applied

sciences
Article
A Rapid Verification System for Automatic Emergency Braking
Control Algorithm of Passenger Car
Jun Xu, Liangyu Li , Ran Zhao, Feng Deng and Gangyan Li *

School of Mechanical and Electronic Engineering, Wuhan University of Technology, Wuhan 430070, China
* Correspondence: gangyanli@whut.edu.cn

Abstract: The automatic emergency braking (AEB) system of the passenger car is responsible for
auxiliary braking judgment and decision-making in an emergency. Due to the inevitable pressure
response delay of passenger car pneumatic braking systems, a large number of verification tests
should be carried out to propose appropriate strategies and algorithms. To realize the rapid veri-
fication of the AEB control algorithm, a verification system integrating software-in-the-loop (SIL)
and hardware-in-the-loop (HIL) was proposed for a two-axle passenger car. It can verify the logic
feasibility of the control algorithm through SIL testing, and can verify the implementation effect of
the control algorithm through HIL testing. The verification system is composed of IPG, dSPACE, and
a pneumatic braking bench. Considering the influence of pneumatic braking delay, it is well-matched
with the actual vehicle AEB system. The AEB hierarchical control algorithm was verified under three
typical test conditions. The results show that the SIL testing results of speed and relative distance are
in good agreement with the HIL testing results, and the average relative deviation of relative distance
is only 1.7 m. The single test time of the SIL testing is about 228 s, which can meet the requirements
of rapid verification of the AEB control algorithm of the passenger car.

Keywords: passenger car; automatic emergency braking; hardware-in-the-loop system; dynamic simulation

1. Introduction
Citation: Xu, J.; Li, L.; Zhao, R.; Deng,
Urban public transportation is the main body of urban passenger transportation in
F.; Li, G. A Rapid Verification System
China. In recent years, the number of passenger cars in China has grown steadily [1].
for Automatic Emergency Braking
Control Algorithm of Passenger Car.
Due to the heavily loaded body of the passenger car, its braking system mostly adopts
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 508. https://
pneumatic braking, which has led to a long pressure response time. If the braking timing is
doi.org/10.3390/app13010508 missed, the braking effect of the passenger car will be weakened, which will eventually
lead to traffic accidents. According to statistics, about 70% of China’s traffic accidents are
Academic Editors: Pavel Kučera and
caused by braking failure, insufficient braking force, and late braking. Insufficient braking
Martin Jonák
is one of the main causes of collision accidents [2].
Received: 11 December 2022 In recent years, automatic emergency braking (AEB) has become one of the key tech-
Revised: 27 December 2022 nologies of automobile active safety. The vehicle equipped with AEB can accurately grasp
Accepted: 29 December 2022 the braking time, actively brake the vehicle under dangerous conditions, and effectively
Published: 30 December 2022 avoid collision accidents [3]. Hu L. et al. [4] analyzed the key parameters of the AEB
system and proposed an optimized AEB system, which can reduce the severity of collision
accidents and unavailable accidents. Accurately judging the driving scene is the premise
for the operation of the AEB system. At present, radar and camera are usually used to
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
perceive the driving scene. Begiovane D.J. et al. [5] developed an alternative circular target
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
for AEB system testing. When the 77 GHz millimeter wave radar system detects the target,
This article is an open access article
its RCS level is the same as the actual cycle. Based on the data of 30 traffic accidents,
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Choi Y. et al. [6] used a simulation to prove that with the increase in the radar angle in
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
the AEB system, the crash avoidance rate of the vehicle is increased. Xique I.J. et al. [7]
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ described the evaluation method of ADAS system sensors and tested and evaluated the
4.0/). performance of millimeter wave radar, LiDAR, and image sensor on site. Stöckle C. et al. [8]

Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 508. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13010508 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci

Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 508 2 of 15

proposed a robust design method for AEB system considering sensor measurement error.
Numerical examples showed that the method can provide a reference for the design of
optimal AEB decision rules.
The design and application of an excellent AEB control algorithm can greatly improve
the performance of the AEB system, thereby improving driving safety. Niu W. [9] designed
a Petri net model and controller for vehicles and pedestrians in specific areas, which can
avoid collisions between vehicles and pedestrians in the Petri net model. Yang W. et al. [10]
proposed a model based on BP neural network and hidden Markov model to identify the
intentions of drivers in front of them, and further proposed an effective AEB model. Al-
suwian T. et al. [11] proposed a multi-sensor fusion AEB control algorithm and verified the
robustness and effectiveness of the AEB system through simulation. Zhang R. et al. [12] de-
signed a multi-objective optimization AEB control strategy. The simulation results showed
that the multi-objective optimization AEB control method had better performance than the
single AEB algorithm in collision avoidance, driving comfort, and fuel economy. Schratter
M. et al. [13] formulated the anti-collision of vehicles and pedestrians as a partially observ-
able Markov decision process (POMDP), and compared the anti-collision performance of
POMDP and AEB systems under various combinations through experiments.
Note that many researchers verified the performance of the AEB control algorithm
through simulation, as mentioned earlier [4,10,12,13]. In addition, Shin S.G. et al. [14] also
evaluated the performance of the proposed adaptive AEB control strategy through simula-
tion to prevent collisions with vehicles following behind. Due to the insufficient accuracy of
the simulation, some researchers tested the existing AEB products or verified the developed
AEB control algorithms in real vehicles [5,7,9]. Park M.K. et al. [15] used a real vehicle to
test the pedestrian target selection algorithm on the test track. The results showed that the
proposed AEB algorithm can avoid or mitigate accidents. Song Z. et al. [16] developed a
set of pedestrian AEB test equipment according to the C-NCAP test requirement, and used
the equipment to evaluate the AEB performance of the test vehicle. However, real vehicle
testing is time-consuming and expensive.
The hardware-in-the-loop (HIL) technique can embed the real braking system into the
software simulation platform through the I/O interfaces, providing a rapid verification
platform for the AEB control algorithm, thus reducing the test cost [17]. Yuan Y. et al. [18]
proposed a hydraulic brake-by-wire system, and verified the brake force distribution
strategy and regenerative braking control strategy through simulation and HIL testing.
Cheng S. et al. [19] tested the proposed lateral stability coordinated collision avoidance
control system (LSCACS) through HIL testing, and the results showed that the LSCACS is
better than that of the traditional AEB system. Zhang N. et al. [20] proposed an integrated
coordinated control method for vehicle AFS and ABS, and proposed a solution method for
the control model. A HIL test was carried out for the control method on low-adhesion and
off-road roads.
The above researches aimed at HIL verification of braking energy management and
braking performance optimization strategies. Based on the research results in ADAS, ACC,
and AEB, some researchers used HIL testing to verify the control algorithms. Solmaz S. [21]
and Schyr C. [22] designed a steerable chassis dynamometer test bench and tested the
lane-keeping assistant, adaptive cruise control, and automatic emergency braking functions
of the real vehicle. Wang F. et al. [23] proposed a hierarchical ACC control strategy for the
city bus, and the HIL test showed that the control strategy can improve the tracking ability,
driving comfort, and energy economy of the city bus. Bours R. et al. [24] proposed an
AEB system development method combining road test, indoor laboratory test, HIL testing,
and simulation. However, the existing HIL system is mainly aimed at the development of
the AEB control algorithm for hydraulic braking vehicles. It cannot be directly applied to
passenger cars equipped with a pneumatic braking system.
Due to the time-delay characteristics of pneumatic braking, the verification of the
AEB control algorithm should meet the high requirements for rapid response to braking
pressure. Therefore, it is urgent to develop a test system to shorten the response time of
 at the development of the AEB control algorithm for hydraulic braking vehicles. It cannot
be directly applied to passenger cars equipped with a pneumatic braking system.
Due to the time-delay characteristics of pneumatic braking, the verification of the
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 508 3 of 15
AEB control algorithm should meet the high requirements for rapid response to braking
pressure. Therefore, it is urgent to develop a test system to shorten the response time of
braking pressure by quickly adjusting the pressure of the pneumatic braking system, to
braking
more pressuresimulate
accurately by quickly
the adjusting
emergencythe pressure
braking of the pneumatic
conditions braking
of real vehicles, system,
and quickly to
more accurately
verify simulate
the effectiveness the passenger
of the emergencycar braking conditions
AEB control of real vehicles, and quickly
algorithm.
verifyInthe
thiseffectiveness of the passenger
paper, our contribution is tocar AEB control
establish a rapidalgorithm.
verification system for the de-
In this paper, our contribution is to establish a rapid
velopment and verification of passenger car AEB control algorithm, verification
whichsystem for the
has software-
development and verification of passenger car AEB control algorithm, which
in-the-loop (SIL) and HIL test functions. The characteristics of the proposed verificationhas software-
in-the-loop
system (SIL) andthrough
are analyzed HIL testan functions. The characteristics
AEB hierarchical of thecase,
control strategy proposed verification
e.g., the rapidity
system
of are and
the test analyzed through an AEB
the characteristics hierarchical
of SIL and HILcontrol
methods.strategy case, e.g., the
The application rapidity of
scenarios of
the test and the characteristics
SIL and HIL methods are summarized. of SIL and HIL methods. The application scenarios of SIL
and HIL methods are summarized.
2. Scheme of Verification System
2. Scheme of Verification System
2.1.
2.1. Working
Working Mechanism
Mechanism of of AEB
AEB
The
The passenger car AEB system
passenger car AEB system cancan obtain
obtain the
the relative
relative position
position information
information between
between
vehicles.
vehicles. If the driver cannot make a braking judgment in time, it will urge
If the driver cannot make a braking judgment in time, it will urge the
the vehicle
vehicle to
to
brake
brake automatically
automatically to to avoid
avoid collision
collision and
and ensure
ensure the
the safety
safety of
of passengers.
passengers. TheThe working
working
mechanism
mechanism of of the
the AEB
AEB system
system is
is shown
shown in in Figure
Figure 1,
1, where
where VTVT refers
refers to
to the
the vehicle
vehicle target
target
and
and VUT
VUT refers
refers to
to the
the vehicle
vehicle under
under test.
test.

