0 0
h iT h . iT
B2 (λ) = mb −1 −1
−ms 0 0 0 0 , w(t) = zg Fr ,

where λ represents uncertain parameter vector and u(t) is the actuator force produced by active
suspension. As shown in Figure 6a, the active suspension system consists of an electro-magnetic
actuator and a mechanical spring. Fail safe passive damping is provided by means of eddy-currents.
The linear motor actuator is a tubular slotted three-phase permanent magnet actuator with a peak force
of 2000 N. The actuator is shown as Figure 6b, where τp represents the PM pole pitch; Rs represents the
coils outer radius; τcp and τsp represent the coil and slot pitches, respectively; τmz and τmr denote the
pitches of axially and radially magnetized PMs, respectively; τs represents the slot width; and R0 and
Rm represent the inner and outer radii of the PMs. The details can be found in the literature [51,52].
The thrust force according to axial direction is shown in Figure 6c (detailed calculation of the thrust
force can be found in literature [52]).
force of 2000 N. The actuator is shown as Figure 6b, where represents the PM pole pitch;
represents the coils outer radius; and represent the coil and slot pitches, respectively;
and denote the pitches of axially and radially magnetized PMs, respectively; represents the
slot width; and and represent the inner and outer radii of the PMs. The details can be found
in the literature [51,52].
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 3929
The thrust force according to axial direction is shown in Figure 6c (detailed
10 of 26
calculation of the thrust force can be found in literature [52]).

(a) (c)

(b)

Figure 6. (a)
Figure 6. (a) Electromagnetic
Electromagnetic suspension system; (b) linear motor actuator structure; (c) thrust
thrust force
force
according to axial direction.
according to axial direction.

3. Reliable Robust H∞ Controller Design

3. Reliable Robust Hꝏ Controller Design
Traditionally, most studies mainly consider three requirements, namely, road-holding stability,
Traditionally, most studies mainly consider three requirements, namely, road-holding stability,
suspension deflection, and the ride comfort, when designing a control law for suspension systems.
suspension deflection, and the ride comfort, when designing a control law for suspension systems.
Some studies also take energy-saving into consideration. However, few papers have covered the
Some studies also take energy-saving into consideration. However, few papers have covered the
coupling performance of IWMs in suspension design, especially for PMSM. The issues for active
coupling performance of IWMs in suspension design, especially for PMSM. The issues for active
suspension system associated with actuator fault tolerance, model parameter uncertainties and coupling
suspension system associated with actuator fault tolerance, model parameter uncertainties and
effect in IWM based on PMSM have not been well studied in any previous research. Therefore, the
reliable robust H∞ control law for active suspension of hub-driven EVs is designed. Considering
factors mentioned above, the following suspension performances should be taken into account.
(1). Maximum actuator force. The active control force provided by the suspension system should
be constrained by a threshold due to the limited power of the actuator, that is

u(t) ≤ umax (22)

where umax is the maximum force of the actuator.

(2). Ride comfort. To provide comfort for passengers, a control u is designed to isolate the sprung
..
mass from the road and magnetic force induced vibration, i.e., to minimize the vertical acceleration zb
in the presence of parameter uncertainties mb and kt , unknown dynamics Fr , and road speed excitation.
(3). Suspension deflection. The suspension deflection should not exceed its travel limit to avoid
ride comfort degradation and vehicle component damage. i.e.,

zs (t) − zb (t) ≤ zmax (23)

where zmax is the maximum deflection of the suspension.

(4). Motor unbalance dynamic force. The UEF in IWM promotes the rotor eccentricity which
intensifies the bearing wear, shortening the motor life. Furthermore, it aggravates the sprung mass
acceleration and provokes cacophony, deteriorating the vehicle comfort significantly. As previously
analyzed, the UEF is closely related to the rotor eccentricity. Thus, another primary objective is to
minimize the rotor eccentricity when the controller is designed. That is, |zr − zs |.
(5). Road-holding stability. The firm uninterrupted contact of wheels to road should be ensured
to make sure the vehicle safety, that is to say, the dynamic load of the tire should not exceed its
corresponding static load, i.e.,

kt (zr (t) − z g (t)) ≤ (mb + ms + mr ) g (24)

To analyze the performances mentioned above, for the sake of convenience the controlled outputs
are defined as T
h .. iT 
z (t)−z (t) kt (zr (t)−z g (t))
z1 = zb β(zr − zs ) z2 = γ s zmaxb (m +m +m ) g
(25)
b s r
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 3929 11 of 26

Thus, active suspension control system can be described by a state-space equation as:
 .

 x(t)=A(λ)x(t)+B1 (λ)w(t)+B2 (λ)u(t)
1 =C1 (λ)x(t)+D1 (λ)u(t)

z (26)



 z =C (λ)x(t)+D u(t)

2 2 2

where
−cs m−1 cs m−1 0 ks m−1
" #
0 0 h iT
C1 ( λ ) = b b b , D1 (λ) = m−1 0 ,
0 0 0 0 β 0 b

0 0 0 γz−1 max 0
" #
0
C2 ( λ ) = , D2 = [00]T ,
0 0 0 0 0 kt (mb + ms + mr )−1 g−1
where γ and β are weight coefficients. To obtain a better control performance of the suspension,
a state-feedback controller as ud = k(λ)x(t) is designed. Then, by considering the actuator fault, a
state-feedback controller can be modelled as

uactual (t) = ξud = ξk(λ)x(t) (27)

where k(λ) is a gain matrix of the feedback controller that needs to be determined, ξ represents the
possible actuator fault, ud is the desired force calculated by the controller, and uactual is the actual force
generated by the actuator. Assuming that ξ is constrained by its maximum ξmax value and minimum
value ξmin , the control law considering actuator faults and parameter uncertainties can be denoted as

uactual (t) = ξk(λ)x(t) = ξ0 (I + L)k(λ)x(t) (28)

where ξ0 = (ξmax + ξmin )/2 and L = (ξ − ξ0 )/ξ0 . Defining J = (ξmax − ξmin )/(ξmax + ξmin ), then, we
have LT L ≤ JT J ≤ I.
Therefore, the closed-loop system with state-feedback controller is rewritten as:
.
x(t)=(A(λ) + ξ0 (I + L)B2 (λ)k(λ))x(t)+B1 (λ)w(t)
(29)
z1 =C1 (λ)x(t)+D1 (λ)u(t)z2 =C2 (λ)x(t)+D2 u(t)

where the system matrices A(λ), B1 (λ), B2 (λ), C1 (λ), D2 (λ) and C2 (λ), which are dependent on the
sprung mass mb and the tire stiffness kt , are functions of λ. It is assumed that A(λ), B1 (λ), B2 (λ), C1 (λ),
D2 (λ) and C2 (λ) are constrained within the polytope Ω
 


 (A, B1 , B2 , C1 , D1 , C2 )(λ) : 


4

 

 P 
 (A, B1 , B2 , C1 , D1 , C2 )(λ) = ai (λ)(A, B1 , B2 , C1 , D1 , C2 )(i),
 
Ω=
 
(30)

 i=1 

4

 

 P 
ai (λ) = 1, ai (λ) ≥ 1,

 


 

i=1

where

(A, B1 , B2 , C1 , D1 , C2 )1 = (A(λ), B1 (λ), B2 (λ), C1 (λ), D1 (λ), C2 (λ)) λ =−λ ,λ =−λ

1 10 2 20
(A, B1 , B2 , C1 , D1 , C2 )2 = (A(λ), B1 (λ), B2 (λ), C1 (λ), D1 (λ), C2 (λ)) λ =−λ ,λ =λ
1 10 2 20
(A, B1 , B2 , C1 , D1 , C2 )3 = (A(λ), B1 (λ), B2 (λ), C1 (λ), D1 (λ), C2 (λ)) λ =λ ,λ =−λ
1 10 2 20
(A, B1 , B2 , C1 , D1 , C2 )4 = (A(λ), B1 (λ), B2 (λ), C1 (λ), D1 (λ), C2 (λ)) λ =λ ,λ =λ
1 10 2 20
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 3929 12 of 26

Additionally, the relationship between the uncertain masses (mb and kt ) and the vector a(λ) =
(a1 (λ), a2 (λ), a3 (λ), a4 (λ)) is expressed by

a1 (λ) = M1 (λ) × N1 (λ)a2 (λ) = M1 (λ) × N2 (λ)

(31)
a3 (λ) = M2 (λ) × N1 (λ)a4 (λ) = M2 (λ) × N2 (λ)

where        
M1 (λ) = m−1
b
− m −1 / m−1 − m−1 M (λ) = m−1 − m−1 / m−1 − m−1
bu   bl bu  2
 bl b  bl  bu
N1 (λ) = kt−1 − ktu
−1 / k−1 − k−1 N (λ) = k−1 − k−1 / k−1 − k−1
tl tu 2 rl r rl ru

T T T T −1 T
 For matices R andS, the inequality RΣS + S Σ R ≤ εRVR + ε S VS holds, if ε > 0,
Lemma 1. [18]
Σ(t) = diag σ(t)1 , σ(t)2 , . . . , σ(t)p is a time varying diagonal matrix, and satisfies |Σ| ≤ V.

