American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER) 2017

American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER)

e-ISSN: 2320-0847 p-ISSN : 2320-0936
Volume-6, Issue-7, pp-304-309
www.ajer.org
Research Paper Open Access

Optimal Design of Pid-Controller For Adaptive Cruise Control

Using Differencial Evolution
*
I. A. Dalyop and J. D. Jiya
(Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, A. T. B. University, Bauchi, Nigeria)
Corresponding Author: **I. A. Dalyop

ABSTRACT: This thesis presents an Adaptive Cruise Control (ACC) system which is an automotive feature
that allows drivers to maintain preset speed while the system automatically monitors the traffic patterns and
adjust the closing distance by acting on the throttle and the brakes to maintain a safe distance behind the
vehicle ahead. It employs radar to measure the distance from the ACC vehicle to the vehicle in front and its
speed relative to the ACC vehicle. The controller used is Proportional, Integral and Differential (PID) and
tuned using Differential Evolution (DE) scheme which is used to choose the correct actuator for the current
driving situation. The structure combines the speed control model and an additional control loop that is charged
of verifying some safety and comfort constraints while the latter is charged with assuring a good tracking of the
desired reference inter-vehicle distance. The system performance during Speed Control (Cruise Control),
Following Distance Control (Headway Control) and Stop-and-Go situation on all road grades and for all speed
ranges has been satisfactory and the proposed controller yields favourable overshoot, rise time and settling time
as compared to similar works. The average safe stoppage distance behind a stationary object is 2 m.
Keywords: Adaptive Cruise Control, Differential Evolution, PID Controller, Optimal control.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------
Date of Submission: 20 -07 - 2017 Date of acceptance: 31-07-2017
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------

I. INTRODUCTION
The rate of road accidents today, the world over is quite alarming that in every minute on the average at least
one person dies in a crash; [1]. The Postnote [2] also, reported that in UK alone, 2,946 people were killed and
245,000 injured in road accidents in 2007. The scenario is not quite different in Nigeria as reported by [3] in
which the World Health Organisation (WHO) reported in 2008 that Nigeria recorded the highest number of
deaths through auto crash in the world. With this statistics, colossal amount of money is lost globally in terms of
hospital bills, damaged property, and other costs; not to talk of the losses that matter most which we cannot put
monetary value on; lives.
In an effort to reduce loss of lives by auto crash, automakers introduced air bags, seat belts and with the use of
supercomputers they created car frames and bodies that protect the people inside by absorbing as much of the
energy of a crash as possible. But, the ultimate, solution and the only one that will save far more lives, limbs and
money is to keep cars from smashing into each other in the first place and this is exactly what this paper is
proposing; an extension of the conventional cruise control that allows drivers to maintain a preset speed while
the system automatically monitors the traffic patterns and adjusts the closing distance by acting on the throttle
and the brakes to maintain a safe distance behind the vehicle ahead. The Adaptive Cruise Control (ACC) system
in this case shall work on all speeds and even in stop-and-go situation.
PID (Proportional, Integral and Derivative) control is one of the earlier control strategies. Its early
implementation was in pneumatic devices, followed by vacuum and solid-state analogue electronics, before
arriving at today‟s digital implementation of microprocessors [4 ]. It has a simple control structure which was
understood by plant operators and which they found relatively easy to tune. Since many control systems using
PID controllers have proved satisfactory, it still has a wide range of applications in industrial control [5].
This paper focuses mainly on the optimal design of a Differential Evolution (DE) based PID Controller for
longitudinal Adaptive Cruise Control system that senses any object along its longitudinal path and cause it to
automatically adapt to the traffic environment thereby adjusting its speed to a safe followed distance or
decelerate to a standstill, 1.0 m to 2.0 m away from the object if it is stationary. The paper is organized as
follows: In section two the adaptive cruise control system is described and the speed control model is shown,