Figure
Figure 1.
1. Schematic
Schematic diagram
diagram of
of passenger
passenger car
car AEB
AEB system.
system.

The AEB
The AEB system
system can
can be
be divided
divided into
into three
three functional
functional layers,
layers, namely
namely thethe perception
perception
layer, the decision-making layer, and the execution layer. The perceive
layer, the decision-making layer, and the execution layer. The perceive layer is layer is mainly
mainly
composed of millimeter wave radar, a displacement sensor installed on
composed of millimeter wave radar, a displacement sensor installed on the brake pedalthe brake pedal
axis, and a steering wheel angle sensor. They are connected to perceive
axis, and a steering wheel angle sensor. They are connected to perceive environmental environmental
informationand
information anddriver
driverstatus,
status,and
andsend
send the
the braking
braking command
command to activate
to activate thethe actuator
actuator on
on the execution layer. The electronic pressure regulating valves as the actuator
the execution layer. The electronic pressure regulating valves as the actuator receive receive
the
the signal from the controller and then generate corresponding braking pressure. Finally,
signal from the controller and then generate corresponding braking pressure. Finally, ac-
accurate braking torque will be formed and applied to the corresponding wheels of the
curate braking torque will be formed and applied to the corresponding wheels of the pas-
passenger car.
senger car.
2.2. Verification System Demands Analysis
2.2. Verification System Demands Analysis
SIL testing, HIL testing, and real vehicle tests are common methods for the develop-
SIL
ment and testing, HIL testing,
verification of AEBand real algorithms.
control vehicle testsThe
are characteristics
common methods for the
of these develop-
methods are
ment and verification
compared, as shown inofTable
AEB control
1. algorithms. The characteristics of these methods are
compared, as shown in Table 1.
Table 1. Comparison of verification methods.

SIL HIL Real Vehicle

Test speed Fast Medium Slow
Cost Low Medium High
Confidence Low Medium High
Real-time Optional Real-time Real-time

The passenger car AEB control algorithm verification system shall be able to quickly
complete the algorithm verification with reliable results. Considering the diversity of the
verified control algorithms, the verification process should be as close to the real operating
environment as possible, and the verification system should have both SIL testing and HIL
testing functions.
 The passenger car AEB control algorithm verification system shall be able to quickly
complete the algorithm verification with reliable results. Considering the diversity of the
verified control algorithms, the verification process should be as close to the real operating
environment as possible, and the verification system should have both SIL testing and
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 508 HIL testing functions. 4 of 15

The controlled parameters of different AEB algorithms are different, and the percep-
tion and matching information required for decision-making are also different. A series
of studies on the existing
The controlled AEBof
parameters control algorithms
different were summarized,
AEB algorithms are different,and
andthe
the parameters
perception
and matching
required by theinformation
verificationrequired for decision-making
system were are also
summarized, as shown indifferent. A series
Table 2. Note that theof
studies on the existing
actual parameters AEB2 control
in Table were usedalgorithms were summarized,
for HIL testing. Through theand the parameters
interaction of actual
required by the
parameters, theverification
relationshipsystem
betweenwerethesummarized, as shown
simulation model andinphysical
Table 2.hardware
Note that was
the
actual parameters in Table 2 were used for HIL testing. Through the interaction
established, and the whole process development and verification of the passenger car AEB of actual
parameters, the relationship
control algorithm between the simulation model and physical hardware was
were realized.
established, and the whole process development and verification of the passenger car AEB
control
Table 2.algorithm
Parameterswere realized.
required by the verification system.

