Mechatronics design and optimisation methodology

A problem formulation focused on automotive mechatronic modules

Fredrik Roos, Jan Wikander
Department of Machine Design, Mechatronics Lab
KTH, 100 44 Stockholm
e-mail: fredrikr@md.kth.se, jan@md.kth.se

Abstract

Introduction

The role of electromechanical or mechatronic subsystems will increase dramatically in future road
vehicles. Two of the main driving forces for this
development are new/improved functionality and
modularisation, e.g. to make the auxiliary systems
driveline independent.
The foreseen very large production volumes of these
sub-systems opens up new degrees of freedom in the
design of the sub-system, i.e. integrated design and
optimisation of all constituent components are
possible.
This paper is intended to give an overview of the
complexity of the design of mechatronic modules and
also to describe the authors approach to develop
design and optimisation methods for automotive
mechatronic modules.
The idea is to develop a model based design and
optimisation methodology for self-contained and
physically integrated mechatronic modules. New
optimisation methods for multi criteria optimisation
across engineering domains are a necessity to find
the best sub-system design for a given set of
requirements.
The methodology will focus on module design, but it
will also be useful for comparing different design
concepts. Some requirements engineering also need
to be incorporated into the methodology since it is
very important that the sub-systems are specified to
such a level of detail that multi criteria optimisation
can be performed.
The problem and approach to an integrated
mechatronics design and optimisation methodology
is exemplified with a steer-by-wire system in the
second part of the paper.

The supply and demand of electric energy will

increase dramatically in future road vehicles.
Many of the in-vehicle systems that today are
mechanic, pneumatic or hydraulic will be
replaced with electromechanical systems in
many cases under closed loop computer control.
This development is primarily driven by new
and improved functionality, but it is also
necessary for the transition to electric or hybrid
electric/internal combustion drive trains.
In addition to the driving forces already
mentioned the benefits of electromechanical or
mechatronic
sub-systems
over
purely
mechanical systems are many; maybe the most
important one is the new possibilities of
modularisation. A mechatronic system can be
modularised far more than a purely mechanical
system, since the power and information flow
between the modules can be transferred on
electrical wires.
One example is the braking system in a
passenger car; a mechatronic braking system
(brake-by-wire) can be based on four
mechatronic wheel brake modules. The
information flow to the modules from the brake
pedal (or other brake command device) is
electronic and the power is transferred to the
brake modules through the vehicles electrical
system. This means that all brake functionality
as for example, ABS and traction control system
can be implemented in a more flexible way
through control algorithms implemented in
software.

in the first part of the design process. That way

it will be possible to get aspects from for
example a control or electrical point of view into
the mechanical design at an early stage of the
design process. This approach makes it possible
to find an optimum design for the entire
automotive sub-system, not only for a specific
domain within the sub-system.

An automotive mechatronic sub-system is

typically very complex to design and especially
to optimise, mainly because of the multi domain
characteristics of mechatronics, but also due to
the safety critical nature of these systems.
Further, the environmental disturbances will in
many cases be extremely harsh, consider for
example a break unit attached to an unsuspended
structure and subject to extreme temperature and
humidity variations. These characteristics and
requirements in combination with also extreme
cost requirements, call for new methods for
specification, design and optimisation of
automotive mechatronic sub-systems. Many
general mechatronic systems are designed in a
concurrent manner resulting in an hopefully
optimised integration and configuration of
standard components such as actuators, sensors,
gearings and control units. The foreseen large
production volumes of the new types of
mechatronic sub-systems targeted in this work,
opens up new degrees of freedom in the design
in the sense that integrated and concurrent
optimisation of all constituent components is
possible. This both required and resulting
freedom in design emphasises the need for new
design methods and tools.

The key to an integrated mechatronics design

methodology is modelling and simulation. Being
able to analyse and simulate the sub-system at
an early design stage is of great help to find the
optimum design solution. Hence, one of the
most important features of mechatronics design
tools will be the inter-changeability of models
between design tools from different domains.

