The multi-axis hydraulic road simulator is an indispensable test rig in vehicle laboratory durability testing. Offline iterative learning control (ILC) based on frequency domain model is widely used to replicate the load conditions experienced by vehicles in the proving ground. Due to the strong nonlinearity of the hydraulic system and test specimens, classical offline ILC requires numerous iterations to generate the required driving signals. This process is not only time-consuming but also inevitably causes pre-damage to the specimens. To expedite the generation of driving signals, an enhanced model-based iterative learning control (EMILC) is proposed that combines the Quasi-Newton optimization algorithm with model-estimated optimal gains. The control strategy employs the Broyden-class optimization method to update the impedance matrix, reducing modeling errors and enhancing the robustness of iterations. Simultaneously, optimal learning gains are obtained during the iteration process based on the estimated model, thereby reducing damage to the specimens. Experimental results, replicating real spindle forces collected from Wheel Force Transducers (WFT) in the proving ground, demonstrate that EMILC improves convergence speed and tracking accuracy compared to existing offline ILC methods. This novel approach is not limited to durability testing and can be extended to other control systems requiring repetitive tracking tasks.
FrenchM.An introduction to road simulation testing. Experimental Techniques2000; 24: 37–38.
2.
PlummerAR.Control techniques for structural testing: A review. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part I: Journal of Systems and Control Engineering2007; 221: 139–169.
3.
KimJWXuanDJKimY-B.Robust control application for a three-axis road simulator. Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology2011; 25: 221–231.
4.
KaurPTaghaviSTianZ, et al. A survey on simulators for testing self-driving cars. In: 2021 Fourth international conference on connected and autonomous driving (MetroCAD). IEEE, pp. 62–70.
5.
SuryawanshiVNKajalkarAMMohiteSS, et al. Evolution of multi axis suspension test rig from reaction type to inertial type. SAE Technical Paper, 2021.
6.
FuYZhouXWanB, et al. Decoupled adaptive terminal sliding mode control strategy for a 6-DOF electro-hydraulic suspension test rig with RBF coupling force compensator. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part C: Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science2023; 237: 4339–4357.
7.
TangYBoKShenG, et al. Investigation of Legendre polynomials expanded adaptive controller with inverse compensation for high frequency tracking of electro-hydraulic force systems. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part I: Journal of Systems and Control Engineering2024; 238: 1678–1695.
8.
DoddsCJPlummerAR.Laboratory road simulation for full vehicle testing: a review. SAE Technical Paper 2001-26–0047. Warrendale, PA: SAE International. Epub ahead of print 10 January 2001. DOI: 10.4271/2001-26-0047.
9.
YangZXieH.Acceleration waveform reproduction control of hypergravity centrifugal shaking table based on data driven iterative learning control and two-degree-of-freedom control. ISA Transactions2024; 155: 373–385.
10.
CornelisBTosoAVerpoestW, et al. Improved MIMO FRF estimation and model updating for robust Time Waveform Replication on durability test rigs. In: International conference on noise and vibration engineering. 2014, pp. 759–774.
11.
ZhidongYYanyanZDachengC, et al. Iterative approach of tire-coupled road simulator based on singularity threshold criterion. In: 2015 International conference on fluid power and mechatronics (FPM). IEEE, 2015, pp. 444–447.
12.
RaathADVan WaverenCC.A time domain approach to load reconstruction for durability testing. Engineering Failure Analysis1998; 5: 113–119.
13.
DursunUBayramT.Tracking control solution for road simulators: model-based iterative learning control approach improved by time-domain modelling. Gazi University Journal of Science2012; 25: 435–446.
14.
MüllerTZiegmannJKrünerS, et al. Optimization of inverse model identification for multi-axial test rig control. In: MATEC web of conferences. EDP Sciences, 2016, p. 01002.
15.
MüllerTEndischC. Compensation techniques for iterative rig control in multi-axial durability testing. In: 2016 IEEE 21st international conference on emerging technologies and factory automation (ETFA). IEEE, 2016, pp. 1–7.