Table 2. Parameters required by the Parameters

verification system.
Environmental Pa-
Name Vehicle Actual Parameters
rameters
Name Vehicle Parameters Environmental
Speed Parameters
of VT/Acceler- Actual Parameters
Speed of VUT/Accel- Braking pressure/Pe-
Speed of ation of VT/Position
Speed of VT/Acceleration of
e.g.
e.g. VUT/Acceleration
eration of
of
VUT/Posi-
VT/Position of VT/Position
dal opening/Control
Braking pressure/Pedal
of VT/Position of ob-opening/Control signal
VUT/Position oftion
VUTof VUT of obstacle signal
stacle

2.3.
2.3. Verification
VerificationSystem
SystemScheme
Scheme
According
According to the functionalrequirements
to the functional requirementsand andinformation
informationrequirements
requirementsofofthe
theverifi-
veri-
cation system,
fication system, a system
a systemframework
frameworkforfor
thethe
rapid verification
rapid of passenger
verification car car
of passenger AEB control
AEB con-
algorithm was proposed as shown in Figure
trol algorithm was proposed as shown in Figure 2. 2.

Xpack4 Real-Time vehicle signal

Virtual Vehicle GUI Interface
System
TruckMaker
Xpack4 control signal
IPG Simulation Platform
dSPACE Controller

CAN Module
Pneumatic Braking Bench
control signal
braking pressure

Analog Signal control signal Proportional braking pressure

pedal opening

Output Relay Valve

braking pressure
Brake
Analog Signal braking pressure
Pressure Sensor Chamber
Input

pedal opening
PWM Signal Input Brake Pedal

Figure2.2.Verification
Figure Verificationsystem
systemstructure.
structure.

As shown in Figure 2, the verification system is mainly composed of three parts,

namely the IPG simulation platform, dSPACE controller, and pneumatic braking bench.
The Xpack4 real-time system of the IPG simulation platform provides I/O interfaces
for external components. TruckMaker included in the IPG simulation platform is used to
establish the dynamic model of the passenger car. It also provides a simulation environment
for the operation of virtual vehicles. The M51 board of the Xpack4 real-time system
is used to transmit the virtual vehicle and environmental parameters to the dSPACE
controller through the CAN bus, which acts as the AEB controller of the passenger car.
The braking model built in TruckMaker is replaced by the pneumatic braking bench. The
opening signal of the brake pedal and pressure signal of the brake chamber are sent to the
dSPACE controller as the real-time braking status information. During the execution of the
verification system, the AEB control algorithm can be quickly modified and verified. When
the controller makes an emergency braking decision, it will send a control signal to adjust
the proportional relay valve of the pneumatic braking bench, and the pressure of the brake
chamber will change accordingly. The braking pressure is timely collected by the pressure
sensor and then fed back to the dSPACE controller.
 nal of the brake pedal and pressure signal of the brake chamber are sent to the dSPA
controller as the real-time braking status information. During the execution of the ve
cation system, the AEB control algorithm can be quickly modified and verified. When
controller makes an emergency braking decision, it will send a control signal to adjust
proportional relay valve of the pneumatic braking bench, and the pressure of the br
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 508 5 ofby
chamber will change accordingly. The braking pressure is timely collected 15 the press
sensor and then fed back to the dSPACE controller.

