378 Electronic stability program Requirements

Electronic Stability Program (ESP)

Human error is the cause for a large portion Requirements
of road accidents. Due to external circum-
stances, such as an obstacle suddenly appear- ESP enhances driving safety by providing the
ing on the road or driving at inappropriately following assets:
high speeds, the vehicle can reach its critical 쐌 Enhanced vehicle stability; the system
limits and it becomes uncontrollable. The lat- keeps the vehicle on track and improves
eral acceleration forces acting on the vehicle directional stability under all operating
reach values that overtax the driver. Elec- conditions, including emergency stops,
tronic systems can make a major contribu- standard braking maneuvers, coasting,
tion towards increasing driving safety. acceleration, trailing throttle (overrun),
and load shift
The Electronic Stability Program (ESP) is 쐌 Increased vehicle stability at the limits
a closed-loop system designed to improve ve- of traction, such as during sharp steering
hicle handling and braking response through maneuvers (panic response), to reduce the
programmed intervention in the braking sys- danger of skidding or breakaway.
tem and/or drivetrain. The integrated func- 쐌 In a variety of different situations, further
tionality of the ABS prevents the wheels from improvements in the exploitation of trac-
locking when the brakes are applied, while tion potential when ABS and TCS come
TCS inhibits wheel spin during acceleration. into action, and when engine drag torque
In its role as an overall system, ESP applies a control is active, by automatically increas-
unified, synergistic concept to control the ve- ing engine speed to inhibit excessive engine
hicle’s tendency to “plow” instead of obeying braking. The ultimate effects are shorter
the helm during attempted steering correc- braking distances and greater traction
tions; and at the same time it maintains sta- along with enhanced stability and higher
bility to prevent the vehicle breaking away to levels of steering response.
the side, provided the vehicle remains within
its physical limits.

1 Lateral dynamic response on passenger car without ESP

β
Fig. 1
1 Driver steers, lateral-
force buildup.
2 Incipient instability
because side-slip 4
angle is too large.
3 Countersteer,
driver loses control
of vehicle.
4 Vehicle becomes
uncontrollable. 3
β
MG Yaw moment
1 2
FR Wheel forces MG
æ UAF0085Y

β Directional deviation β
β
from vehicle’s FR
longitudinal axis
(side-slip angle)

K. Reif (Ed.), Automotive Mechatronics, Bosch Professional Automotive Information,

DOI 10.1007/978-3-658-03975-2_16, © Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden 2015
 Electronic stability program Tasks and method of operation 379

Tasks and method Because this “discriminatory” control concept

relies on two individual intervention strate-
of operation gies, the system has two options for steering
The electronic stability program is a system the vehicle: it can brake selected wheels
that relies on the vehicle’s braking system as a (selective braking) or accelerate the driven
tool for “steering” the vehicle. When the sta- wheels. Within the invariable limits imposed
bility-control function assumes operation it by the laws of physics, ESP keeps the vehicle
shifts the priorities that govern the brake sys- on the road and reduces the risk of accident
tem. The basic function of the wheel brakes – and overturning. The system enhances road
to decelerate and/or stop the vehicle – as- safety by furnishing the driver with effective
sumes secondary importance as ESP inter- support.
venes to keep the vehicle stable and on
course, regardless of the conditions. Below are four examples comparing vehicles
Specific braking intervention is directed with and without ESP during operation “on
at individual wheels, such as the inner rear the limit”. Each of the portrayed driving ma-
wheel to counter understeer, or the outer neuvers reflects actual operating conditions,
front wheel during oversteer, as shown in and is based on simulation programs de-
Fig. 2. For optimal implementation of stabil- signed using data from vehicle testing. The
ity objectives, ESP not only initiates braking results have been confirmed in subsequent
intervention, but it can also intervene on the road tests.
engine side to accelerate the driven wheels.

2 Lateral dynamic response on passenger car with ESP

Fig. 2
1 Driver steers, lateral-
force buildup.
β 2 Incipient instability,
ESP intervention at
4
right front.
3 Vehicle remains
under control.
4 Incipient instability,
ESP intervention at
left front, complete
stabilization.
3
β
MG Yaw moment
FR Wheel forces
1 2 β Directional deviation
MG
β
æ UAF0021-1Y

from vehicle’s
FR β longitudinal axis
(side-slip angle)
Increased braking
force
380 Electronic stability program Maneuvers

