MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Controller Design of Quarter Car Suspension System and Stability Analysis of the Linear System

2024· article· en· W4413098687 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Piyush Nahar, Vidya S. Rao, Bipin Krishna

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Applied Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)Suspension (topology)Active suspensionController (irrigation)Control theory (sociology)Car modelComputer scienceControl engineeringEngineeringAutomotive engineeringMathematicsControl (management)ActuatorArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The suspension system plays a pivotal role in ensuring the safety, stability, and comfort of passengers in a vehicle by absorbing shocks and vibrations caused by road irregularities. The primary purpose of the suspension system is to improve passenger comfort and facilitate safe handling by maintaining tire contact with the road surface. This paper proposes a linear model of a quarter-car suspension system, focusing on its dynamic behavior under typical driving conditions. The suspension system operates to counteract disturbances from road irregularities, such as bumps, potholes, and uneven surfaces, which can impact vehicle stability. Though the system’s dynamics are generally nonlinear due to the complexity of real-world road conditions and mechanical components, this study simplifies the model to a linear approximation. Controller design comparison using a traditional PID controller and a State Feedback Controller is done for the system, and the result from MATLAB can be used for further analysis. Lyapunov stability analysis is employed in this paper to evaluate the system’s stability, ensuring that the suspension system remains within a stable operating range and does not lead to uncontrolled oscillations or instability. The linear model, though an approximation, allows for identifying critical parameters that affect system performance and the development of design strategies that enhance vehicle safety and ride quality.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEngineering Applied ResearchFrench-language works237,207