www.ajer.org Page 304

American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER) 2017
section three is the overview of the differential evolution scheme, section four is the Implementation of the DE-
PID controller and section five is conclusion.
II. ADAPTIVE CRUISE CONTROL (ACC) SYSTEM
Adaptive cruise control (ACC) is also known as “active cruise control” or “intelligent cruise control”[6]. ACC
uses a forward-looking sensor, usually radar or laser, to monitor the distance to leading vehicles [1],[7]. If the
system is active and the time gap to the leading vehicle falls below a certain threshold, the vehicle will
automatically brake in order to maintain safe distance between it and the lead vehicle [8]. In cases where there
are government restrictions, which limit the permitted braking rate as such audible warning devices are included
to alert the driver if a higher deceleration is required to avoid colliding with the leading vehicle otherwise, if
there is no vehicle in front, ACC operates in the same way as cruise control [9].
3. Model of the ACC Control System
The dynamics of an automobile are given by equations (1) and (2); [10].


V t    ArV 2 t   d  mg sin   Ft 
1
m

...(1)

F t    Ft   ut 
1

...(2)
Where u = the control input (if u > 0, it represents a throttle input but if u < 0, it represents a brake input)
V = Vehicle speed
F(t) = Instantaneous value of the driving/braking force
mc  Mass of the vehicle
Ar  Aerodynamic drag constant
d  Constant frictional force
 = Engine/Brake Time Constant.
mgsinθ = Weight of the automobile
From equations (1) and (2) the automobile transfer function is given by equation (3)
1
V s  m

U s  1 2  2
s 2  s  Ar  y0  d  mg sin     Ar  y0  d  mg sin  
 m  m
... (3)
Equation (3) conforms to the standard second order dynamics given by equation (4).
n2
Gs  
s 2  2n s  n2
... (4)
Where:  is the damping factor, n is the natural frequency
So, comparing equations (3) and (4) gives:
 m

2 m
... (5)
1
n 
m
... (6)
3.1 The DE-PID Controller
Differential Evolution (DE) is an optimization algorithm that in this case is employ to optimally tune
the PID Controller. Turning a PID Controller means setting the Proportional, Integral and Derivative values to
get the best possible control for a particular process which means adjusting the controller gains to satisfy the
performance specification like margins of stability, transient response and bandwidth; [11]. The DE is used to
compute the gain that can minimize the performance index which is a function of the system error, e(t) [12]. The
commonly employed performance indices are the IAE, ISE, and ITSE performance criterion which formulas are
as follows; [13]:

www.ajer.org Page 305

American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER) 2017
∞

𝐼𝐴𝐸 = 𝑟 𝑡 − 𝑦 𝑡
0
∞

= 𝑒 𝑡 𝑑𝑡 … 7
0
𝐼𝑆𝐸
∞

= 𝑒 2 𝑡 𝑑𝑡 … 8
0
𝐼𝑇𝑆𝐸
∞

= 𝑡. 𝑒 2 𝑡 𝑑𝑡 … (9)
0

3.2 The Differencial Evolution (DE) Scheme

Differential Evolution (DE) is a novel parallel direct search method which utilizes NP parameter
vectors, Xi, G, i = 0, 1, 2, ..., NP-1 as a population for each generation G. NP doesn't change during the
minimization process. The initial population is chosen randomly if nothing is known about the system [5]. A
uniform probability distribution was assumed for all random decisions unless otherwise stated. In case, a
preliminary solution is available, adding normally distributed random deviations to the nominal solution X nom, 0,
often generates the initial population. The crucial idea behind DE is a new scheme for generating trial parameter
vectors. DE generates new parameter vectors by adding the weighted difference vector between two population
members to a third member. If the resulting vector yields a lower objective function value than a predetermined
population member, the newly generated vector replaces the vector with which it was compared. The
comparison vector can, but need not be part of the generation process mentioned above. In addition, the best
parameter vector Xbest, G is evaluated for every generation G in order to keep track of the progress that is made
during the minimization process [5]. The flowchart of the DE-PID control system is shown in Fig. 1.

www.ajer.org Page 306

American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER) 2017
3.3 Control Objectives
 To minimize the error.
 To calculate the step response of the system and out of which the error is estimated.
 The iterations are run till the error minimizes.