Maneuvers 쐌 on a high-traction road-surface

(coefficient of friction μHF = 1),
Rapid steering and countersteering 쐌 without the driver braking,
This maneuver is similar to lane changes 쐌 with an initial speed of 144 km/h.
or abrupt steering inputs such as might be
expected for instance Initially, as they approach the S-bend, the
쐌 when a vehicle is moving too fast when conditions for both vehicles, and their reac-
it enters a series of consecutive S-bends, tions, are identical. Then come the first
쐌 or which have to be initiated when, with steering inputs from the drivers (phase 1).
oncoming traffic, an obstacle suddenly
appears on a country road, or Vehicle without ESP
쐌 which are necessary when an overtaking As can be seen, in the period following the
maneuver on the highway or freeway initial, abrupt steering input the vehicle
suddenly has to be aborted. without ESP is already threatening to be-
come unstable (Fig. 4 on left, phase 2).
Figs. 3 and 4 demonstrate the handling re- Whereas the steering input has quickly gen-
sponse of two vehicles (with and without erated substantial lateral forces at the front
ESP) negotiating a series of S-bends with wheels, there is a delay before the rear
rapid steering and countersteering inputs wheels start to generate similar forces. The
vehicle reacts with a clockwise movement
3 Curves for dynamic response parameters during around its vertical axis (inward yaw). The
a right-left cornering sequence
next stage is phase 3 with the second steer-
ing input. The vehicle without ESP fails to
+180° respond to the driver’s attempt to counter-
1+2
Steering-wheel

steer and goes out of control. The yaw veloc-

0 ity and the side-slip angle rise radically, and
the vehicle breaks into a skid (phase 4).
angle

-180° Vehicle with ESP

+10 On this vehicle ESP brakes the left front
m/s2
1 wheel to counter the threat of instability
acceleration

0
(Fig. 4 on right, phase 2) that follows the ini-
Lateral

tial steering input. Within the ESP context

this is referred to as active braking, and it
2
-10 proceeds without any intervention on the
+ 45 driver’s part. This action reduces the ten-
°/s
1
dency to yaw toward the inside of the corner
(inward yaw). The yaw velocity is reduced
0
velocity

and the side-slip angle is limited. Following

Yaw

2 the countersteer input, first the yaw moment

-45 and then the yaw velocity reverse their direc-
+22° tions (phase 3). In phase 4 a second brief
1 brake application – this time at the right
front wheel – restores complete stability.
Side-slip

0 The vehicle remains on the course defined

æ UAF0061-1E
angle

Phase 1 2 3 4 2 by the steering-wheel angle.

Fig. 3 -22°
1 Vehicle without ESP 0 Time s 11
2 Vehicle with ESP
 Electronic stability program Maneuvers 381

4 Vehicle tracking during right-left cornering sequence

Vehicle without ESP Vehicle with ESP

Fig. 4
Increased braking
force
1 Driver steers, lateral-
force buildup.
2 Incipient instability
Right: ESP interven-
tion at left front.
3 Countersteer
Phase 4 Left: Driver loses
control of vehicle;
Phase 4
Right: Vehicle remains
Phase 3
under control.
4 Left: Vehicle becomes
Phase 3
uncontrollable,
Right: ESP interven-
tion at right front,
Phase 2 Phase 2
complete stabilization.

Fig. 5
æ UAF0060-1E

a Oversteering
Phase 1 behavior.
Phase 1
1 The rear end of the
vehicle breaks away.
2 ESP applies the
brake at the outer
5 Over and understeering behavior when cornering
front wheel and this
a b reduces the risk of
skidding.
3 The vehicle without
3 ESP breaks into
3 a slide.

b Understeering
2 behavior
2
1 The front of the
1 vehicle breaks away.
1 2 ESP applies the
brake at the inner
rear wheel and this
with ESP with ESP reduces the risk of
understeering.
without ESP without ESP 3 The vehicle without

æ UAF0086E ESP is understeered

and leaves the road.
382 Electronic stability program Maneuvers

Lane change with emergency braking 쐌 one equipped solely with the Antilock
When the last vehicle in a line of stopped Braking System (ABS) and
traffic is hidden by a rise in the road, and thus 쐌 one that is also fitted with ESP.
invisible to traffic approaching from behind, Both vehicles
drivers closing on the traffic jam cannot reg- 쐌 are traveling at 50 km/h and
ister the dangerous situation until the very 쐌 on a slippery road surface (μHF = 0.15)
last second. Stopping the vehicle without col- at the moment when the driver registers
liding with the stationary traffic will entail a the dangerous situation.
lane change as well as braking.
7 Curves for dynamic response parameters for lane
change during an emergency stop at υ0 = 50 km/h
Figs. 6 and 7 show the results of this evasive and μHF = 0.15
action as taken by two different vehicles:
50
6 Lane change during emergency braking
km/h
Vehicle without Vehicle with ESP