Mechanicaldesign
design
Mechanical
Mechanical
design
views
views
views

Mechanicaldesign
design
Mechanical
Electromechanical
views
views
design
views

Mechanical
design
Controller
and
Mechanical
design
views
Software
design
views
views

Core model

Mechatronics development
methodology

Mechanical
design
Electronic
Mechanical
design
views
hardware
design
views
views

Concurrent model based engineering,

one model many views

Figure 1. Different design views in model based

mechatronics engineering

The mechatronics development process is

different from other development processes in
the sense that it spans over many closely
coupled engineering domains. In order to
optimise an automotive sub-system it is
necessary to treat the entire sub-system in an
integrative way during the design process.
Parameters like inertia and electrical capacity
depend on the sub-system geometry and can
only be optimised in common [1], [2].
Further, the extensive functionality and complex
structure of mechatronic systems means that it
generally is not enough to optimise on a single
criterion, often a multi-objective optimisation is
needed.

Tool support that for instance, easily enables

changes made from an assembly point of view
to be evaluated in control system simulations is
desirable. This demands a core model that
represents the entire design and that can be
viewed from various windows (views). It would
be a great advantage if changes made in one
view (window) were reflected immediately in
other views [3].
There are however some problems arising
just from the fact that different engineering
domains use different models and modelling
frameworks during the design work, e.g. control
engineers are used to models in the form of
transfer functions or state space descriptions.
Without special precautions, such models
generally do not have a direct relation to the
physical parameters in the mechatronic system.

Optimisation within each domain separately will

not result in the optimum system design;
therefore all the domains of the automotive subsystem have to be treated concurrently, at least

be a necessity to facilitate integrated design

across engineering domains and to facilitate
optimisation.
Further the models should support different
levels of abstraction and support the different
views typically used in the involved engineering
domains. Modelling and simulation tools is not
the focus here, but the modelling methodology
will function partly as a requirement
specification on a design tool chain.
Many of the available domain specific design
methods are based upon some optimisation
methodology, e.g. as in systems identification,
control design and fault detection. Extending the
use of optimisation across engineering domains
will involve parameterisation of an increased set
of physical characteristics, widening the
parameter space and increasing the complexity
of the optimisation problem.

Approach

As depicted in figure 2, the realisation of

advanced functionality in future vehicles entails
a complex design process. The problem that is
being approached in this research is hence
strongly delimited to a methodology for
designing optimal mechatronic modules. Such
modules will be the low level corner stones to
achieve advanced functionality such as vehicle
stability control and collision avoidance.
Given a vehicles high-level functional
requirements and architectural platform, the
design of a particular functionality, e.g. lateral
stability control, is assumed to be initiated with
a conceptual design phase evaluating different
possible concepts. A selected conceptual design
typically involves the usage of lower level
mechatronic modules such as a break module in
a break-by-wire system. From the
point of view of modularity the
hypothesis is here that the
mechatronic modules we are
aiming at are self-contained and
physically integrated units for
advanced and versatile actuation of
Functional
Requirements
motion and force.
The goal behind this problem
formulation is to develop a model
based design and optimisation
methodology for such automotive
mechatronic
modules.
The
methodology will be based on
dynamic component models and
design
by
simulation.
By
facilitating the design/selection of
all constituent components of a
module, in the same integrated and
concurrent design process, there is
a potential of optimisation that goes
across engineering domains. The
main
constituent
components
would typically be mechanical
structure, actuator, transmission,
sensor, control algorithm/software
and embedded processing hardware.
A
modelling
strategy
and
framework that allows to jointly
model the necessary characteristics
of all constituent components will

System requirements
(vehicle system)

Sub-system 1
requirements

Sub-system n
requirements

Non-Functional
Requirements
Requirements identification

Functional structure
(Functional model)

Conceptual
design 1

Conceptual
design 2

Evaluation and optimisation

of conceptual design

Conceptual
design 3

Conceptual
design n

Etc.

Optimal concept

Electric view
Geometric view
Control view

Gear box model

Motor model

Controller model

Load model

Modelling of sub-system
components

Analysis and
optimisation

Final sub-system
design
Model database

Spring
constant

EMF

Friction

Inertia

gear ratio
Models of physical properties
and phenomena

Figure 2. Model based design methodology - our focus is below the

red line, and particular the analysis and optimisation concepts

Further, considering the requirements and the

advanced functionality of the modules, the
optimisation problem will involve several
optimisation criteria.