III. SIMULATION RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Table 1: Definition of Simulation Parameters
Parameter Description
+
Mc Mass of Vehicle
θ Road Slope Angle
d Road Frictional Force
Ar Aerodynamic Drag of Surrounding Air

Table 2: Road Grade and Simulation Conditions Settings

Condition Mc (Kg) θ (o) d (N) Ar
Flat Road - 0 =- -
Normal Road - - ≤ 100 -
Hilly Road - 30 - -
Sloppy Road - -30 - -
Rough Road - - > 100 -
Loaded Vehicle > 1000 - - -
Windy Environment - - - > 10
Worst Scenario > 1000 30 > 100 > 10
Smooth Road - - < 50 -

Table 3: Research Constraints

Overshoot (%) Rise Time (Tr) (s) Settling Time (Ts) (s)
0.1 – 4.0 ≤ 1.5 ≤ 5.0

Figure11. relative velocity

www.ajer.org Page 307

American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER) 2017
The generalized control structure for ACC is as shown in Fig. 12

TABLES 1, 2 and 3 provides definition of Simulation Parameters, Road Grade and Simulation Conditions
Settings and Research Constraints respectively.
The system performance for all road grade, vehicle condition and environmental conditions settings as shown in
TABLE 2 is very good with a rise time (tr) of 0.5s, maximum overshoot of 1.46% and a settling time of 0.94s
which are within the research constraints as shown in TABLE 3. The PID-Controller effective performance is
demonstrated by the almost zero response to command input as depicted by Fig. 2. Figs. 3 and 5 are the PID
control signal plot that modulates the vehicle throttle and braking system under Cruise Control (CC) and
Adaptive Cruise Control (ACC) scenarios respectively while Fig. 4 reveals the speed control (Cruise Control)
ability of this research work and the system performance (Speed Control) over different speed ranges.
Fig. 6 depicts the system under Followed Distance Control i.e. ACC as the speed response of the system no
longer follows the command signal due to the presence of a lead vehicle, but adjust itself in such a way as to
attend a speed that will allow a safe distance between them, while Fig 7 shows the distance covered by both the
automated and the lead vehicle with a varying constant time gap between them depending on the speed. The
appearance of the lead vehicle curve on top of the automated car curve throughout the simulation period
indicates that it is a “Followed Distance control scenario” and the apparent parallel nature of the curves further
demonstrates a strict „Headway Control‟. The inter-vehicle space plot of Fig. 8 gives the safe distance between
the vehicles at any point in time therefore, ACC is a welcome additional vehicle system that will add comfort
and convenience to the driver in addition to its safety tendencies [8],[14].
The velocity plot of Fig 9 depicts the capability of this system to work in a stop-and-go situation as at t=0 to
t=5s the automated car was pursuing the lead car and after this time the lead car came to a standstill (v p=0)
therefore, the automated car decelerated to a standstill (v(t)=0) about 2m away from the stationary lead car they
remain like that for about 8s when the lead car started moving, the automated car followed and as well as
tracking it for headway control. Figs. 7 and 8 further supported the capability of the system to work in stop-and-
go situation. [15] Demonstrates this capability but with a poor rise time. Fig. 10 illustrates the acceleration and
deceleration capabilities of the system due to the presence of a lead vehicle. At t=0 the automated vehicle
noticed a stationary vehicle ahead (Vp = 0), so it started retarding to a standstill some few metres away, but at
t=25s the lead vehicle speed jumped to some positive value, hence the automated vehicle automatically
accelerates and later decelerates so as to track the lead vehicle in order to maintain a safe distance between them.
Fig. 11 shows the relative speed of the system thereby further emphasizing the „stop-and-go‟ capability of this
research work.

