MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3041581117 · doi:10.1177/0954407020933364

Ride comfort control of in-wheel motor drive unmanned ground vehicles with energy regeneration

2020· article· en· W3041581117 on OpenAlexaff
Lipeng Zhang, Chenhui Ren, Xinmao Yuan, Wei Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part D Journal of Automobile Engineering · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVibration Control and Rheological Fluids
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsAutomotive engineeringAccelerationSuspension (topology)VibrationRide qualityRegenerative brakeEngineeringSprung massController (irrigation)Vehicle dynamicsPower (physics)Control engineeringDamperPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adopting in-wheel motor drive can improve vehicle dynamics control functions, which is the most ideal drive mode of unmanned ground vehicle. However, with the increase of the heavy unspring-mass vibration energy while the vehicle running on uneven road, the ride comfort will be seriously deteriorated. To solve the problem and save energy, the ride comfort control based on regenerative suspensions is adopted. By analyzing the vibration performance, the adverse effects of the vehicle equipped in-wheel motors with passive suspensions are revealed. Then, the dynamics model of the regenerative suspension is built. Based on the suspension power recovery, the multi-state optimal control strategy for improving the ride comfort is designed. Finally, comparing the simulation results of regenerative suspensions with the test results of passive suspensions, when the vehicle mass ratio decreases from 8:1 to 4:1, the body acceleration and the root mean square value of tire dynamic load increase by 28.1% and 31.6%, correspondingly. With the control method, the body acceleration is decreased by 23% and reaches the level of conventional vehicles. Furthermore, part of the vehicle vibration energy can be recovered and the vehicle driving range can be extended.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.333
Threshold uncertainty score0.609

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.169
Teacher spread0.163 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part D Journal of Automobile EngineeringSame topicVibration Control and Rheological FluidsFrench-language works237,207