Theorem 1. For given positive constant ρ, a robust reliable H∞ controller in the form of Equation (28) exists,
such that the closed-loop system in Equation (29) is asymptotically stable and satisfies kz1 (t)k2 < γkw(t)k2 for
all w satisfying kw(t)k22 ≤ kw(t)kmax = ρ/γ2 , while the constrains in inequalities (32–34) are guaranteed, if
there exist symmetric matrices P(λ), general matrix k(λ) and any scalar η > 0, ε > 0 satisfying
 T 
 Λ11 B1 (λ) Λ13 ηB2 k (λ)ξT0 
 
 ∗
 −γ2 I 0 0 0 

ηD1 (λ)  < 0 (32)
 
 ∗ ∗ −I 0
 
 ∗
 ∗ ∗ −ηJ−1 0 

∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ −ηJ−1
 

√
 −I + εJ ρξ0 k(λ)
 
0 
 √ T

 < 0
∗ −u2max P(λ) ρk (λ)ξT0 (33)

 
εJ−1
 
∗ ∗
√
ρC2 (λ)P(λ)
" #
−I
<0 (34)
∗ −z2max P(λ)
with
T
Λ11 = sym(A(λ)P(λ) + B2 (λ)ξ0 k(λ)), Λ13 = P(λ)CT1 (λ)+k (λ)ξT0 DT1 (λ).

Proof. Choose the Lyapunov–Krasovskii functional candidate as follows:

v(t, λ) = xT (t)P(λ)x(t) (35)

To establish a system in Equation (29) that is robust asymptotically stable with disturbance
attenuation γ > 0, the following Hamiltonian should be less than zero
.
H(x, λ, w, t) = zT1 (t)z1 (t) − γ2 wT (t)w(t) + v(λ, t) < 0 (36)

xT (t) [A(λ) + B2 (λ)ξ0 (I + L)k(λ)]T P(λ) + P(λ)[A(λ) + B2 (λ)ξ0 (I + L)k(λ)] x(t)+

n o
H(x, λ, w, t) =
xT (t)P(λ)B1 (λ)w(t) + w(t)T B1 T (λ)P(λ)x(t) − γ2 w(t)T w(t) + xT (t)[C1 (λ)+
D1 (λ)ξ0 (I + L)k(λ)]T [C1 (λ)+D1 (λ)ξ0 (I + L)k(λ)]x(t)

 Π1

P(λ)B1 (λ)  T
= ΓT (t) Γ (t)
1 B T (λ)P(λ) −γ2 I
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 3929 13 of 26

where

iT Π1 = [A(λ) + B2 (λ)ξ0 (I + L)k(λ)]T P(λ) + P(λ)[A(λ) + B2 (λ)ξ0 (I + L)k(λ)]+

ΓT (t)= [xT (t), w(t)T
[C1 (λ)x(t)+D1 (λ)ξ0 (I + L)k(λ)]T [C1 (λ)x(t)+D1 (λ)ξ0 (I + L)k(λ)]

To achieve H(x, λ, w, t) < 0 for all Γ(t) , 0, the following inequality should hold

Π1 P(λ)B1 (λ)
" #
<0 (37)
B1 T (λ)P(λ) −γ2 I

By using the Schur complement, inequality (37) can be converted into inequality (38).

 Λ11 P(λ)B1 (λ) Λ13   P(λ)B2 (λ)

   
 h i
−γ2 I L ξ0 k(λ)
   
 ∗
 0  +  0  0 0
 
∗ ∗ −I D1 ( λ )
 
T (38)
 P(λ)B2 (λ)  h
 
i
L ξ0 k(λ) 0 0  < 0
 
+ 0 
 
D1 ( λ )


where
Λ11 = sym(P(λ)A(λ) + P(λ)B2 (λ)ξ0 k(λ)), Λ13 = [C1 (λ)+D1 (λ)ξ0 k(λ)]T .

Based on Lemma 1, inequality (38) can be converted into inequality (39).

 Ψ11 P(λ)B1 (λ) Ψ13

 

−γ2 I  < 0
 
 ∗ 0 (39)
 
∗ ∗ −I + ηD1 (λ)JDT1 (λ)
 

where

Ψ11 = Λ11 + ηP(λ)B2 (λ)BT2 (λ)P(λ) + kT (λ)ξT0 η−1 Jξ0 k(λ), Ψ13 = Λ13 + ηP(λ)B2 JDT1 (λ).

By the Schur complement, we get

 Λ11 P(λ)B1 (λ) Λ13 ηP(λ)B2 kT (λ)ξT0

 

−γ2 I
 
 ∗ 0 0 0 
 
 ∗ ∗ −I ηD1 (λ) 0  < 0 (40)
 
 ∗ ∗ ∗ −ηJ−1 0
 

 
∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ −ηJ−1

Pre- and post-multiplying diag P(λ)−1 I I I I , the congruent transformation of the matrix is
n o

achieved. Subsequently, by defining P(λ)= P(λ)−1 and k(λ) = k(λ)P(λ)−1 , the inequality (40) is
equivalent to the first LMI in inequality (32). Then we will show that hand constrains in inequalities
(22)–(24) are guaranteed. From the Lyapunov function in inequality (35), it can be known that xT Px < ρ,
with ρ = γ2 wmax + v(0). Similarly, the following inequalities hold:

2
max u(t) = maxkξ0 (I + L)k(λ)x(t)k22 = maxkx(t)T [ξ0 (I + L)k(λ)]T [ξ0 (I + L)k(λ)]x(t)k2
t>0 t>0 t>0 (41)
< ρ · θmax (P−1/2 [ξ0 (I + L)k(λ)]T [ξ0 (I + L)k(λ)]P−1/2 ) < u2max I

2
= maxkx(t)T C2 (λ)T C2 (λ)x(t)k2

max z2 (t)
n t>0 t>0
= maxk x(t)T P(λ)1/2 P(λ)−1/2 C2 (λ)T C2 (λ)P(λ)−1/2 P(λ)1/2 x(t) k
o
(42)
t>0 2
< ρ · θmax (P(λ)−1/2 C2 (λ)T C2 (λ)P(λ)−1/2 ) < z2max I
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 3929 14 of 26

where θmax (·) represents the maximal eigenvalue. Using the Schur complement and Lemma 1,
inequality (41) can be written as
√
 −I + εJ ρξ0 k(λ)
 
0 
√ T
−u2max P(λ) ρk (λ)ξT0  < 0
 

 ∗  (43)
∗ ∗ εJ−1
 

Pre- and post-multiplying inequality (43) by diag I P(λ)−1 I , defining P(λ)= P(λ)−1 and k(λ) =
n o

k(λ)P(λ)−1 , the inequality is equivalent to the second LMI in inequality (33). Furthermore, based on
the Schur complement, the inequality matrix in inequality (42) can be change to
√
ρC2 (λ)
" #
−I
<0 (44)
∗ −z2max P(λ)

Pre- and post-multiplying inequality (44) by diag I P(λ)−1 , using P(λ) to replace P(λ)−1 , the
n o

LMI inequality (44) is equal to the third LMI in inequality (34). Thus, the proof is completed.
According to the inner property of the polytopic tire stiffness uncertainties and sprung mass
uncertainties, Equations (32)–(34) in Theorem 1 are equivalent to the inequalities as follows:

T
 
 Λ11 B1i Λ13 ηij B2i k j ξT0 
 
 ∗ −γ2 I 0 0 0
 

ηij D1i  < 0 i, j = 1, 2, 3, 4
 
 ∗
 ∗ −I 0  (45)
 ∗ ∗ ∗ −ηij J−1 0
 

−ηij J−1
 
∗ ∗ ∗ ∗

√
 −I + ε j J ρξ0 k j
 
0 
 √ T T  < 0 j = 1, 2, 3, 4
∗ 2
−umax P j ρk j ξ0  (46)


ε j J−1
 
∗ ∗
√
ρC2i P j
" #
−I
< 0 i, j = 1, 2, 3, 4 (47)
∗ −z2max P j
where
T
Λ11 = sym(Ai P j + B2i ξ0 k j ), Λ13 = P j CT1i +k j ξT0 DT1i .