3. Verification
3. Verification System Establishment
System Establishment
3.1. Pneumatic3.1. Pneumatic
Braking BenchBraking Bench
The structureThe structure
of the passengerof the passenger
car’s pneumatic car’sbraking
pneumatic braking
system system
is shown in is shown
Figure 3. in Figu
The generated braking
The pressure
generated is related
braking to the
pressure is opening
related toofthe
the opening
pedal valve. During
of the pedalbraking,
valve. During b
the proportional relay
ing, the valve receives
proportional relaythe electronic
valve receivessignal, and thesignal,
the electronic pilot and
solenoid valve
the pilot solenoid v
generates a corresponding opening degree. Then, the compressed air enters the
generates a corresponding opening degree. Then, the compressed air enters the cham chamber
of the proportional relay valve and
of the proportional relaygenerates
valve and corresponding braking pressure.
generates corresponding braking Aspressure.
the As
compressed compressed
air in the proportional relay valve isrelay
air in the proportional provided
valveby the nearby
is provided byair tank,
the andair
nearby thetank, and
connecting pipeline is short,
connecting it is conducive
pipeline is short, it to reducing the
is conducive to braking
reducingdelay and obtaining
the braking a obtain
delay and
better automatic emergency
a better automaticbraking effect.braking effect.
emergency

Front Brake Service Line Parking Line Rear Brake

Chamber Supply Line Electronic Signal Chamber

Tank Four-circuit
Protection Valve
Pressure Filter Parking
Sensor Compressor Tank Hand Brake
ABS Valve
Valve Electronic
Quick
Brake Pedal
Release
Front Rear Valve
Tank Tank Proportional
Relay Valve

dSPACE

Figureof3.passenger
Figure 3. Structure Structurecar’s
of passenger car’s
pneumatic pneumatic
braking braking system.
system.

The pneumatic Thebraking

pneumatic benchbraking
providesbenchtheprovides
dSPACE the dSPACE
controller controller
with with pres-
the braking the braking p
sure signal and
sure the brake
signal andpedal opening
the brake pedalsignal.
openingThe braking
signal. pressurepressure
The braking is acquired by
is acquired by p
pressure sensors. The dSPACE
sure sensors. controller
The dSPACE provides
controller the control
provides signal for
the control the for
signal proportional
the proportional r
relay valve in the pneumatic
valve in the pneumaticbraking bench.
braking The pressure
bench. sensor,
The pressure brake
sensor, pedal,
brake andand
pedal, pro-proportio
portional relay valve
relay valveare
areallallconnected
connectedto to the
the interface of
of the
thedSPACE
dSPACEcontroller.
controller.The The
parameter
parameters ofthe main components in the pneumatic braking bench are shown in Table 3.3.
the main components in the pneumatic braking bench are shown in Table

Table 3. Components of pneumatic braking bench.

Components Models Parameters

Proportional relay valve WABCO 4802020040 Range: 0–0.9 MPa
Pressure sensor SMC PSE540A-R06 Range: 0–1.0 MPa
Front brake chamber RL 35190300170 Spring stiffness: 5000 N/m
Rear brake chamber RL 35300102810 Spring stiffness: 5000 N/m
Tank C 3513010-S0300 Volume: 25 L

3.2. Pressure Regulating Method of Pneumatic Braking System

The proportional relay valve is the pressure regulator of the pneumatic braking system.
The proportional relay valve is controlled by the PWM method, which adjusts the input
current by changing the duty cycle, and then adjusting the outlet pressure.
As the hysteresis characteristics of the proportional relay valve will affect the pressure
regulation effect of the braking system. The PID method was adopted to control the outlet
pressure of the proportional relay valve [25]. The PWM duty cycle was adjusted timely to
keep the braking pressure at the target value.
 tem. The proportional relay valve is controlled by the PWM method, which adju
input current by changing the duty cycle, and then adjusting the outlet pressure.
As the hysteresis characteristics of the proportional relay valve will affect th
sure regulation effect of the braking system. The PID method was adopted to con
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 508 outlet pressure of the proportional relay valve [25]. The PWM duty cycle 6 of 15 was a
timely to keep the braking pressure at the target value.
The dynamic pressure regulation performance of the proportional relay val
verified dynamic
The pressure regulation
by the pneumatic braking performance
bench. Theof the proportional
target pressurerelay valve
range was wasset from
verified by the pneumatic braking bench. The target pressure range was set from 0 MPa
to 0.7 MPa, while the step size was set as 0.1 MPa by using the ladder lifting mo
to 0.7 MPa, while the step size was set as 0.1 MPa by using the ladder lifting mode. The
experimental results
experimental results werewere
shown shown in 4.
in Figure Figure 4.

Figure 4. Dynamic pressure regulation performance of the pneumatic braking system.

