Model Predictive Control (MPC) is increasingly gaining popularity in a wide range of autonomous vehicle and driving assistant applications owing to its style of optimality and convenience in handling multiple constraints. However, a primary drawback in online applications lies in the high computational burden caused by the complex non-linearity in the vehicle system and driving stability constraints. The differential flatness property of the vehicle motion system offers a solution by treating the error signals as flat outputs for endogenous feedback linearization. Nevertheless, this approach introduces a new challenge of dealing with time-varying implicit constraints. To address this issue, our work combines flatness-based MPC design with real-time iterative handling of lateral stability constraints, leading to a pure linear Quadratic Programming (QP) problem that can be efficiently solved online. Through numerical simulations conducted under two challenging scenarios, we demonstrate that our proposed method outperforms conventional linear-time-varying MPC in terms of linearization error and dynamic performance. Finally, field tests conducted with a four-wheel independent driving and four-wheel independent steering chassis platform validate the feasibility and substantial potential of our presented method in autonomous driving applications.
JiJKhajepourAMelekWW, et al. Path planning and tracking for vehicle collision avoidance based on model predictive control with multiconstraints. IEEE Trans Vehicular Technol2016; 66(2): 952–964.
2.
BealCEGerdesJC.Model predictive control for vehicle stabilization at the limits of handling. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol2012; 21(4): 1258–1269.
3.
YanYPengLWangJ, et al. A hierarchical motion planning system for driving in changing environments: Framework, algorithms, and verifications. IEEE/ASME Trans Mechatron2022; 28(3): 1303–1314.
4.
CagienardRGriederPKerriganEC, et al. Move blocking strategies in receding horizon control. J Process Control2007; 17(6): 563–570.
5.
LiSEJiaZLiK, et al. Fast online computation of a model predictive controller and its application to fuel economy–oriented adaptive cruise control. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst2014; 16(3): 1199–1209.
6.
WangYBoydS.Fast model predictive control using online optimization. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol2009; 18(2): 267–278.
7.
KögelMFindeisenR.A fast gradient method for embedded linear predictive control. IFAC Proc Volumes2011; 44(1): 1362–1367.
8.
KögelMFindeisenR. Fast predictive control of linear systems combining Nesterov’s gradient method and the method of multipliers. In: 2011 50th IEEE conference on decision and control and European control conference, 2011, pp.501–506. New York: IEEE.
9.
BemporadAMorariMDuaV, et al. The explicit linear quadratic regulator for constrained systems. Automatica2002; 38(1): 3–20.
10.
OhtsukaT.A continuation/GMRES method for fast computation of nonlinear receding horizon control. Automatica2004; 40(4): 563–574.
11.
EnglertTVölzAMesmerF, et al. A software framework for embedded nonlinear model predictive control using a gradient-based augmented Lagrangian approach (GRAMPC). Optim Eng2019; 20(3): 769–809.
12.
FalconePBorrelliFTsengHE, et al. Linear time-varying model predictive control and its application to active steering systems: stability analysis and experimental validation. Int J Robust Nonlinear Control2008; 18(8): 862–875.
13.
GaoHKanZLiK.Robust lateral trajectory following control of unmanned vehicle based on model predictive control. IEEE/ASME Trans Mechatron2021; 27(3): 1278–1287.
14.
GrosSZanonMQuirynenR, et al. From linear to nonlinear MPC: bridging the gap via the real-time iteration. Int J Control2020; 93(1): 62–80.
15.
FliessMLévineJMartinP, et al. Flatness and defect of non-linear systems: introductory theory and examples. Int J Control1995; 61(6): 1327–1361.
16.
FuchshumerSSchlacherKRittenschoberT. Nonlinear vehicle dynamics control-a flatness based approach. In: Proceedings of the 44th IEEE conference on decision and control, 2005, pp.6492–6497. New York: IEEE.
17.
SetlurPWagnerJRDawsonDM, et al. A trajectory tracking steer-by-wire control system for ground vehicles. IEEE Trans Vehicular Technol2006; 55(1): 76–85.
18.
ZengJKotaruPMuellerMW, et al. Differential flatness based path planning with direct collocation on hybrid modes for a quadrotor with a cable-suspended payload. IEEE Robot Autom Lett2020; 5(2): 3074–3081.
19.
GreeffMSchoelligAP.Exploiting differential flatness for robust learning-based tracking control using gaussian processes. IEEE Control Systems Letters2020; 5(4): 1121–1126.
20.
Ramírez-NeriaMMadonskiRShaoS, et al. Robust tracking in underactuated systems using flatness-based ADRC with cascade observers. J Dyn Syst Meas Control2020; 142(9): 091002.
21.