Vehicle speed
ESP, with ABS 1
2

0
4 4
+300°
1
Steering-wheel angle

0
2

-300°
+40
°/s 1
Yaw velocity

3 3 2

0
Fig. 6
+16°
υ0 = 50 km/h
μHF = 0.15 1
Side-slip angle

2 2
Increased brake slip

0
2
Fig. 7
æ UAF0062-1Y

υ0 = 50 km/h
æ UAF0063-1E

1 2 3 4
μHF = 0.15 1 1
-16°
0 Time s 15
1 Vehicle without ESP
2 Vehicle with ESP
 Electronic stability program Maneuvers 383

Vehicle with ABS but without ESP the complexity of the steering process and
Immediately after the initial steering input lowers the demands placed on the driver.
both the side-slip angle and the yaw velocity Yet another asset is that the ESP vehicle stops
have increased to the point where driver in- in less distance than the vehicle equipped
tervention – in the form of countersteer – has with ABS alone.
become imperative (Fig. 6, on
left). This driver action then 9 Oversteering and understeering when cornering
generates a side-slip angle in the 1
opposite direction (technically:
with the opposite operational
sign). This side-slip angle in-
creases rapidly, and the driver 2
must countersteer for a second
time. Here the driver is able –
but only just – to restabilize the
vehicle and bring it to a safe halt.

Vehicle with ESP

Because ESP reduces yaw veloc- 1
ity and side-slip angle to easily Fig. 9
controllable levels, this vehicle 1 Vehicle with ESP
remains stable at all times. The 3 2 Oversteered vehicle
driver is not confronted with without ESP
unanticipated instability and can
æ UAF0088Y
3 Understeered vehicle
thus continue to devote full at- without ESP

tention to keeping the vehicle on

course. ESP substantially reduces Fig. 8
Vehicle without ESP
8 Critical obstacle-avoidance maneuver with and without ESP 1 Vehicle approaches
an obstacle.
2 Vehicle breaks away
2 and does not follow
3 the driver’s steering
movements.
3 Vehicle slides
uncontrolled off
4
the road.
2
3 Vehicle with ESP
1 Vehicle approaches
an obstacle.
2 Vehicle almost
breaks away 씮 ESP
!

intervention, vehicle
follows driver’s
with ESP steering movements.
1 3 Vehicle almost
without ESP breaks away again
æ UAF0087E

when recentering
the steering wheel
씮 ESP intervention.
4 Vehicle is stabilized.
384 Electronic stability program Maneuvers

Extended steering and countersteering clearly seen during this kind of dynamic ma-
sequence with progressively greater neuver when the steering wheel has to
input angles be turned to progressively greater angles to
A vehicle traversing a series of S-curves (for negotiate each turn.
instance, on a snaking secondary road) is in Figs. 10 and 11 illustrate the handling
a situation similar to that encountered on a response of two vehicles (one with and
slalom course. The way the ESP works can be one without ESP) under these conditions
쐌 on a snow-covered road (μHF = 0.45),
10 Curves for dynamic response parameters for rapid 쐌 without the driver braking, and
steering and countersteering inputs with increasing
steering-wheel angles 쐌 at a constant velocity of 72 km/h.

+180° Vehicle without ESP

Engine output will have to be increased con-
wheel angle

1+2
tinually in order to maintain a constant road
Steering-

0 speed. This, in turn, will generate progressively

greater slip at the driven wheels. A sequence of
steering and countersteering maneuvers with a
-180°
40° steering-wheel angle can quickly increase
+5
m . s-2 1
drive slip to such levels that a vehicle without
ESP becomes unstable. At some point in this
Lateral acceleration

alternating sequence the vehicle suddenly

ceases to respond to steering inputs and breaks
0 into a slide. While lateral acceleration remains
virtually constant, both side-slip angle and yaw
velocity rise radically.
2
-5 Vehicle with ESP
The Electronic Stability Program (ESP) inter-
+30
°/s venes at an early stage in this sequence of
1 steering and countersteering maneuvers to
counter the instability that threatens right
Yaw velocity

from the outset. ESP relies on engine inter-

0 vention as well as individually controlled
2 braking of all four wheels to maintain the
vehicle’s stability and steering response. Side-
slip angle and yaw velocity are controlled so
-30 that the driver’s steering demands can be
+10°
complied with as far as possible considering
1 the prevailing physical conditions.
Side-slip angle

0
2
æ UAF0065-1E

1 2 3 4 5 6

Fig. 10 -10°
0 Time s 14
1 Vehicle without ESP
2 Vehicle with ESP
 Electronic stability program Maneuvers 385

