Crone Ground Hook Suspension

Abstract

The work presented in this paper is to be read within the context of a connected autonomous vehicle (CAV). This context makes it possible to consider dividing the overall operational domain (operational design domain: ODD) of the vehicle into three sub-domains, relating to the areas of comfort (ODD1), road-holding (ODD2), and emergency situations (ODD3). Thus, based on information from the CAV’s proprioceptive and exteroceptive sensors, in addition to information from the infrastructure and other vehicles, supervision makes it possible, at any time, to identify the ODD in which the vehicle is located and to propose the most appropriate strategy, particularly for suspension control. Work already carried out by the authors made it possible to determine a crone sky hook (CSH) strategy for suspension control, 100% comfort-oriented for ODD1, a mixed crone sky hook—crone ground hook (CSH-CGH) strategy, oriented towards road-holding for ODD2, and a CGH strategy oriented towards safety for ODD3. In this paper, a comparative study focusing on security (ODD3) is presented. It concerns two versions of the CGH strategy (nominal CGHN and generalized CGHG). More precisely, for the comparative study to be meaningful, the control loops of the two versions have the same speed (iso-speed constraint), and the performance indices are normalized with respect to the values obtained in fault mode when the actuator is faulty. Notably, the CGHG version is part of the dynamics of fractional systems.