Latest advances in road profile sensors make the implementation of pre-emptive suspension control a viable option for production vehicles. From the control side, model predictive control (MPC) in combination with preview is a powerful solution for this application. However, the significant computational load associated with conventional implicit model predictive controllers (i-MPCs) is one of the limiting factors to the widespread industrial adoption of MPC. As an alternative, this paper proposes an explicit model predictive controller (e-MPC) for an active suspension system with preview. The MPC optimization is run offline, and the online controller is reduced to a function evaluation. To overcome the increased memory requirements, the controller uses the recently developed regionless e-MPC approach. The controller was assessed through simulations and experiments on a sport utility vehicle demonstrator with controllable hydraulic suspension actuators. For frequencies
In vehicle dynamics, yaw rate control is used to improve the cornering response in steady-state and transient conditions. This can be achieved through an appropriate anti-roll moment distribution between the front and rear axles of a vehicle with controllable suspension actuators. Such control action alters the load transfer distribution, which in turn provokes a lateral tire force variation. With respect to the extensive set of papers from the literature discussing yaw rate tracking through active suspension control, this study presents: i) A detailed analysis of the effect of the load transfer on the lateral axle force and cornering stiffness; ii) A novel linearized single-track vehicle model formulation for control system design, based on the results in i); and iii) An optimization-based routine for the design of the non-linear feedforward contribution of the control action. The resulting feedforward-feedback controller is assessed through: a) Simulations with an experimentally validated model of a vehicle with active anti-roll bars (case study 1); and b) Experimental tests on a vehicle prototype with an active suspension system (case study 2).