Thus, by solving the following convex optimization problem, the robust state-feedback controller
design can be accomplished.
min γ
s.t. inequalities (45)–(47), P j > 0, ηij > 0, ε j > 0
for k j , i, j = 1, 2, 3, 4,
The gain matrix of the controller can be expressed by
  −1
X4 X4 
K = ξ a j (λ)k j  a j (λ)P j  (48)
  
  
j=1 j=1

This convex optimization problem can be solved by the function mincx provided by MATLAB.
Employing a similar method to what is proposed in Theorem 1, the theorem 2 can be achieved for the
active suspension of the hub-driven EVs without actuator faults and parameter uncertainties.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 3929 15 of 26

Theorem 2. Given positive constant ρ, a H∞ controller exists, such that the closed-loop system is asymptotically
stable and satisfies kz1 (t)2 k < γkw(t)k2 for all w satisfying kw(t)k22 ≤ kw(t)kmax = ρ/γ2 , while the constrains
in inequalities (22–24) are guaranteed, if there exist symmetric matrices P and general matrix k satisfying

PCT1 +kT DT1

 
 sym(AP + B2 k) B1 
2  < 0
 

 ∗ −γ I 0  (49)
∗ ∗ −I
 

√
ρk
" #
−I
<0 (50)
∗ −u2max p
√
ρC2 P
" #
−I
<0 (51)
∗ −z2max P

Thus, the feedback gain matrix K2 of the controller can be given by K2 = kP−1 .

4. Results and Discussion

To reflect the superiority of reliable robust H∞ controller in improving the vehicle and the motor
performances, the responses of the hub-driven EV under different controllers are investigated in both
the frequency domain and time domain. The parameters of the hub-driven EV are given in Appendix A.
We assume umax = 2000 N and zmax = 0.11 m. Moreover, the uncertain parameters about the sprung
mass and the tire stiffness are supposed to satisfy |λ1 | ≤ 0.3, |λ2 | ≤ 0.2.
A conventional robust controller KC is designed firstly, as described by Theorem 2, in which the
actuator failure and the model uncertainties are not considered. The gain matrix of the conventional
controller is
KC = 103 × [−1.092 − 0.326 − 0.12 − 5.802 − 4.6833.91]

Then, a parameter-dependent controller KP is designed for parameter uncertainties by applying

the method in Theorem 1 with the ξ0 and J terms dropped out. This design does not consider the
actuator failure, and its corresponding gain matrix is

KP = 103 × [−0.865 − 0.425 − 0.109 − 6.747 − 3.6634.018]

Lastly, a reliable robust controller KPF is designed for active suspension in the hub-driven EV
according to Theorem 1. in which the actuator failure and the parameter uncertainties are both
considered. The gain matrix of a reliable robust controller is KPF1 and KPF2 when the actuator thrust
loss is 0% and 40% respectively.

KPF1 = 103 × [−1.082 − 0.531 − 0.136 − 8.434 − 4.5795.022]

KPF2 = 103 × [−0.649 − 0.319 − 0.082 − 5.061 − 2.7473.014]

Figure 7 illustrates the control structure for the active suspension system. The control structure
can be divided into two parts: the outer control loop and the inner control loop. In the inner control
loop, the states which are sampled by sensors act as an input to the reliable robust H∞ controller.
The ideal control force is first generated by the controller based on control strategy. Then, the linear
motor is controlled to produce thrust force (detailed control process can be found in the literature [52]).
In the outer control loop, with the change of the sprung mass, tire stiffness or actuator thrust losses
exceed a certain limit, the gain matrix of the controller will be updated by solving proposed convex
optimization problem. This convex optimization process takes 20 s. However, the degree of actuator
thrust loss, the sprung mass, and the tire stiffness do not change rapidly in real time. In other words,
the gain matrix of the controller is not updated in real time. In addition, in inner control loop, the
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 3929 16 of 26

absolute CPU-time (0.00081 s) per time step is shorter than the real-time simulation time-step (0.01 s),
Appl. Sci.
thus 2020, 10, x FOR
illustrating PEER REVIEW
the viability of its real-time implementation. 15 of 25
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 15 of 25

Measured outputs Gain matrix of the

Measured outputs Sprung mass Polytope Ω Gain matrix of the
Sprung mass Polytope Ω controller
If..., controller
Tire stiffness If..., Convex optimization
Tire stiffness Then... outer loop
Then... Convex optimization outer loop
problem
Actuator fault problem
Actuator fault
Reliable robust
State variables of the suspension system Reliable robust
H controller
State variables of the suspension system H controller
inner loop
inner loop
Ideal control
Feedback signals of the linear motor Ideal control
Feedback signals of the linear motor force
force

Actuator Actuator
Road Actuator Actuator
Road Force control
distubance Force control
distubance

Figure 7. Control structure of the active suspension system.

Figure 7. Control structure of the active suspension system.
4.1. Bump Road Excitation
4.1. Bump road Excitation
4.1. Bump road Excitation
To reveal the transient response characteristics of the electric vehicle and the IWM, the bumpy
To reveal the transient response characteristics of the electric vehicle and the IWM, the bumpy
To reveal the
road excitation transient response
is introduced as follows: characteristics of the electric vehicle and the IWM, the bumpy
road excitation is introduced as follows:
road excitation is introduced as follows:

2πv
 2a (1a − cos( 2lπ0vt0)), t0 ≤ t ≤l vl0 + t0

 2π v0 t )), t0 ≤ t ≤ l + t0

zg =  a (1 − cos( (52)
z g =  2 (1 − cos(
 0, l t )), t0 t≤ >t ≤l/v
v0 0++
t 0 t0 (52)
zg =  2 l v0 (52)
 0, t > l v0 + t0
 0, t > l v0of
+ the
t0 bump; v denotes vehicle forward
where a denotes the height of the bump;  l denotes the length 0
where a denotes
velocity. Here wethe height
choose v0 =
of 25thekm/h,
bump;l = l 0.2
denotes
m the
and a =length
0.1 m. of the bump;
Figure 8a,b
where a denotes the height of the bump; l denotes the length of the bump; v0 denotes
v0 denotes
show vehicle
the road forward
displacement
vehicle forward
velocity. Here
excitation we
and we choose
speed v0 = 25 km/h,
excitation, l = 0.2 m and a = 0.1 m. Figure 8a, b show the road displacement
respectively.
velocity. Here choose v0 = 25 km/h, l = 0.2 m and a = 0.1 m. Figure 8a, b show the road displacement
excitation and speed excitation, respectively.
excitation and speed excitation,
(a)
respectively. (b)
(a) (b)

Figure 8. Bump input from the ground: (a) displacement excitation; (b) speed excitation.
Figure 8. Bump input from the ground: (a) displacement excitation; (b) speed excitation.
Figure 8. Bump input from the ground: (a) displacement excitation; (b) speed excitation.
Figure 9 shows the time-domain responses of passive suspension, KC and KP . It can be observed
that, Figure
compared 9 shows
withthe time-domain
passive responses
suspension, the bodyof passive suspension,
acceleration, KC and K
tire dynamic P. It can
force andbe observed
suspension
Figure 9 shows the time-domain responses of passive suspension, KC and KP. It can be observed
that, compared
deflection withsuspension
of active passive suspension,
with KC andtheKbody
P are acceleration, tire dynamic
obviously reduced. force and
Furthermore, thesuspension
periods of
that, compared with passive suspension, the body acceleration, tire dynamic force and suspension
deflection
their of active
transients suspension
become with KCThese
much shorter. and Kimply
P are obviously reduced. Furthermore,
that the performance of the electricthevehicle
periodshas
of
deflection of active suspension with KC and KP are obviously reduced. Furthermore, the periods of
their improved
been transients with
become much
active shorter.
control These
system. imply that
In addition, thebe
it can performance of the
observed that the control
electriceffects
vehicle
of has
KC
their transients become much shorter. These imply that the performance of the electric vehicle has
beenKimproved
and P with
are similar in active control system. In addition, it can be observed that the control effects of
time domain.
been improved with active control system. In addition, it can be observed that the control effects of
KC and KP are similar in time domain.
KC and KP are similar in time domain.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 3929 17 of 26
Appl. Sci.
Appl. Sci. 2020,
2020, 10,
10, xx FOR
FOR PEER
PEER REVIEW
REVIEW 16 of
16 of 25
25

(a)
(a) (b)
(b)

(c) (d)
(d)
(c)

Figure 9.
Figure 9. Vehicle
9. Vehicle dynamic
Vehicle dynamic responses
dynamic responses under
responses under bump
under bump excitation:
bump excitation: (a)
excitation: (a) body
body acceleration;
body acceleration; (b)
acceleration; (b) suspension
(b) suspension
suspension
deflection; (c)
deflection; (c) tire
(c) tire dynamic
tire dynamic force;
dynamic force; (d)
force; (d) actuator
(d) actuator force.
actuator force.
force.