11 Vehicle tracking for rapid steering and countersteering inputs with increasing steering-wheel angles.

Vehicle without ESP Vehicle with ESP

6
4 4

3 3

1 1
æ UAF0064-1Y

Fig. 11
Increased braking
force
386 Electronic stability program Maneuvers

Acceleration/deceleration during cornering for steering input starts to rise rapidly, while at
A decreasing-radius curve becomes progres- the same time the side-slip angle increases dra-
sively tighter as one proceeds. If a vehicle matically. This is the upper limit at which the
maintains a constant velocity through such driver can still manage to keep the car inside
a curve (as frequently encountered on free- the skid pad. A vehicle without ESP enters its
way/highway exit ramps) the outward, or cen- unstable range at roughly 98 km/h. The rear
trifugal force, will increase at the same time end breaks away and the driver must counter-
(Fig. 12). This also applies when the driver steer and leave the skid pad.
accelerates too soon while exiting a curve.
In terms of the physics of vehicle operation, Vehicle with ESP
it produces the same effects as the situation de- Up to a speed of roughly 95 km/h, vehicles
scribed above (Fig. 13). Excessive braking in with and without ESP display identical re-
such a curve is yet another potential source of sponse patterns. Because this speed coincides
radial and tangential forces capable of induc- with the vehicle’s stability limit, the ESP refuses
ing instability during cornering. to implement continued driver demand for
A vehicle’s handling response during further acceleration to beyond this point. ESP
simultaneous acceleration and cornering uses engine intervention to limit the drive
is determined by testing on the skid pad torque. Active engine and braking intervention
(semi-steady-state circulation). In this test the work against the tendency of the vehicle to un-
driver gradually accelerates dersteer. This results in minor deviations from
쐌 on a high-traction surface (μHF = 1.0) and the initially projected course, which the driver
쐌 attempts to stay on a skid pad with a can then correct with appropriate steering ac-
100 meter radius while circulating at pro- tion. At this point, the driver has assumed an
gressively faster rates; this continues until active role as an element within the control
the vehicle reaches its cornering limits. loop. Subsequent fluctuations in steering-
wheel and side-slip angle will now be a func-
Vehicle without ESP tion of the driver’s reactions, as will the final
During testing on the skid pad at approxi- speed of between 95 and 98 km/h as stipulated
mately 95 km/h the vehicle responds to the im- for the test. The vital factor is that ESP consis-
pending approach of its physical operating tently maintains these fluctuations within the
limits by starting to understeer. The demand stable range.

12 Vehicle tracking when cornering while braking with a constant steering-wheel angle

Fig. 12
æ UAF0066-1Y

Increased braking
force
Decreased braking
force
 Electronic stability program Maneuvers 387

13 Vehicle tracking when cornering while accelerating.

Vehicle without ESP Vehicle with ESP

æ UAF0067-1Y
Fig. 13
Increased braking
force

14 Comparison of cornering with vehicles with and without ESP

æ UAF0089Y
388 Electronic stability program Closed-loop control system and controlled variables

Closed-loop control system System and control structure

The Electronic Stability Program (ESP)
and controlled variables embraces capabilities extending far beyond
Electronic stability program concept those of either ABS or ABS and TCS com-
Application of the ESP closed-loop stability bined. Based on advanced versions of ABS
control in the vehicle’s limit situation as and ABS/TCS system components, it allows
defined by the dynamics of vehicle motion active braking at all four wheels with a high
is intended to prevent the level of dynamic sensitivity. Vehicle response
쐌 linear (longitudinal) velocity, the is adopted as an element within the control
쐌 lateral velocity and the loop. The system controls braking, propulsive
쐌 rotational speed around the vertical axis and lateral forces so that the actual response
(yaw velocity), converges with the ideal response under the
given circumstances.
exceeding the ultimate control limits. Assum- An engine-management system with CAN
ing appropriate operator inputs, driver de- interface can vary engine output torque in or-
mand is translated into dynamic vehicular re- der to adjust the driven-wheel slip rates. The
sponse that is adapted to the characteristics of advanced ESP system provides highly precise
the road in an optimization process designed performance for selective adjustment of the
to ensure maximum safety. As shown in Fig. dynamic longitudinal and lateral forces acting
1, the first step is to determine how the vehi- on each individual wheel.
cle should respond to driver demand during
operation in the limit range (ideal response), Fig. 2 shows ESP control in a schematic
and also how it actually does respond (actual diagram with
response). Actuators are then applied to mini- 쐌 the sensors that determine the controller
mize the difference between the ideal and input parameters,
the actual response (control deviation) by 쐌 the ESP control unit with its hierarchically-
indirectly influencing the forces acting at the structured controller, featuring a higher-
tires. level ESP controller and the subordinate
slip controllers,
쐌 the actuators used for ultimate control
of braking, drive and lateral forces.

1 Block diagram of electronic stability program (ESP)

Vehicle (control loop)

Actuators for brake and engine interventions
Measured/estimated motion variables

Driver command Vehicle response

Specified behavior Actual behavior

Control variance
æ UAF0083E

Controller for calculating correcting variables