WangXSunW.Trajectory tracking of autonomous vehicle: a differential flatness approach with disturbance-observer-based control. IEEE Trans Intell Vehicles2022; 8(2): 1368–1379.
22.
LiZWeiYZhouX, et al. Differential flatness-based ADRC scheme for underactuated fractional-order systems. Int J Robust Nonlinear Control2020; 30(7): 2832–2849.
23.
HuangCLuoCLiY, et al. Differential flatness active disturbance rejection control approach for a class of nonlinear uncertain systems. Int J Robot Autom2019; 34(2): 146–154.
24.
KongXXiaYHuR, et al. Trajectory tracking control for under-actuated hovercraft using differential flatness and reinforcement learning-based active disturbance rejection control. J Syst Sci Complex2022; 35(2): 502–521.
25.
RanMLiJXieL.Reinforcement-learning-based disturbance rejection control for uncertain nonlinear systems. IEEE Trans Cybern2021; 52(9): 9621–9633.
26.
SaiedMMahairyTFrancisC, et al. Differential flatness-based approach for sensors and actuators fault diagnosis of a multirotor UAV. IFAC-PapersOnLine2019; 52(16): 831–836.
27.
FischerFDeutscherJ.Flatness-based algebraic fault diagnosis for distributed-parameter systems. Automatica2020; 117: 108987.
28.
SreenathKLeeTKumarV. Geometric control and differential flatness of a quadrotor UAV with a cable-suspended load. In: 52nd IEEE conference on decision and control, 2013, pp.2269–2274. New York: IEEE.
29.
TalEKaramanS.Accurate tracking of aggressive quadrotor trajectories using incremental nonlinear dynamic inversion and differential flatness. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol2020; 29(3): 1203–1218.
30.
YuXZhouXGuoK, et al. Safety flight control for a quadrotor UAV using differential flatness and dual-loop observers. IRE Trans Ind Electron2021; 69(12): 13326–13336.
31.
ThounthongPMungpornPGuilbertD, et al. Design and control of multiphase interleaved boost converters-based on differential flatness theory for PEM fuel cell multi-stack applications. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst2021; 124: 106346.
32.
Garcia-SanchezJRHernandez-MarquezERamirez-MoralesJ, et al. A robust differential flatness-based tracking control for the “mimo DC/DC boost converter–inverter–DC motor” system: Experimental results. IEEE Access2019; 7: 84497–84505.
33.
DjeriouiAHouariASaimA, et al. Flatness-based grey wolf control for load voltage unbalance mitigation in three-phase four-leg voltage source inverters. IEEE Trans Ind Appl2019; 56(2): 1869–1881.
34.
XiaYLinMZhangJ, et al. Trajectory planning and tracking for four-wheel steering vehicle based on differential flatness and active disturbance rejection controller. Int J Adapt Control Signal Process2021; 35(11): 2214–2244.
35.
GöltzSOssigDLFuW, et al. Nonlinear flatness-based observer for vehicle dynamics control. In: IECON 2021–47th annual conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society, 2021, pp.1–6. New York: IEEE.
36.
BascettaLIncremonaGPDella RossaF, et al. Sliding mode control of an autonomous ground vehicle via flatness based feedback linearization. In: 2022 IEEE 18th international conference on automation science and engineering (CASE), 2022, pp.557–562. New York: IEEE.
37.
WangZZhaJWangJ.Autonomous vehicle trajectory following: a flatness model predictive control approach with hardware-in-the-loop verification. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst2020; 22(9): 5613–5623.
38.
LévineJ.On the equivalence between differential flatness and dynamic feedback linearizability. IFAC Proc Volumes2007; 40(20): 338–343.
39.
WangJLongoriaRG.Coordinated and reconfigurable vehicle dynamics control. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol2009; 17(3): 723–732.
40.
WangRHuCWangZ, et al. Integrated optimal dynamics control of 4wd4ws electric ground vehicle with tire-road frictional coefficient estimation. Mech Syst Signal Process2015; 60: 727–741.
41.
WangWChenXWangJ. Unsprung mass effects on electric vehicle dynamics based on coordinated control scheme. In: 2019 American control conference (ACC), 2019, pp.971–976. New York: IEEE.
42.
DaiCZongCChenG.Path tracking control based on model predictive control with adaptive preview characteristics and speed-assisted constraint. IEEE Access2020; 8: 184697–184709.
43.
ChenBCTsaiCTLeeK. Path-following steering controller of automated lane change system with adaptive preview time. In: 2015 IEEE international conference on systems, man, and cybernetics, 2015, pp.2522–2526. New York: IEEE.
44.
WangMChenXJinB, et al. A novel V2V cooperative collision warning system using UWB/DR for intelligent vehicles. Sensors2021; 21(10): 3485.