Figure 4. Dynamic pressure regulation performance of the pneumatic braking system.
As shown in Figure 4, the actual pressure at the outlet of the proportional relay valve
Asand
can rise shown in Figureto4,the
fall according thetarget
actual pressure
pressure andat the
can outlet
reach the of the proportional
target value. The rela
experimental results show that the control algorithm can effectively eliminate
can rise and fall according to the target pressure and can reach the target value.the influence
of the hysteresis characteristics of the proportional relay valve, and significantly improve
perimental results show that the control algorithm can effectively eliminate the in
the pressure regulation effect of the proportional relay valve. The experiment verified
of
thethe hysteresis
pressure characteristics
regulation performanceof of the proportional
the pneumatic relay
braking valve,
system, and
and significantly
provided a im
the pressure
hardware basisregulation
for the rapideffect
responseof of
thetheproportional
AEB system. relay valve. The experiment veri
pressure regulation performance of the pneumatic braking system, and provided
3.3. Configuration of Passenger Car Simulation Parameters
ware basis for the rapid response of the AEB system.
The structure of the passenger car pneumatic braking system was designed, and its
dynamic pressure regulating performance was verified through the pneumatic braking
3.3. Configuration
bench. Taking the AEB of Passenger
system of aCar Simulation
two-axle passengerParameters
car as the test target, TruckMaker
was adopted to configure
The structure parameters
of the of thecar
passenger virtual vehicle in the
pneumatic verification
braking systemsystem,
wassuch
designed,
as mass, tire radius, and inertia of each axle, which is shown in Table 4.
dynamic pressure regulating performance was verified through the pneumatic b
bench. Taking
Table 4. Main the AEB
parameters system
of virtual of a two-axle passenger car as the test target, Truc
vehicle.
was adopted to configure parameters of the virtual vehicle in the verification syste
Parameters Value Parameters
as mass, tire radius, and inertia of each axle, which is shown inValue
Table 4.
Overall mass/kg 8000 Distance from front axle to centroid/m 2.1
Body mass/kg 7330 Distance from rear axle to centroid/m 1.8
Aerodynamic area/m2 7.981 Inertia of X axis/(kg·m2 ) 5000
Tire radius/m 0.558 Inertia of Y axis/(kg·m2 ) 5000
Height of centroid/m 1.068 Inertia of Z axis/(kg·m2 ) 10,000

The radar sensor judges the relative position between VUT and VT by sending and
receiving pulse signals. When VT enters the radar detection range of VUT, VUT receives
the radar signals and automatically identifies the type of detected objects, providing an
effective judgment basis for passenger car AEB control. The detection principle of the radar
sensor is shown in Figure 5.
 The radar sensor judges the relative position between VUT and VT by send
receiving pulse signals. When VT enters the radar detection range of VUT, VUT
the radar signals and automatically identifies the type of detected objects, prov
effective judgment basis for passenger car AEB control. The detection principle o
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 508 7 of 15
dar sensor is shown in Figure 5.

relative position

longitudinal range Lr
drel, vrel

dimensions
(w, l, h)
bearing q1

aperture q
Y Z

Object Detected Sensors Field of Vision

Object not Detected Sensor

Figure
Figure Schematic
5. 5. diagram
Schematic of the radar
diagram of thesensor.
radar sensor.
When there are obstacles within the detection range of the radar sensor, the obstacles
Whenand
are classified there are obstacles
marked within
according to the detection
the relative range
distance. The of the
relative radarrelative
distance, sensor, the o
are classified
angle, andand
length, width, marked
height according to the
of obstacles are relative
saved distance.
in matrix form. TheThe relative
spatial distance,
position
of the object detected by the passenger car radar sensor can be expressed as:
angle, length, width, and height of obstacles are saved in matrix form. The spatial
of the object detected Xby
 the passenger

sin θ
car
  radarsensor
0 0 0
  can be expressed as:
w
1
X   sin θ1  0 0 0   w 
 Y  = drel cos θ1  + 0 0 0  l  (1)
Z  0  0  0 1 h 
 Y  = drel  cos θ1  + 0 0 0   l 
 Z coordinate
where X, Y, and Z are the space  0values
 of 0 1 drelh is
0 objects;  the distance between
VUT and objects; θ 1 is the angle between VUT and objects (bearing); w, l, and h are the
width,
wherelength,
X, Y,and
andheight
Z areof the
the detected objects, respectively.
space coordinate values of objects; drel is the distance
VUT and objects; θ1 is the angle between the
When only longitudinal motion is considered, VUTbearing 1 is always
and θobjects 0◦ , which w,
(bearing); canl, and h
simplify the object’s spatial position as follows:
width, length, and height of the detected objects, respectively.
When only longitudinal motion is considered, the bearing θ1 is always 0°, w
   
