This study investigates the effectiveness of Advanced Emergency Braking (AEB) in coordination with Active Suspension Control (ASC) to enhance vehicle stability on negatively inclined roads. AEB systems are designed to apply autonomous braking in emergency situations, significantly reducing rear-end collisions. However, during cornering, hard braking can lead to a loss of lateral stability. In this study, an ASC system is integrated with AEB to maintain lateral stability, especially in conditions where understeering, oversteering, or rollover risks increase due to road inclination. The novelty of the study lies in the adaptation of ASC to work cooperatively with AEB, using a Fuzzy Logic Controller (FLC) framework. The controller was developed in MATLAB/Simulink and implemented in a realistic vehicle model within the IPG/CarMaker simulation environment. Simulation results demonstrate the effectiveness of the integrated AEB–ASC system in mitigating stability issues under challenging road conditions.
Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. They’re working: insurance claims data show which new technologies are preventing crashes. Status Rep2012; 47(5): 1–7.
2.
ÖrtlundR.Evaluation of AEBS real life performance. Dissertation, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, 2017.
3.
Isaksson-HellmanILindmanM.Evaluation of the crash mitigation effect of low-speed automated emergency braking systems based on insurance claims data. Traffic Inj Prev2016; 17(suppl 1): 42–47.
4.
TrigellASRothhämelMPauwelussenJ, et al. Advanced vehicle dynamics of heavy trucks with the perspective of road safety. Veh Syst Dyn2017; 55(10): 1572–1617.
5.
KoglbauerIHolzingerJEichbergerA, et al. Autonomous emergency braking systems adapted to snowy road conditions improve drivers’ perceived safety and trust. Traffic Inj Prev2018; 19(3): 332–337.
6.
TagessonKColeD.Advanced emergency braking under split friction conditions and the influence of a destabilizing steering wheel torque. Veh Syst Dyn2017; 55(7): 970–994.
JiXHeXLvC, et al. A vehicle stability control strategy with adaptive neural network sliding mode theory based on system uncertainty approximation. Veh Syst Dyn2018; 56(6): 923–946.
9.
GordonTJLidbergM. Automated driving and autonomous functions on road vehicles. Veh Syst Dyn2015; 53(7): 958–994.
10.
ZhangYLiHWangP.An integrated control strategy for active suspension and automatic emergency braking systems. Mech Syst Signal Process2022; 167: 108605.
11.
ChenMZhaoYLiuQ.Fuzzy logic based vehicle dynamics control in autonomous vehicles. IEEE Trans Intell Veh2021; 6(3): 412–421.
12.
AhmedMSKimJ.Adaptive cruise control with emergency braking: a review of techniques and systems. Sensors2020; 20(10): 2906.
13.
KumarASinghB.Road surface estimation and its application in vehicle dynamics control systems. Veh Syst Dyn2023; 61(2): 245–262.
14.
ParkSLeeJ.A comparative study of PID, LQR and fuzzy logic for vehicle suspension systems. Int J Automot Technol2021; 22(4): 785–792.
15.
GirbésVArmestoLDolsJ, et al. An active safety system for low speed bus braking assistance. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst2017; 18(2): 377–387.
16.
WangDHuangJ.Integrated lateral and longitudinal control of autonomous vehicles on sloped roads. Control Eng Pract2020; 100: 104454.
17.
DingYChenHGongJ, et al. Model predictive enhanced adaptive cruise control for multiple driving situations. In: Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV); 2018 Jun 26-30; Changshu, Suzhou, China. Piscataway (NJ): IEEE Press; 2018.
WongJY.Theory of ground vehicles. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2001.
20.
RajamaniR.Vehicle dynamics and control. New York, NY: Springer, 2006.
21.
WangL.Model predictive control system design and implementation using MATLAB. London: Springer-Verlag London Limited, 2009, pp.22–27.
22.
SatzgerCCastroRKnoblackA, et al. Design and validation of an MPC based torque blending and wheel slip control strategy. In: Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV); 2016 Jun 19-22; Gothenburg, Sweden. Piscataway (NJ): IEEE Press; 2016.
23.
PlessenMGBernardiniDEsenH, et al. Spatial-based predictive control and geometric corridor planning for adaptive cruise control coupled with obstacle avoidance. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol2018; 26(1): 38–50.
24.
El SayedAATranDYoonJ.Evaluation of cooperative ADAS performance under dynamic scenarios. IEEE Access2022; 10: 11230–11242.
25.
QuiWTingQShuyouY, et al. Autonomous vehicle longitudinal following control based on model predictive control. In: Proceedings of the 34th Chinese Control Conference (CCC 2015); 2015 Jul 28-30; Hangzhou, China. Piscataway (NJ): IEEE; 2015.
26.
QuTWangQCongY, et al. Modeling driver’s longitudinal and lateral control behavior: a moving horizon control modeling scheme. In: Proceedings of the 30th Chinese Control and Decision Conference (CCDC 2018); 2018 Jun 9-11; Shenyang, China. Piscataway (NJ): IEEE; 2018.
27.
ShimizuTRacksincharoensakP. Motion planning via optimization of risk quantified by collision velocity accompanied with AEB activation. In: Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE International Conference on Vehicular Electronics and Safety (ICVES 2017); 2017 Jun 27-28; Vienna, Austria. Piscataway (NJ): IEEE; 2017.
28.
ZhengRNakanoKYamabeS, et al. Study on emergency avoidance braking for the automatic platooning of trucks. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst2014; 15(4): e07160.
29.
GietelinkOPloegJSchutterBD, et al. Development of advanced driver assistance systems with vehicle hardware-in-the-loop simulations. Veh Syst Dyn2006; 44(7): 569–590.
30.
MaYLiZMalekianR, et al. Hierarchical fuzzy logic-based variable structure control for vehicles platooning. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst2018; 20(4): 1329–1340.
31.
GburiFHKadhomMAKamilF, et al. Fuzzy logic based control for intelligent vehicles: a survey. AIP Conf Proc2024; 3092: 040017.
32.
ChakravertySSahooDMMahatoNR. Defuzzification. In: ChakravertySSahooDMMahatoNR (eds.). Concepts of Soft Computing: Fuzzy and ANN with Programming. Singapore: Springer Singapore; 2019. p. 117–127.
33.
ArdiYEffendiSNababanEB.Mamdani and Sugeno fuzzy performance analysis on rainfall prediction. Int Soc Sci J2021; 2(2): 161–177.
34.
PopMDPescaruDMiceaMV. Mamdani vs. Takagi–Sugeno fuzzy inference systems in the calibration of continuous-time car-following models. Sensors2023; 23(21): 8791.
35.
AlsebaiMDPedapenkiKK.Sugeno/Mamdani interval type II fuzzy logic controller based DSTATCOM with controlled load. In: Proceedings of the 2023 International Conference on Smart Systems for applications in Electrical Sciences (ICSSES 2023); 2023 Jul 7-8; Tumakuru, India. Piscataway (NJ): IEEE; 2023.
36.
AlmediaRSSilviaFVViannaSV.Combining the bow-tie method and fuzzy logic using Mamdani inference model. Process Saf Environ Prot2023; 169: 159–168.
37.
ChabaniMCBenchouiaMTGoleaA, et al. Takagi–Sugeno fuzzy logic controller for DFIG operating in the stand-alone mode: simulations and experimental investigation. Arab J Sci Eng2023; 48: 14605–14620.
38.
NguyenATDehakAGuerraTM.Convex stability analysis of Mamdani-like fuzzy systems with singleton consequents. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst2023; 31: 3787–3798.