Command from driver

or
from other system

Automatic Control

Software

Primary optimisation criteria that are targeted in

this research are:
Weight / Envelope
Energy-efficiency

Electronics
Sensors

Controller

Power electronics
Converter /Driver

Electromechanical
actuator

Transmission /
Linkage

Load

Physical mechatronic module

Other important criteria for which the evaluation

will be simplified by the developed
methodology are for instance:
Cost
Noise / Vibrations
Dependability / Safety
Environmental Impact
Modularity / Flexibility

Energy
Source / Buffer

Figure 3. Block diagram of a mechatronic actuation

module.

One of the actuation modules will be the driver

command/feedback module, attached to the
steering wheel/joy-stick. The other will be the
actual steering actuator that turns the front
wheels of the vehicle. A conceptual block
diagram of the system is shown in figure 4.

In the lower part of figure 2, the focus of the

work is indicated. The models of constituent
components and the physical phenomena that
are important for the components separate as
well as compound behaviour, will be developed
and stored for easy access and use. The
methodology will hence support both design of
components and selection from sets of already
modelled components.
Even though the research is focused on the
module design it is inevitable to include the
requirements engineering work on higher levels
to ensure that requirements are specified in such
a detail that the multi-criteria optimisation can
be performed. This will also be very important
when using the developed methodology for
rapid evaluation of different conceptual designs.

Steering wheel
/ Joy-stick
Driver

Mechatronic
feedback
module
TTP,
communication bus

Stability Control
Mechatronic
Steering rack
(wheel actuator)
LF wheel

RF wheel

Figure 4. Steer-by-wire system

This small example is limited to the mechatronic

steering rack module in figure 4. The
mechatronic steering rack is here assumed to be
a module (figure 3), with a linear electric motor
as actuator (for simplicity).

Application; steer-by-wire

This section exemplifies the approach for the

integrated mechatronic design methodology that
is described earlier in this paper. The example is
also intended to show the complexity and
difficulties with highly integrated mechatronic
design.
As an example we will use a very simple steerby-wire system that consist of two mechatronic
actuation modules interconnected with an
electronic communication link (e.g. TTP or
FlexRay).

The objective is to optimise the mechatronic

steering rack module with respect to weight
and/or energy efficiency given predefined yaw
torque and velocity requirements on the front
wheels of the vehicle. The four most important
high-level views of the sub-system within this
context are the geometrical, dynamic analysis,
electro-mechanical and control views.

The different views of the subsystem can be

classified as, for example, form or behaviour
views. Where the behaviour views capture the
mathematical description of the physical and
informational behaviour of the component or
sub-system [4], and the form views capture the
shape of the sub-system or component.
Each component in the sub-system can contain
multiple behavioural models with different
level of detail. However, in this short example
we will just show the top-level views of the subsystem.

4.1

A related view that not is shown here is the

multi body system (MBS) view of the
mechanical linkage, including the motor mover
(permanent magnet). This view is important for
simulating forces and torques on the structure.

4.2

Electromechanical view

The electromechanical view describes the

transformation from electrical to mechanical
energy in the electromechanical actuator.

Geometric view

F= Cf * I
E= Cv * v

Converter/
Driver
G

Uin
-

F, mm, v

+ Iref

Figure 7. Electromechanical view of the sub-system

Figure 7 shows a simple high level model of the

linear motor. Important variables and parameters
are, the motor force and voltage constants (Cf ,
Cv), necessary size (mass, mm) of the mover etc.
Figure 5. 3D geometric view

A geometric view (CAD view) of a system

describes all physical dimensions of all the
constituent mechanical parts.

4.3

Control view

The control view shows the sub-system from a

control
engineers
perspective,
i.e.
a
mathematical representation of the plant and the
controller.
Load

p ref

I ref

Iref

PD controller

I ref

Current

Cf

Force

Gain1

G inverter

Integrator
position

Figure 6. Geometric view of the steering rack

1
s

v elocity

1
s

acceleration

Integrator1

The geometric view of the mechatronic steering

rack can at the top level be an assembly drawing
looking something like the one shown in figure
6 with 3D visualization in figure 5.
Important parameters from the geometric view
are size and shape of moving parts (l, w, h, dm,
lm). Combined with information of the material
used, parameters like mass and inertia of the
moving parts can be calculated.

ml + mm
Gain

Figure 8. Control view

The control engineer is dependent on data

(parameters) both from the electromechanical
and geometric/MBS views.