16.
MüllerTVögeleUEndischC. Disturbance compensation for iterative control of suspension durability test rigs. In: 2016 IEEE international conference on advanced intelligent mechatronics (AIM). IEEE, 2016, pp. 1675–1681.
17.
MüllerTEndischC. An estimation based iterative learning control approach for cross-coupled vehicle test systems. In: 2017 IEEE international conference on advanced intelligent mechatronics (AIM). IEEE, 2017, pp. 1375–1381.
18.
BrudnakMJ.A Composite linear and nonlinear approach to full-vehicle simulator control. army tank-automotive command warren MI, SAE Technical Paper 2005-01-0937, 2005, DOI: 10.4271/2005-01-0937.
19.
EksteenJJAHeynsPS. An alternative update formula for non-linear model-based iterative learning control. Inverse Prob Sci Eng2016; 24: 860–888.
20.
DursunUCanseverGÜstoğluİ.Neuro-fuzzy iterative learning control for 4-poster test rig. Transact Instit Meas Cont2020; 42(12):2262-2275.
21.
De CuyperJCoppensDLiefoogheC, et al. Advanced drive file development methods for improved service load simulation on multi axial durability test rigs. Proceed Acoustics Vib Asia1998; 339–354.
22.
RobertsDEHayNC.Dynamic response simulation for a nonlinear system. J Sound Vib2005; 281: 783–798.
23.
LiMZhangY.Convergence optimization and verification for single-channel remote parameter control of a nonlinear system. Appl Sci2019; 9: 549.
De CuyperJ. Linear feedback control for durability test rigs in the automotive industry. Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Department of Mechanical Engineering.
26.
VaesDEngelenKAnthonisJ, et al. Multivariable feedback design to improve tracking performance on tractor vibration test rig. Mech Sys Signal Proc2007; 21: 1051–1075.
27.
WangLHuangfuZLiR, et al. Iterative learning control with parameter estimation for non-repetitive time-varying systems. J Franklin Inst2024; 361: 1455–1466.
28.
AlamFKoHSLeeHF, et al. Deep learning approach for volume estimation in earthmoving operation. Int J Ind Eng Manag2023; 14: 41–50.
29.
QianJShenD.A novel iterative learning control scheme based on Broyden-class optimization method. Intl J Robust Nonlinear2024; 34: 321–340.
30.
WangXCongDYangZ, et al. Iterative learning control with complex conjugate gradient optimization algorithm for multiaxial road durability test rig. Proceed Instit Mech Eng Part C J Mech Eng Sci2019; 233: 2349–2360.
31.
UnderwoodMA.Adaptive control method for multiexciter sine tests. Patent 5299459, USA, 1994.
32.
WangXCongDYangZ, et al. Modified quasi-newton optimization algorithm-based iterative learning control for multi-axial road durability test rig. IEEE Access2019; 7: 31286–31296.
33.
ZhangLFengJHaoR, et al. Experiment research on complex optimization algorithm-based adaptive iterative learning control for electro-hydraulic shaking tables. Electronics2023; 12: 1797.
34.
XuGZhouJYZhouH.A new Nonlinear Iterative learning controller for road simulator. Appl Mech Mat2013; 373–375: 1546–1550.
35.
MusellaUWaimerSPeetersB, et al. Development of a steepest-descent control solution for Multi-Input Multi-Output swept sine testing in a virtual shaker environment. J Phys Conf Ser2019, 1264(1):012002.
36.
MusellaUManzatoSPeetersB, et al. CR-Calculus and adaptive array theory applied to MIMO random vibration control tests. J Physics Conf Ser2016; 744: 12175.
37.
BroydenCG.A class of methods for solving nonlinear simultaneous equations. Math Comp1965; 19: 577–593.
38.
PintelonRGuillaumePRolainY, et al. Parametric identification of transfer functions in the frequency domain-a survey. IEEE Transact Autom Cont1994; 39: 2245–2260.
