Performance Investigation of Active, Semi-Active and Passive Suspension Using Quarter Car Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, a semi-active and fully active suspension system using a PID controller were designed and tuned in MATLAB/Simulink to achieve simultaneous optimisation of comfort and road holding ability. This was performed in order to quantify and observe the trends of both the semi-active and active suspension, which can then influence the choice of controlled suspension systems used for different applications. The response of the controlled suspensions was compared to a traditional passive setup in terms of the sprung mass displacement and acceleration, tyre deflection, and suspension working space for three different road profile inputs. It was found that across all road profiles, the usage of a semi-active or fully active suspension system offered notable improvements over a passive suspension in terms of comfort and road-holding ability. Specifically, the rms sprung mass displacement was reduced by a maximum of 44% and 56% over the passive suspension when using the semi-active and fully active suspension, respectively. Notably, in terms of sprung mass acceleration, the semi-active suspension offered better performance with a 65% reduction in the passive rms sprung mass acceleration compared to a 40% reduction for the fully active suspension. The tyre deflection of the passive suspension was also reduced by a maximum of 6% when using either the semi-active or fully active suspension. Furthermore, both the semi-active and fully active suspensions increased the suspension working space by 17% and 9%, respectively, over the passive suspension system, which represents a decreased level of performance. In summary, the choice between a semi-active or fully active suspension should be carefully considered based on the level of ride comfort and handling performance that is needed and the suspension working space that is available in the particular application. However, the results of this paper show that the performance gap between the semi-active and fully active suspension is quite small, and the semi-active suspension is mostly able to match and sometimes outperform the fully active suspension n in certain metrics. When considering other factors, such as weight, power requirements, and complexity, the semi-active suspension represents a better choice over the fully active suspension, in the author’s opinion. As such, future work will look at utilising more robust control methods and tuning procedures that may further improve the performance of the semi-active suspension.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".