www.ajer.org Page 308

American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER) 2017
IV. CONCLUSION
This research work presents a PID based control approach for automotive longitudinal adaptive control. The
structure is charged with both verifying some safety and comfort constraints and assuring a good tracking of the
desired reference inter-vehicle distance. The simulated results depicts that the system exhibits capabilities of
Cruise Control, Following Distance Control for all speed ranges and it also shows a good performance in Stop-
and-Go scenario. The results further show that the system is doing well on all road grades i.e. Rough, Smooth,
Hilly, Sloppy and Windy. A safe inter-vehicle space distance of about one car length is achieved.

REFERENCES
[1]. Willie D. J. (2001). Keeping Cars: Adaptive Cruise Control is were the first step toward systems that can help cars keep their
distance on crowded highways, IEEE Spectrum, September, pp40-45
[2]. Postnote, (2009). Intelligent Transport Systems, January, No322, pp1-4: Retrieved July 17, 2010, from:
http://www.parliament.uk/parliamentary_offices/post/pubs2009.cfm
[3]. Federal Road Safety Commision, Nigeria. Retrieved July 17, 2010 from http://www.roadsafety.award/
[4]. Boumediene A., Brahim G., & Brahim M. (2009). Seetting up PID DC Motors Speed control Alteration Parameters using Particle
Swam Optimization strategy.[Electronic version]. Leonardo Electronic Journal of Practices and Technology, 19-32
[5]. Stone R and Price K. (1997). Differential Evolution – A Simple and Efficient Heuristic for Global Optimization Over continuous
Spaces. Journal of Global Optimization, 11(4), 341-59.
[6]. Bart V. A., Cornelie J. G., Van D., & Reuben V. (2006). IEEE Transaction on Intelligent Transportation systems, Vol.7, No. 4.
[7]. Martin D. A., (2002). Co axial range Measurement-Current trends for Mobile Robotic Applications. IEEE Sensors journal, Vol.2,
no.1
[8]. Richardson M., Barber P., King, P., Hoare, E., & Cooper, D. (1997). Longitudinal Driver Support Systems. Proceedings of
Autotech, London: ImechE
[9]. Chi-Y. & Huei P. (1998). Optimal Adaptive Cruise Control with Guaranteed String Stability, Vehicle system Dynamics, 31:
313-330.
[10]. Hong S. B., Jihan R. & Gerdes J. C. (2005). Road Grade and Vehicle Parameter Estimation for Longitudinal Control using
GPS, Center for Design Research, Stanford University, 560 Panama Mall, Stanford CA.
[11]. [Naranjo, J. E., Gonzalez, C., Reviojo, J., Garcia, R. and Pedro, T. D. (2003). Adaptive Fuzzy Control for Inter-vehicle gap keeping,
IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transport System. 4 (3), 132-142
[12]. Lieslehto J. (2001). PID controller tuning using Evolutionary programming, American Control Conference, VA June 25-27.
[13]. Mitsukura Y., Yamamoto T., & Kaneda M. (1999). A design of self-tuning PID controllers using a genetic algorithm, in Proc.
Amer. Contr. Conf., San Diego, CA, p. 1361 –1365.
[14]. U.S. Software System Safety Working Group (2005). 5th Meeting of the Group, April, 12th – 14th, Anaheim, California USA.
[15]. Bleek, R.A.P.M. & Van D. (2007). Design of a Hybrid Adaptive cruise Control Stop and-Go Syste. [Electronic version]. Unplished,
master‟s Thesis, Technische Universiteit Eindhoven.

*I. A. Dalyop " Optimal Design of Pid-Controller For Adaptive Cruise Control Using
Differencial Evolution" American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER) 6.7 (2017):
304-309.

www.ajer.org Page 309