Besides, the
Besides,
Besides, the corresponding
corresponding responses
corresponding responsesof
responses of the
of the rotor
the rotor eccentricity
rotor eccentricity and
eccentricity and the
and the UEF
the UEF of IWM are are illustrated
illustrated
in Figure
in Figure 10.
Figure10. It
10.It It can
cancan be
be seen seen that
that the
be seen the magnitudes
thatmagnitudes of the eccentricity
of the eccentricity
the magnitudes and the UEF
of the eccentricity and the
andunder UEF
active
the UEF under active
suspension
under active
suspension
are
suspension are significantly
significantly
are significantly
reduced in timereduced in time
domain,
reduced in time domain,
indicating
domain, indicating
that the active
indicating that the active
activegreatly
suspension
that the suspension
improve
suspension greatly
the
greatly
improve the
performance performance
of the IWM. of
The the IWM.
reason The
behind reason
this is behind
that activethis is that
suspension active suspension
inhibits
improve the performance of the IWM. The reason behind this is that active suspension inhibits the the rotor inhibits the
eccentricity,
rotor eccentricity,
eccentricity,
restricting
rotor the magneticrestricting the magnetic
magnetic
force oscillation.
restricting the Thus,force oscillation.
the oscillation.
force Thus,
coupling effect
Thus, the coupling
in IWM
the coupling effect in
is alleviated.
effect in IWM
IWM is is
alleviated.
alleviated.
(a)
(a) (b)
(b)

Figure 10. The motor responses under bump excitation: (a) the rotor eccentricity; (b) the UEF.

Figure 10. The motor responses under bump excitation: (a) the rotor eccentricity; (b) the UEF.
Figure 10. The motor
Figure 11a,b show theresponses
frequency under bump excitation:
responses from the (a) ground
the rotor eccentricity;
velocity to (b)thethebody
UEF. vertical
acceleration for the open and closed-loop systems using the conventional robust controller and
Figure 11a,b
Figure 11a,b show show the
the frequency
frequency responses
responses from
from thethe ground
ground velocity
velocity to to the
the body
body vertical
vertical
the parameter-dependent controller. It can be observed that the closed-loop system minimizes the
acceleration for
acceleration for the the open
open and
and closed-loop
closed-loop systems
systems using
using thethe conventional
conventional robust
robust controller
controller and
and the
the
acceleration of the sprung mass in the frequency range from 1 Hz to 8 Hz implying that the ride
parameter-dependent
parameter-dependent controller.
controller. It can be observed that
It can be observedcontroller the
that thefor closed-loop
closed-loop system minimizes
systemsystems
minimizes the
the
comfort of EV is enhanced. The parameter-dependent active suspension achieve
acceleration
acceleration of the sprung mass in the frequency range from 1 Hz to 8 Hz implying that the ride
less value ofof the sprung
sprung mass in the frequency
mass acceleration range from 1robust
than the conventional Hz tocontroller.
8 Hz implying that that
It means the ride
the
comfort of
comfort of EV EV is is enhanced.
enhanced. TheThe parameter-dependent
parameter-dependent controller
controller for
for active
active suspension
suspension systems
systems
control effect of the parameter-dependent controller is slightly better. In addition, the second peak
achieve less
achieve less value of of sprung
sprung mass
mass acceleration
acceleration than
than the conventional
conventional robust
robust controller.
controller. ItIt means
means that
that
value of Tz..b /value
z g , which
. decreases with an increase inthethe sprung mass, is the fixed point for active
the control effect
the control effect of the parameter-dependent controller is slightly better. In addition, the
of the parameter-dependent controller is slightly better. In addition, the second peak second peak
suspension system.
value of
value of /
/ ,, which
which decreases with
decreases with anan increase
increase in
in the
the sprung
sprung mass,
mass, isis the
the fixed
fixed point
point for
for active
active
suspension system.
suspension system.
Figure 11c,d demonstrate
Figure 11c,d demonstrate the
the frequency
frequency responses
responses from
from the
the ground
ground velocity
velocity to
to the
the rotor
rotor
eccentricity for the open and closed-loop systems. It can be seen that the closed-loop system reduces
eccentricity for the open and closed-loop systems. It can be seen that the closed-loop system reduces
the value
the value of
of (( )/
)/
in the
in the frequency
frequency range
range from
from 11 Hz
Hz toto 44 Hz,
Hz, implying
implying that
that active
active suspension
suspension
can suppress
can suppress the
the interference
interference from
from the
the ground
ground toto the
the IWM
IWM in in the
the corresponding
corresponding frequency
frequency range,
range,
alleviating the coupling effect in IWM.
alleviating the coupling effect in IWM.
Figure 11e,f
Figure 11e,f show
show the
the frequency
frequency responses
responses from
from the
the F
Frr (UEF)
(UEF) to
to the
the body
body vertical
vertical acceleration
acceleration for
for
the open
the open and
and closed-loop
closed-loop systems.
systems. One
One cancan observe
observe that
that the
the closed-loop
closed-loop system
system can
can suppress
suppress the
the
influence of the UEF on the body vertical acceleration, improving the ride comfort of EV.
influence of the UEF on the body vertical acceleration, improving the ride comfort of EV. Compared Compared
with the
with the conventional
conventional robust
robust controller,
controller, the
the parameter-dependent
parameter-dependent controller
controller performs
performs better
better in
in
frequency domain.
frequency domain.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 3929 18 of 26
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 17 of 25

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e) (f)

Figure 11.
Figure 11. Frequency
Frequencyresponses
responsesforfor different
different sprung
sprung masses:
masses: (a) transfer
(a) transfer function
function Tz.. b /z. g with
/ mb = 218;
with =
218;transfer
(b) (b) transfer
function function
Tz.. b /z. g with
/ m b =
with 405; =
(c)405; (c)
transfer transfer
function function
T . with m with
(zr −z g )/z g( )/ b =218; (d) =218;
transfer (d)
transfer Tfunction
function (zr −z g )/z g (with )/
. mb =with
405; (e) transfer function
= 405;, (e) Tz.. b /F
transfer with mb =/ 218;
function
r
(f) transfer
with = 218;, function Tz.. b /Fr
(f) transfer
with mb = 405.
function / with = 405.

Figure
Figure11c,d demonstrate
12 shows the peak
the first frequency responses
value from the ground
of the closed-loop velocity
transfer to the rotor eccentricity
function with the
/
for the open and closed-loop systems. It can be seen that the closed-loop system reduces the value of
parameter-dependent controller and the reliable robust controller versus the uncertain parameters λ1
T(zr −z g )/z. g in the frequency range from 1 Hz to 4 Hz, implying that active suspension can suppress
and λ2 in existence of 0%, 40%, and 80% actuator thrust loss. One can observe that the peak value of
the interference from the ground to the IWM in the corresponding frequency range, alleviating the
/ goes up with an increase of actuator thrust loss. This indicates that, with the extent of failure
coupling effect in IWM.
increasing, the effect of active suspension to isolate the disturbance from the ground to the sprung
Figure 11e,f show the frequency responses from the Fr (UEF) to the body vertical acceleration
mass becomes worse, deteriorating the ride comfort. In addition, one can observe that, along with the
for the open and closed-loop systems. One can observe that the closed-loop system can suppress the
changes of the uncertain parameters λ1 and λ2, the reliable robust controller yields smaller closed-
influence of the UEF on the body vertical acceleration, improving the ride comfort of EV. Compared
loop peak value than the parameter-dependent controller, indicating that the reliable robust
with the conventional robust controller, the parameter-dependent controller performs better in
controller considering actuator fault-tolerant can achieve better the ride comfort of EV than the one
frequency domain.
without fault-tolerant.
Figure 12 shows the first peak value of the closed-loop transfer function Tz..b /z. g with the
parameter-dependent controller and the reliable robust controller versus the uncertain parameters
λ1 and λ2 in existence of 0%, 40%, and 80% actuator thrust loss. One can observe that the peak
value of Tz..b /z. g goes up with an increase of actuator thrust loss. This indicates that, with the extent
of failure increasing, the effect of active suspension to isolate the disturbance from the ground to the
sprung mass becomes worse, deteriorating the ride comfort. In addition, one can observe that, along
with the changes of the uncertain parameters λ1 and λ2 , the reliable robust controller yields smaller
closed-loop peak value than the parameter-dependent controller, indicating that the reliable robust
controller considering actuator fault-tolerant can achieve better the ride comfort of EV than the one
without fault-tolerant.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 3929 19 of 26
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 18 of 25

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e) (f)

The first peak value of Tz.. b //z. g with the parameter-dependent

Figure 12. The parameter-dependent controller
controller and the reliable
robust controller
robust controller versus
versus the
theuncertain
uncertainparameters
parametersλλ1 1and andλ2λ: 2(a)
: (a) versus
versus λ1 under
λ1 under 0% 0% actuator
actuator loss;loss;
(b)
(b) versus λ
versus λ2 under
2 under 0% actuator loss; (c) versus
0% actuator loss; (c) versus λ1 underλ 1 under 40% actuator loss; (d) versus λ under
40% actuator loss; (d) versus λ22 under 40% 40%
actuator loss;
actuator loss; (e) versus λ
(e) versus under 80%
λ1 under 80% actuator
actuator loss;
loss; (f)
(f) versus
versus λλ22under
under80%
80%actuator
actuatorloss.
loss.