X 0
 Y  =  d
simplify the object’s spatial position as follows:
rel
 (2)
Z h
X   0 
 the
The radar sensor is usually mounted at  front
 of the vehicle. Based on the measuring
performance of a certain type of millimeter  = radar,
 Ywave drel  the radar sensor parameters were
 Z mode,
configured in TruckMaker. In the far range   hthe position (x, y, z) of the sensor was
◦ ◦
set to (7.8 m, 0 m, 1 m), the field of view (h, v) was set to (9 , 9 ), the longitudinal range
was setThe radar
to 200 sensor
m, and is usually
the update rate was mounted at the
set to 60 Hz. front
In the nearof the mode,
range vehicle.
the Based
field of on the
ing performance
view of was
(h, v) of the sensor a certain
set to (45 ◦
type ◦
, 45of),millimeter wave
the longitudinal radar,
range thetoradar
was set sensor par
70 m, and
the other parameters were the same as those in the far range mode.
were configured in TruckMaker. In the far range mode, the position (x, y, z) of th
wasImplementation
3.4. set to (7.8 m,
of 0 m, 1 m),System
Verification the field of view (h, v) was set to (9°, 9°), the longitudin
wasThe
setverification
to 200 m,system
and the update
proposed ratepaper
in this was can
setrealize
to 60 SIL
Hz.testing
In theand
near
HILrange
testing mode,
of the AEB control algorithm. This section will describe the implementation process of SIL
testing and HIL testing, respectively.
The SIL testing method of the verification system is shown in Figure 6. TruckMaker
provides a simulation environment for virtual vehicles, as well as vehicle parameters
and environmental parameters for AEB braking decisions. The AEB control algorithm is
loaded into the MATLAB/Simulink of the host. TCP/IP protocol is used for information
transmission between the host and the IPG simulation platform.
 The
testing andSIL
HILtesting
testing, method of the verification system is shown in Figure 6
respectively.
The SIL
provides testing method
a simulation of the verification
environment system vehicles,
for virtual is shown in asFigure 6. TruckMake
well as vehicle p
provides a simulation environment for virtual vehicles, as well
environmental parameters for AEB braking decisions. The AEB contro as vehicle parameters an
environmental parameters for AEB braking decisions. The AEB control algorithm i
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 508 loaded into the MATLAB/Simulink of the host. TCP/IP protocol is15used fo
loaded into the MATLAB/Simulink of the host. TCP/IP protocol is used for8 ofinformatio
transmission between
transmission between the the
hosthost and
and the the
IPG IPG simulation
simulation platform. platform.

IPG/TruckMaker
IPG/TruckMaker Host Host
Power System
Power System

Data Interface
Virtual Scenario

Data Interface
Body System Virtual Scenario TCP/IP AEB Algorithm
Body System TCP/IP AEB Algorithm
Sensing System Simulation Engine
Sensing System Simulation Engine
Braking System MATLAB
Braking System MATLAB
Figure 6. SIL testing method.