4.4

Table 2 shows a design structure matrix (DSM)

with some selected system parameters. As seen
in the DSM and table 1, one of the most central
parameters in the design and optimisation of a
sub-system like this is the motor mover
geometry and mass (mm). The mover makes it
hard (impossible?) to isolate the mechanical
load from the electromechanical actuator design.

Parameters and optimisation

Linkage mass, m
Mover mass
Stator geometry
Number of Windings
Max current, Im
Motor Resistance
Force constant, C f
Voltage constant, C v
Controller design

X
X
X
O
O
X
O
X
O
X

ue
Tor
q

Conclusions and future work

The dependence of parameters from different

engineering domains (and views) is large in
mechatronic systems. The only possibility to
optimise a mechatronic sub-system is to treat the
system in an integrative way, across the
different domains.

effi

cen
cy
Tot
al m
ass

X
X
X
O
O
O
O
O
X
X

E ne
rg y

eer
ing
. St

Req

Linkage geometry

Req

Elektromechanics

Motor
geometry CAD

. St

eer
ing

velo
city

A selection of the most important sub-system

parameters is listed in table 1. An X marks a
direct relation between parameter and
requirement/optimisation criterion. An O
indicates an indirect relation.
As seen in the table all of the parameters listed
affect the performance (torque and velocity)
either direct or indirect. In other words there
exists a vast number of different sub system
designs that will fulfill the subsystem
requirements on torque and speed.

O
O
O
O
O
O
X

Now, when the problem has been described, we

will focus on finding design and optimisation
methods. To start with for a very reduced subsystem, maybe just for a motor and a fixed load,
then more and more parts will be added to the
problem. As an hypothesis it will be possible to
find isolated parts of a system that are not so
dependent on other parts, and in that case they
can be treated separately.

O
X
X
X
O
O
O
O
O

References

Table 1. Parameter relations to requirements and

optimisation criteria.

[1] Gausemeier J., Flath M. and Mhringer S.

(2000), Modelling of Functions of Mechatronic
Systems, exemplified by tyre pressure control in
automotive systems, Int. J. of Vehicle Design,
Vol 28, Nos. 1/2/3, 2002, pp. 5-17

If we study the parameters that affect the mass

of the sub-system directly, i.e. linkage mass,
mover mass and stator geometry; the
optimisation problem of minimising the weight
of the mechatronic steering rod, does not appear
to be very complex. But if we consider the
parameters that affect the mass indirectly the
optimisation problem grows rapidly.
L

Cf

Cv Im

X
X

X
X

X
X

Cf

O
X
X
O
X
X
O

Cv
X Im

[3] van Amerongen Job, Coelingh Erik, de Vries

Theo J.A. (2000), Computer support for
mechatronic control system design, Robotics
and autonomous systems no 30 2000 pp. 249260.

Depend

Provides
w h
l ml dm lm mm R
Linkage witdh w
X
Linkage hight
h
X
Linkage length
l
X
Linkage mass
ml
Mover diameter
dm
X X
Mover length
lm X X
Mover mass
mm
Motor Resitance
R
Motor Inductance
Motor Force Const.
Motor Voltage Const.
Rated Motor Current

[2] Rothfuss, R. et al. (2002), Systems

Engineering in the Design of Mechatronic
Systems, Int. J. of Vehicle Design, Vol 28, Nos.
1/2/3, 2002, pp. 18-36

[4] Rajarishi Sinha, Paredis Christiaan J.J.,

Khosla Pradeep K. (2002), Behavioral Model
Composition in Simulation-Based Design.
Proceedings of the 35th annual simulation
symposium IEEE 2002

X = direct relation
O = inderect relation (e.g. sets requirments on)

Table 2. Design Structure Matrix (only a few of a

vast number of parameters are shown here)