Figure 13
Figure 13 shows
shows the
the first
first peak
peak value
value of
of the
the closed-loop
closed-loop transfer function T(zr −z g )/z. g with
transfer function with the
the
( )/
parameter-dependent controller and the reliable robust controller versus the uncertain parameters
parameter-dependent controller and the reliable robust controller versus the uncertain parameters λ1
λ1 and λ2 in the existence of 0%, 40%, and 80% actuator thrust loss. Clearly, under different actuator
and λ2 in the existence of 0%, 40%, and 80% actuator thrust loss. Clearly, under different actuator
thrust loss, the reliable robust controller can obtain outstanding performances in terms of isolating
thrust loss, the reliable robust controller can obtain outstanding performances in terms of isolating
the disturbance from the ground to the IWM, compared with the parameter-dependent controller.
the disturbance from the ground to the IWM, compared with the parameter-dependent controller. In
In addition, one can observed that the peak value of T . goes up with an increase of λ , indicating
g ) /z g goes up with an increase of λ1
addition, one can observed that the peak value of ( (zr −z)/ 1, indicating
that with the increase of sprung mass, the effect of active suspension to isolate the disturbance from the
that with the increase of sprung mass, the effect of active suspension to isolate the disturbance from
ground to the IWM becomes worse. That is to say, the increase of the sprung mass intensifies coupling
the ground to the IWM becomes worse. That is to say, the increase of the sprung mass intensifies
effect in IWM.
coupling effect in IWM.
Figure 14 shows the frequency responses of the open and closed-loop systems by using the
parameter-dependent controller and the reliable robust controller in the existence of 0% and 40%
actuator thrust loss. Similar to Figure 11a,b, one can observe that compared with passive suspension
and the parameter-dependent controller, the reliable robust controller can achieve better vehicle and
motor performance, when actuator thrust loss occurs.
 (a) (b)

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 3929 20 of 26

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 19 of 25

(a) (b)
(c) (d)

(c) (d)
(e) (f)

(e) (f)

Figure 13. The first peak value of ( )/ with the parameter-dependent controller and the reliable
robust controller versus the uncertain parameters λ1 and λ2: (a) versus λ1 under 0% actuator loss; (b)
versus λ2 under 0% actuator loss; (c) versus λ1 under 40% actuator loss; (d) versus λ2 under 40%
actuator loss; (e) versus λ1 under 80% actuator loss; (f) versus λ2 under 80% actuator loss.

Figure 14 shows the frequency responses of the open and closed-loop systems by using the
Figure 13. The first peak value of T(zr −zg )/z. g with the parameter-dependent controller and the reliable
parameter-dependent controller
Figure 13. The first peak value ofand( the )/ reliable robust
with the controller in the
parameter-dependent existence
controller andof
the0% and 40%
reliable
robust controller versus the uncertain parameters λ1 and λ2 : (a) versus λ1 under 0% actuator loss;
actuator thrust
robust loss. Similar
controller versus theto uncertain
Figure 11a, b, one can
parameters observe
λ1 and λ2: (a)that compared
versus λ1 underwith passiveloss;
0% actuator suspension
(b)
(b) versus λ2 under 0% actuator loss; (c) versus λ1 under 40% actuator loss; (d) versus λ2 under 40%
and the parameter-dependent
versus λ2 under 0% actuatorcontroller, the reliable
loss; (c) versus λ1 under robust controller
40% actuator can(d)achieve
loss; versus better vehicle
λ2 under 40% and
actuator loss; (e) versus λ1 under 80% actuator loss; (f) versus λ2 under 80% actuator loss.
motor performance,
actuator whenλactuator
loss; (e) versus thrust
1 under 80% loss loss;
actuator occurs.
(f) versus λ2 under 80% actuator loss.
(a) (b)

Figure 14 shows the frequency responses of the open and closed-loop systems by using the
parameter-dependent controller and the reliable robust controller in the existence of 0% and 40%
actuator thrust loss. Similar to Figure 11a, b, one can observe that compared with passive suspension
and the parameter-dependent controller, the reliable robust controller can achieve better vehicle and
motor performance, when actuator thrust loss occurs.
(a) (b)
(c) (d)

(c) (d)

Figure 14. Frequency responses for the open (passive mode) and closed loop (active mode) systems
Figure
with 14. Frequency
actuator responses
thrust loss: for function
(a) transfer the openT(passive
.. . mode) and closed loop (active mode) systems
zb /z g under 0% actuator loss; (b) transfer function Tzb /z g
.. .

with actuator thrust loss: (a) transfer function under 0% actuator loss; (b)
under 40% actuator loss; (c) transfer function T(zr −zg )/zg /under 0% actuator loss; (d) transfer function
. transfer
Tfunction
(z −z )/z under
r g
.
g
/ under 40% actuator
40% actuator loss. loss; (c) transfer function ( )/ under 0% actuator loss; (d)
transfer function ( )/ under 40% actuator loss.
Figures 15 and 16 illustrate the time-domain responses of passive suspension and active suspension
with the parameter-dependent
Figures 15 and 16 illustratecontroller and the reliable
the time-domain robust controller
responses of passive in the existenceand
suspension of 0% and
active
40% actuator
suspension
Figure 14.thrust
with loss.
the Similar toforFigure
parameter-dependent
Frequency responses 13, those
the open figures
controller
(passive reveal
and
mode) the advantage
theclosed
and reliable ofmode)
robust
loop (active the reliable
controller robust
in the
systems
with of
controller
existence actuator
in 0% andthrust
improving40%the loss:
ride(a)
actuator transfer
comfort
thrust andfunction
loss. inhibiting
Similar to/the under13, 0%
coupling
Figure actuator
effect
those loss;
in IWM.
figures reveal(b)the
transfer
advantage
function / under 40% actuator loss; (c) transfer function ( )/ under 0% actuator loss; (d)
transfer function ( )/ under 40% actuator loss.

Figures 15 and 16 illustrate the time-domain responses of passive suspension and active
suspension with the parameter-dependent controller and the reliable robust controller in the
existence of 0% and 40% actuator thrust loss. Similar to Figure 13, those figures reveal the advantage
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 20 of 25
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 20 of 25
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 20 of 25
of the reliable robust controller in improving the ride comfort and inhibiting the coupling effect in
of theSci.reliable
Appl. 2020, 10,robust
3929 controller in improving the ride comfort and inhibiting the coupling effect
21 of in
26
IWM.
of the reliable robust controller in improving the ride comfort and inhibiting the coupling effect in
IWM. (a) (b)
IWM. (a) (b)
(a) (b)

Figure 15.
Figure 15. Body acceleration
Body acceleration of
acceleration of the vehicle:
of the
the vehicle: (a) under 0%
(a) under
under 0% actuator
actuator loss;
loss; (b)
(b) under
under 40%
40% actuator
actuator loss.
loss.
Figure 15. Body vehicle: (a) 0% actuator loss; (b) under 40% actuator loss.
Figure 15. Body acceleration of the vehicle: (a) under 0% actuator loss; (b) under 40% actuator loss.
(a) (b)
(a) (b)
(a) (b)

(c) (d)
(c) (d)
(c) (d)

16. The in-wheel motor dynamic responses: (a) the rotor eccentricity under 0% actuator loss;
Figure 16.
Figure 16. The in-wheel motor dynamic responses: (a) the rotor eccentricity under 0% actuator loss;
(b)
(b) the
Figure rotor
16. Theeccentricity under 0%
in-wheel under
motor actuator
dynamic responses: UEF
loss; (c) (a) under
the 0%
rotor0% actuator loss;
eccentricity (d) UEF
under under 40%
(b) the rotor eccentricity 0% actuator loss; (c) UEF under actuator loss; (d)0% actuator
UEF under loss;
40%
actuator loss.
loss.
(b) the rotor
actuator loss.eccentricity under 0% actuator loss; (c) UEF under 0% actuator loss; (d) UEF under 40%
actuator loss.
4.2. Random road
4.2. Random RoadExcitation
Excitation
4.2. Random road Excitation
To
To further
4.2. Random roadevaluate
further Excitation
evaluate the
the advantages
advantages of of the
the reliable
reliable robust
robust controller,
controller, the the performances
performances of of electric
electric
To
vehicles further
are evaluate
investigated the
at advantages
a speed of of
25 the
km/h reliable
on a robust
B-class controller,
road. Figurethe performances
17 and Table 1 of
showelectric
the
vehicles are investigated
To further evaluate the at a speed of 25 km/h on a B-class road. Figure 17 and Table 1 of show the
vehicles
stochastic are investigated
responses of at aadvantages
three speed of 25
suspensions
of km/h
the reliable
(K C, Kon
P , and
robust road.
a B-class
the
controller,
passive Figure the17performances
suspension).and Table 1 show
Responses
electric
of the
stochastic
vehicles are responses of
investigated three suspensions
at a speed of 25 km/h(K K , and the passive suspension). Responses of the
(KC, Kon a B-class road. Figure 17 and Responses
Table 1 show the
C, P
stochastic
sprung responses of three suspensions P, and the passive suspension). of the
sprung mass
stochastic mass acceleration
acceleration
responses of
and
three
the
the rotor
rotor eccentricity
and suspensions eccentricity
(K C, KP, and
are plotted
are the
plotted in
passivein Figure
Figure 17.
17. A
suspension). A detailed
detailed numerical
Responsesnumerical
of the
sprung
comparison massusing
acceleration
the and the rotorvalues
eccentricity are plottedininTable Figure 17. A detailed numerical
comparison
sprung mass using the root
acceleration
mean
root and
mean square
square
the rotor values (RMS)
(RMS)are
eccentricity
is
is shown
shown
plotted ininTable 1.
Figure1. One
One
17. A
can
can observe that
that both
observenumerical
detailed both
comparison
of active using
control the rootKmean
methods and
C C and K square
K can values
obviously(RMS) is
enhance shown the in
ride Table 1.
comfort One
and
P P can obviously enhance the ride comfort and slightly intensify can observe
slightly that
intensify both
the
of active
comparison control methods
usingmethods
the root K K
mean square
of active
rotor control
eccentricity compared C and
with KP canvalues
passive
(RMS)enhance
obviously
suspension. It
is shown
can be the inride
found
Table
that
1. One and
comfort
compared
can observe
slightly
with K C ,
that
the
both
intensify
RMS
theactive
of rotor eccentricity compared
control methods KC and with passive
KPpassive suspension.
can obviously enhance It can the beride
found that compared
comfort and slightlywith KC, the
intensify
the
of rotor
the eccentricity
sprung mass compared
acceleration with
controlled suspension.
by K P decreased It canby be found
4.5%, from that compared
0.7 to 0.67, with
and theKCrotor
, the
RMS
the of the
rotor sprung mass
eccentricity acceleration
compared with controlled
passive by KP decreased
suspension. It can be by 4.5%,
found from
that 0.7 to 0.67,
compared with and
K the
C, the
RMS of the sprung
eccentricity only rosemass acceleration
byrose
0.8%, from controlled
174.5 176. by
to174.5 The KPcomprehensive
decreased by 4.5%, from 0.7of
performance toK0.67, and the
P is obvious
rotor
RMS of eccentricity
the sprung only
mass by 0.8%,
acceleration from
controlled to 176. The comprehensive performance of K is
174.5 byto K P decreased by 4.5%, from 0.7 to 0.67, and the P
rotor
better eccentricity
than that of only
K C . rose by 0.8%, from 176. The comprehensive performance of KP is
obvious
rotor better than thatrose
eccentricity of KC. 0.8%, from 174.5 to 176. The comprehensive performance of KP is
obvious better thanonly
that of KCby .
(a)
obvious better than that of K(a) C. (b)
(b)
(a)
(b)

Figure 17. The responses under stochastic excitation: (a) body acceleration; (b) the rotor eccentricity.
Figure 17. The responses under stochastic excitation: (a) body acceleration; (b) the rotor eccentricity.
Figure 17. The responses under stochastic excitation: (a) body acceleration; (b) the rotor eccentricity.
Figure 17. The responses under stochastic excitation: (a) body acceleration; (b) the rotor eccentricity.
Table 1. The root mean square (RMS) of electric vehicle (EV) responses.
Table 1. The root mean square (RMS) of electric vehicle (EV) responses.
Table 1. The root mean square (RMS) of electric vehicleActive
(EV) responses.
Suspension
Dynamics Response Passive Active Suspension
Dynamics Response Passive Kc Suspension
Active KP
Dynamics Response Passive Kc KP
Kc KP
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 3929 22 of 26

Table 1. The root mean square (RMS) of electric vehicle (EV) responses.

Active Suspension
Dynamics Response Passive
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 21 of 25
Kc KP
Sprung mass acceleration (m/s2 )
Sprung mass acceleration (m/s2) 0.92 0.92 0.70
0.70 0.67
0.67
Deflection of suspension (m) 0.0046 0.0043 0.0045
Deflection
Dynamic forceof
ofsuspension
tire (N) (m) 647.7 0.0046 0.0043
787 0.0045
819
Dynamic force
Eccentricity (m) of tire (N) 6.1 × 10 −5 647.7 6.4 × 10787
−5 6.5819
× 10−5
Eccentricity
UEF (N) (m) 164.4 6.1×10-5 6.4×10-5
174.5 6.5×10
176 -5
Control force
UEF(N) (N) – 164.4 90.97
174.5 103.3
176
Control force (N) -- 90.97 103.3
Figure 18 and Table show the stochastic
Table 2 show stochastic responses
responsesof ofthree
threesuspensions
suspensions(K (KPP,, K
KPF
PF and
and thethe passive
passive
suspension). It can
canbe beseen
seenfrom
fromTable
Table 2 and
2 and Figure
Figure 18 that
18 that the reliable
the reliable robustrobust controller
controller achieves achieves
a lower a
lower peak and
peak value value and RMS
lower lowervalue
RMSof value
sprung of sprung mass acceleration,
mass acceleration, compared compared with passive
with passive system and system
the
and the parameter-dependent
parameter-dependent controller
controller system system
without without
actuator actuator fault-tolerant,
fault-tolerant, which clearly which clearly
illustrates that
illustrates that KPF improve
KPF can effectively can effectively
the rideimprove
comfort.the ride comfort.
Furthermore, fromFurthermore,
Table 2, it canfrom Table 2,that
be observed it can
whenbe
observed
the extentthat when is
of failure theminor,
extentthe
of failure
RMS ofisthe minor,
bodythe RMS of theisbody
acceleration acceleration
greatly reduced and is greatly
the RMS reduced
of the
and
UEF the RMS of
increased the UEF
slightly increased
compared slightlysuspension
to passive comparedand to passive suspension and the
the parameter-dependent parameter-
control system.
dependent controlthat
The results imply system. The results
the reliable robust imply thatwith
controller the reliable robustfailure
slight actuator controller with slight actuator
can significantly enhance
failure
the ridecan significantly
comfort and avoid enhance the ride comfort
large increases and avoid
of the coupling large
effect increases
in IWM. When of the extent
coupling effect in
of failure is
IWM.
major, When thebody
both the extent of failure and
acceleration is major,
the UEFbothdecreased
the bodytoacceleration and the
a certain extent, UEF decreased
indicating to a
that the ride
certain
comfortextent,
and theindicating that the ride
IWM performance are comfort
improved.andAccording
the IWM to performance
the analysis, are improved.
it can be inferredAccording
that in
to
thethe analysis,
presence it can be
of actuator inferred
failure that inparameter
and model the presence of actuator
uncertainties, the failure and modelsystem
active suspension parameter
with
uncertainties, the active suspension system with the reliable robust controller
the reliable robust controller improves the ride comfort and PMBDC motor operation performance. improves the ride
comfort and PMBDC motor operation performance.
(a) (b)

Figure 18. Body acceleration in electric vehicle: (a) under 0% actuator loss; (b) under 40% actuator loss.
Figure 18. Body acceleration in electric vehicle: (a) under 0% actuator loss; (b) under 40% actuator
Table 2. The RMS of EV dynamic responses with different actuator thrust losses and parameter variation.
loss.
Body Suspension Tire
Control Eccentricity
Suspension
Table 2. The Types Accele-Ration
RMS of EV Deflection withDynamic
dynamic responses different actuator thrust losses UEF (N)
Force (N) (m) and parameter
(m/s2 ) (m) Force (N)
variation.
Passive 0.92 0.0046 647.7 – 6.1 × 10−5 164.4
Pra-dependent 0% Body
0.67 0.0045 819 103.3 6.5 × 10−5 176
Reliable robust 0% 0.61 0.0047 893.9 Tire 136.5Control 6.9 × 10−5 187.5 UEF
Accele- Suspension Eccentricity
Suspension Types40%
Pra-dependent 0.77 0.0043 732.4 Dynamic 58.9 Force6.1 × 10−5 166.1
Reliable robust 40%
Ration
0.72
Deflection
0.0043
(m) 761.4 74.6 (N) 6.1 × 10−5
(m) 169.2 (N)
Force (N)
Pra-dependent 80% 0.86)
(m/s 2
0.0044 671.1 19.5 5.9 × 10−5 160.9
Reliable
Passiverobust 80% 0.85
0.92 0.0044
0.0046 677.7 647.7 24.3 -- 5.9 × 10−56.1×10-5161.0 164.4
Pra-dependent 0% 0.67 0.0045 819 103.3 6.5×10-5 176
Reliable robust 0% 0.61 0.0047 893.9 136.5 6.9 ×10-5 187.5
In general, the active suspension system considering the eccentricity of the rotor can greatly enhance
Pra-dependent 40% 0.77 0.0043 732.4 58.9 6.1×10-5 166.1
the ride comfort and weaken the influence of UEF on the performance of the hub-driven -5EV. When the
Reliable robust 40% 0.72 0.0043 761.4 74.6 6.1×10 169.2
model parameters
Pra-dependent 80%are perturbed,
0.86 the parameter-dependent
0.0044 controller 19.5
671.1 shows better comprehensive
5.9×10 -5 160.9
performance than80%
Reliable robust conventional
0.85robust controller . In addition,
0.0044 the reliable24.3
677.7 robust controller
5.9×10-5 can achieve
161.0
betterInvehicle andthe
general, motor performance
active suspensioninsystem
the presence of different
considering actuator thrust
the eccentricity losses
of the andcan
rotor parameter
greatly
variation, compared with the conventional robust controller and parameter-dependent controller.
enhance the ride comfort and weaken the influence of UEF on the performance of the hub-driven EV.
When the model parameters are perturbed, the parameter-dependent controller shows better
comprehensive performance than conventional robust controller. In addition, the reliable robust
controller can achieve better vehicle and motor performance in the presence of different actuator
thrust losses and parameter variation, compared with the conventional robust controller and
parameter-dependent controller.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 3929 23 of 26

5. Conclusions
The mathematical model for a hub-driven electric vehicle considering the coupling effect in IWM
was established based on electric magnetic field theory. The influences of the coupling effect on
the vehicle performances were analyzed. Then, a reliable robust H∞ controller considering model
uncertainties, actuator failure and electromagnetic force interference was designed. The results are
given as follows:
(1). The vertical UEF in the motor is strongly coupled with rotor rotation position, phase current,
and rotor eccentricity. High phase current and large rotor eccentricity promoted by the coupling effect
provoke the UEF of the motor. The mutual promotion phenomenon (i.e., the rotor eccentricity provokes
the UEF; synchronously, the UEF intensifies the rotor eccentricity) aggravates the electromagnetic
coupling effect, thus worsening the motor operation performance. Furthermore, this phenomenon
aggravates the car body acceleration, deteriorating the ride comfort of vehicle.
(2). Based on Lyapunov stability theory, a reliable robust H∞ controller for active suspension
of a hub-driven EV associated with model uncertainties, actuator failure, and electromagnetic force
interference was investigated. The control objective is to enhance the ride comfort and restrict
the coupling effect in IWM while satisfying the hard constraints such as road holding capability,
suspension deflection limitation, actuator failure, and parameter variation. Simulation results in both
the frequency-domain and time-domain show the robustness and advantageous performances of the
reliable robust H∞ controller method. This work can provide a practical model reference for the
study of vibration performance of hub-driven EVs with PMSM and the optimization, control and
improvement of its vibration performance. In the future, the influence of bearing nonlinear force and
bearing clearance on the ride comfort and the motor operation performance will be studied. Moreover,
the experimental validation will be investigated.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, methodology, H.W. and L.Z.; software, formal analysis, H.W., Z.Z.
and Y.Y.; writing and editing, H.W.; supervision and funding acquisition, L.Z. Y.Y. and Y.L. All authors have read
and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 51875061), Technology
innovation and application development special project of Chongqing (Grant No. cstc2019jscx-zdztzxX0032), Chongqing
Postgraduate Research and Innovation Project [grant number: CYB19063].
Acknowledgments: The authors would like to extend special thanks to Qian Chen of Chongqing University for
language polishing from the research supported by State Education Ministry and Fundamental Research Funds
for the Central Universities (2018CDJSK04XK09).
Conflicts of Interest: We declare that there is no conflict of interests in connection with the paper submitted.

Appendix A

Table A1. Nomenclature and value.

EV Symbol Value Unit Expression

The parameter values of the hub-driven electric vehicle
Rs 0.028 ohm Stator resistances
J 1.2 kg·m2 Rotor rotational inertia
Ls 0.00187 H Inductance of phase
mr 65 kg Motor rotor mass
ms 37.5 kg Motor stator mass
mb 337.5 kg Sprung mass
kt 250,000 N/m Stiffness of tire
ks 23500 N/m Stiffness of suspension
km 8,000,000 N/m Stiffness of motor bearing
cs 1450 N·s/m Damp of suspension
ct 375 N·s/m Damp of tire
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 3929 24 of 26

Table A1. Cont.

EV Symbol Value Unit Expression

Parameters of a 27-slot/24-pole surface PMBDC motor
2p 24 - Pole number
QS 27 - Slot number
Rr 169.8 mm Rotor surface radius
Rm 163.8 mm Magnet surface radius
Rs 163 mm Stator surface radius
αp 0.8 - Ratio of magnet arc to pole pitch
L 42 mm Stack length
lm 6 mm Radial thickness of magnet
δ 0.8 mm Length of air gap
Ns 20 - Number of turns of winding
b0 2 mm Stator slot opening
Br 1.29 T Magnet remanence
ur 1.07 - Relative recoil permeability

References
1. Wang, Z.; Qu, C.; Zhang, L.; Xue, X.; Wu, J. Optimal component sizing of a four-wheel independently-actuated
electric vehicle with a real-time torque distribution strategy. IEEE Access 2018, 6, 49523–49536. [CrossRef]
2. Long, G.; Ding, F.; Zhang, N.; Zhang, J.; Qin, A. Regenerative active suspension system with residual energy
for in-wheel motor driven electric vehicle. Appl. Energy 2020, 260, 114180. [CrossRef]
3. Mingchun, L.; Feihong, G.; Yuanzhi, Z. Ride Comfort Optimization of In-Wheel-Motor Electric Vehicles with
In-Wheel Vibration Absorbers. Energies 2017, 10, 1647–1668.
4. Teixeira, A.C.; Sodré, J.R. Impacts of replacement of engine powered vehicles by electric vehicles on energy
consumption and CO 2 emissions. Transp. Res. Part D-Transp. Environ. 2018, 59, 375–384. [CrossRef]
5. Zhao, W.; Wang, Y.; Wang, C. Multidisciplinary optimization of electric-wheel vehicle integrated chassis
system based on steady endurance performance. J. Clean Prod. 2018, 186, 640–651. [CrossRef]
6. Xu, B.; Xiang, C.; Qin, Y.; Ding, P.; Dong, M. Semi-active vibration control for in-wheel switched reluctance
motor driven electric vehicle with dynamic vibration absorbing structures: Concept and validation.
IEEE Access 2018, 6, 60274–60285. [CrossRef]
7. Song, C.X.; Xiao, F.; Song, S.X.; Peng, S.L.; Fan, S.Q. Stability Control of 4WD Electric Vehicle with In-Wheel
Motors Based on Integrated Control of Electro-Mechanical Braking System. Appl. Mech. Mater. 2015, 740,
206–210. [CrossRef]
8. Zhai, L.; Sun, T.; Wang, J. Electronic Stability Control Based on Motor Driving and Braking Torque Distribution
for a Four In-Wheel Motor Drive Electric Vehicle. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 2016, 65, 4726–4739. [CrossRef]
9. Sun, W.; Li, Y.; Huang, J.; Zhang, N. Vibration effect and control of In-Wheel Switched Reluctance Motor for
electric vehicle. J. Sound Vibr. 2015, 338, 105–120. [CrossRef]
10. Qin, Y.; He, C.; Shao, X.; Du, H.; Xiang, C.; Dong, M. Vibration mitigation for in-wheel switched reluctance
motor driven electric vehicle with dynamic vibration absorbing structures. J. Sound Vibr. 2018, 419, 249–267.
[CrossRef]
11. Tan, D.; Wang, H.; Wang, Q. Study on the Rollover Characteristic of In-Wheel-Motor-Driven Electric Vehicles
Considering Road and Electromagnetic Excitation. Shock Vib. 2016, 2016, 13. [CrossRef]
12. Luo, Y.; Tan, D. Study on the dynamics of the In-Wheel Motor System. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 2012, 61,
3510–3518.
13. Zhao, Y.E.; Zhang, J.W.; Han, X. Design and study on the dynamic damper mechanism for an in-wheel motor
individual drive electric vehicle. Mech. Sci. Technol. Aerosp. Eng. 2008, 27, 395–398.
14. Li, Z.; Zheng, L.; Ren, Y.; Li, Y.; Xiong, Z. Multi-objective optimization of active suspension system in electric
vehicle with In-Wheel-Motor against the negative electromechanical coupling effects. Mech. Syst. Signal Proc.
2019, 116, 545–565. [CrossRef]
15. Shao, X.; Naghdy, F.; Du, H.; Qin, Y. Coupling effect between road excitation and an in-wheel switched
reluctance motor on vehicle ride comfort and active suspension control. J. Sound Vibr. 2019, 443, 683–702.
[CrossRef]
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 3929 25 of 26

16. Wang, R.; Jing, H.; Yan, F.; Karimi, H.R.; Chen, N. Optimization and finite-frequency H∞ control of active
suspensions in in-wheel motor driven electric ground vehicles. J. Frankl. Inst. 2015, 352, 468–484. [CrossRef]
17. Qin, Y.; He, C.; Ding, P.; Dong, M.; Huang, Y. Suspension hybrid control for in-wheel motor driven electric
vehicle with dynamic vibration absorbing structures. IFAC-PapersOnLine 2018, 51, 973–978. [CrossRef]
18. Shao, X.; Naghdy, F.; Du, H.; Li, H. Output feedback H∞ control for active suspension of in-wheel motor
driven electric vehicle with control faults and input delay. ISA Trans. 2019, 92, 94–108. [CrossRef]
19. Jing, H.; Wang, R.; Li, C.; Wang, J.; Chen, N. Fault-tolerant control of active suspensions in in-wheel motor
driven electric vehicles. Int. J. Veh. Des. 2015, 68, 22–36. [CrossRef]
20. R, J.; Choi, S.B. A novel semi-active control strategy based on the quantitative feedback theory for a vehicle
suspension system with magneto-rheological damper saturation. Mechatronics 2018, 54, 36–51.
21. Liu, B.; Saif, M.; Fan, H. Adaptive fault tolerant control of a half-car active suspension systems subject to
random actuator failures. IEEE-Asme Trans. Mechatron. 2016, 21, 2847–2857. [CrossRef]
22. Yetendje, A.; Seron, M.; De Dona, J. Diagnosis and Actuator Fault Tolerant Control in Vehicle Active
Suspension. In Proceedings of the 2007 Third International Conference on Information and Automation for
Sustainability, Melbourne, VIC, Australia, 4–6 December 2007; pp. 153–158.
23. Cao, F.; Sun, H.; Li, Y.; Tong, S. Fuzzy Adaptive Fault-Tolerant Control for a Class of Active Suspension
Systems with Time Delay. Int. J. Fuzzy Syst. 2019, 21, 2054–2065. [CrossRef]
24. Jing, H.; Wang, R.; Karimi, H.R.; Chadli, M.; Hu, C.; Yan, F. Robust output-feedback based fault-tolerant
control of active suspension with finite-frequency constraint. IFAC-Pap. 2015, 48, 1173–1179. [CrossRef]
25. Liu, S.; Zhou, H.; Luo, X.; Xiao, J. Adaptive sliding fault tolerant control for nonlinear uncertain active
suspension systems. J. Frankl. Inst. 2016, 353, 180–199. [CrossRef]
26. Ma, M.; Chen, H.; Liu, X. Robust H-infinity control for constrained uncertain systems and its application to
active suspension. J. Control Theory Appl. 2012, 10, 470–476. [CrossRef]
27. Sun, W.; Pan, H.; Yu, J.; Gao, H. Reliability control for uncertain half-car active suspension systems with
possible actuator faults. IET Contr. Theory Appl. 2014, 8, 746–754. [CrossRef]
28. Haiping, D.; Zhang, N. Fuzzy control for nonlinear uncertain electrohydraulic active suspensions with input
constraint. IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst. 2008, 17, 343–356. [CrossRef]
29. Zhang, Y.; Zhang, G.; Yu, F. Modeling and µ Synthesis Control of Vehicle Active Suspension with Motor
Actuator. WSEAS Trans. Syst. 2012, 11, 173–186.
30. Pang, H.; Liu, F.; Xu, Z. Variable universe fuzzy control for vehicle semi-active suspension system with MR
damper combining fuzzy neural network and particle swarm optimization. Neurocomputing 2018, 3, 130–140.
[CrossRef]
31. Akay, H.; Türkay, S. Influence of tire damping on mixed H2/H∞ synthesis of half-car active suspensions.
J. Sound Vib. 2009, 322, 15–28. [CrossRef]
32. Pusadkar, U.S.; Chaudhari, S.D.; Shendge, P.D.; Phadke, S.B. Linear disturbance observer based sliding mode
control for active suspension systems with non-ideal actuator. J. Sound Vib. 2019, 442, 428–444. [CrossRef]
33. Chen, S.L.; Chen, S.H.; Yan, S.T. Stabilization of a Current-Controlled Three-Pole Magnetic Rotor-Bearing
System by Integral Aliding Mode Control. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on
Networking, Sensing and Control, Taipei, Taiwan, 21–23 March 2004.
34. Wu, H.; Wu, J.; Sun, Q.; Wang, H.; Zhang, L. A Novel Sliding Mode Observer-Based Sensorless PMSM
Control. In Proceedings of the 2019 22nd International Conference on Electrical Machines and Systems
(ICEMS), Harbin, China, 11–14 August 2019; pp. 1–5.
35. Mystkowski, A. Lyapunov sliding-mode observers with application for active magnetic bearing operated
with zero-bias flux. J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control 2019, 141, 041006. [CrossRef]
36. Hezzi, A.; Bensalem, Y.; Elghali, S.B.; Abdelkrim, M.N. Sliding Mode Observer Based Sensorless Control of
Five Phase PMSM in Electric Vehicle. In Proceedings of the 2019 19th International Conference on Sciences
and Techniques of Automatic Control and Computer Engineering (STA), Sousse, Tunisia, 24–26 March 2019.
37. Pang, H.; Zhang, X.; Xu, Z. Adaptive backstepping-based tracking control design for nonlinear active
suspension system with parameter uncertainties and safety constraints. ISA Trans. 2019, 88, 23–36.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
38. Sun, L.; Wang, X. Nonlinear Control for Semi-active Suspension with Input Constraints. IFAC-Pap. 2018, 51,
131–135. [CrossRef]
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 3929 26 of 26

39. Mystkowski, A.; Pawluszewicz, E. Nonlinear Position-Flux Zero-Bias Control for AMB System with
Disturbance. Appl. Comput. Electromagn. Soc. J. 2017, 32, 650–656.
40. Salameh, M.; Yaman, S.; Jiang, Y.; Krishnamurthy, M. Analytical Approach for Calculating Magnetic Field
Distribution in Surface Mount PM Motor Including Stator Slot Effect. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE
Transportation Electrification Conference and Expo (ITEC), Dearborn, MI, USA, 19–21 June 2019; pp. 1–6.
41. Ying, M. Configuration Analysis and Structural Research of In-Wheel Motor. Ph.D. Thesis, Chongqing
University, Chongqing, China, 2014.
42. Zhu, Z.Q.; Howe, D. Instantaneous Magnetic Field Distribution in Brushless Permanent Magnet dc Motors
Part 11, Armature-Reaction Field. IEEE Trans. Magn. 1993, 29, 124–135. [CrossRef]
43. Zhu, Z.Q.; Ishak, D.; Howe, D.; Chen, J. Unbalanced Magnetic Forces in Permanent-Magnet Brushless
Machines with Diametrically Asymmetric Phase Windings. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2007, 43, 1544–1553.
[CrossRef]
44. Zhu, Z.Q.; Xia, Z.P.; Wu, L.J.; Jewell, G.W. Analytical Modeling and Finite-Element Computation of Radial
Vibration Force in Fractional-Slot Permanent-Magnet Brushless Machines. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2010, 46,
1908–1918. [CrossRef]
45. Zarko, D.; Ban, D.; Lipo, T.A. Analytical calculation of magnetic field distribution in the slotted air gap of a
surface permanent-magnet motor using complex relative air-gap permeance. IEEE Trans. Magn. 2006, 42,
1828–1837. [CrossRef]
46. Jie, M.; Tao, R.; Lee, X. Analytical calculation of no-load magnetic field distribution in the slotted airgap of a
permanent magnet synchronous motor. IFAC Proc. Vol. 2013, 46, 184–189. [CrossRef]
47. Kim, D.; Noh, M.D.; Park, Y.W. Unbalanced magnetic forces due to rotor eccentricity in a toroidally wound
BLDC motor. IEEE Trans. Magn. 2016, 52, 1–4. [CrossRef]
48. Teymoori, S.; Rahideh, A.; Moayed-Jahromi, H.; Mardaneh, M. 2-D analytical magnetic field prediction for
consequent-pole permanent magnet synchronous machines. IEEE Trans. Magn. 2016, 52, 1–14. [CrossRef]
49. Lu, H.; Zhang, L.; Qu, W. A New Torque Control Method for Torque Ripple Minimization of BLDC Motors
with Un-Ideal Back EMF. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2008, 23, 950–958. [CrossRef]
50. Cabrera, J.A.; Castillo, J.J.; Pérez, J.; Velasco, J.M.; Guerra, A.J.; Hernández, P. A procedure for determining
tire-road friction characteristics using a modification of the magic formula based on experimental results.
Sensors 2018, 18, 896. [CrossRef]
51. Chao, Y. Optimal Design and Energy-Regenerative Research of Electromagnetic Active Suspension Linear
Actuator. Ph.D. Thesis, Chongqing University, Chongqing, China, 2018.
52. Li, Y.; Zheng, L.; Liang, Y.; Yu, Y. Adaptive compensation control of an electromagnetic active suspension
system based on nonlinear characteristics of the linear motor. J. Vib. Control 2020, 42, 386. [CrossRef]

© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).