Figure
Figure 6. SIL
6. SIL testing
testing method.
method.
During the SIL testing, the AEB control model of the host makes a decision accordin
to the vehicle
During the parameters
SIL testing, theandAEBenvironmental
control model parameters in thea simulation
of the host makes process. Whe
decision according
During
toTruckMaker
the vehicle the SILand
parameters
receives testing,
the theinformation,
environmental
decision AEB control
parameters model
in
the the ofvehicle
the process.
simulation
virtual host makes
When
presents a deci
the corre
TruckMaker
to the vehicle
sponding receives the decision
parameters
AEB braking information, the virtual vehicle presents
status.and environmental parameters in the simulation the correspond-
ing AEB Thebraking
HIL status. method of the verification system is shown in Figure 7. The brakin
testing
TruckMaker receives the decision information, the virtual vehicle prese
The HIL testing method of the verification system is shown in Figure 7. The braking
system
sponding in TruckMaker
AEB braking is replaced
status. by the pneumatic braking bench. The AEB control a
system in TruckMaker is replaced by the pneumatic braking bench. The AEB control
gorithm
algorithm
is loaded
is HIL
on
loadedtesting
Simulink,
on Simulink,
and real-time
and real-time code
code could be downloaded
could be downloaded toshown
to the dSPAC
the dSPACE
The
controllerthrough
through
method of the verification system is in Figure
controller thethe
RTIRTI interface.
interface. The Xpack4
The Xpack4 real-time
real-time systemsystem
of the IPGof the IPG simulatio
simulation
system
platform
in
platformprovides TruckMaker
provides boards
boards
is
andand
replaced
interfaces
interfaces
by
forthe pneumatic
connecting
for connecting external
braking
external
hardware,
bench.
hardware,
and dataand
The A
is data i
gorithm
transmitted
transmitted iswith
loaded
withthethe on
dSPACE
dSPACE Simulink, andthrough
controller
controller through real-time
the CAN code
the bus.
CANThe could
bus. Thebecommunication
downloaded
communication be- t
be
controller through the RTI interface. The Xpack4 real-time system of the I
tween
tween the
the pneumatic
pneumatic braking
brakingbench and
bench the
and dSPACE
the controller
dSPACE is carried
controller is out through
carried out throug
analog
analogsignals
signals and digital
and signals.
digital signals.
platform provides boards and interfaces for connecting external hardwar
transmitted with the dSPACE controller through the CAN bus. The comm
dSPACE Pneumatic Braking
tween the IPG Simulation
pneumaticPlatformbraking bench Controller
and the dSPACE Bench
controller is carrie
Xpack4 Real-time system

analog signals and digital signals.

Power System
CAN AEB Algorithm DIO
Virtual Scenario
Body System
dSPACE
AIO Pneumatic Braking
IPG Simulation Platform MATLAB Controller
Sensing System Bench
Simulation Engine RTI
Xpack4 Real-time system

Power System
Braking System
MicroAutoBox
CAN AEB Algorithm DIO
Virtual Scenario Replace
Body System
AIO
Figure
Figure 7. 7.
Sensing HIL
HIL testing
testing
System method.
method. MATLAB
Simulation Engine RTI
During
During the HIL testing, the dSPACE controller receives vehicle
the HIL testing, the dSPACE controller receives vehicle parameters and en- and en
parameters
Braking System MicroAutoBox
vironmental parameters through the CAN interface, and receives braking
vironmental parameters through the CAN interface, and receives braking pressure pressure and an
pedal opening signals through the AIO and DIO interfaces. The current status of the VUT
pedal opening signals through the AIO and Replace
DIO interfaces. The current status of the VU
is calculated through the AEB control algorithm. Then the dSPACE controller sends the
is calculated through
corresponding the relay
proportional AEB valve
control algorithm.
control Then thetodSPACE
signal according controller
the braking decision,sends th
corresponding
Figure the
receives 7. HIL proportional
testing
braking and pedal opening signals feedback, and transmits the brak-decision
method.
pressure relay valve control signal according to the braking
ing pressure signal to the IPG simulation platform. In TruckMaker, braking pressure is
converted into braking torque and applied to each wheel. The virtual vehicle presents the
During the HIL testing, the dSPACE controller receives vehicle param
corresponding AEB braking status.
vironmental parameters
The verification through
system including thesimulation
the IPG CAN interface, and receives
platform, dSPACE braking
controller,
pedal
and opening
pneumatic signals
braking benchthrough
is shown inthe AIO
Figure 8. and DIO interfaces. The current sta
is calculated through the AEB control algorithm. Then the dSPACE contro
corresponding proportional relay valve control signal according to the bra
 receives the braking pressure and pedal opening signals feedback, and transmits the brak-
ing pressure signal to the IPG simulation platform. In TruckMaker, braking pressure is
converted into braking torque and applied to each wheel. The virtual vehicle presents the
corresponding AEB braking status.
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 508 9 of 15
The verification system including the IPG simulation platform, dSPACE controller,
and pneumatic braking bench is shown in Figure 8.

Figure8.8.Verification
Figure Verificationsystem.
system.

4.4. Verification
VerificationofofPassenger
PassengerCar CarAEB
AEBControl
ControlAlgorithm
Algorithm
An
An AEB algorithm verification system forthe
AEB algorithm verification system for thepassenger
passengercar
carwas
wasestablished,
established,which
which
isissuitable
suitable for the rapid development and verification of the AEB controlalgorithm.
for the rapid development and verification of the AEB control algorithm. ToTo
prove
provethe thepracticability
practicabilityofofthe
theverification
verificationsystem,
system,ananAEB
AEBhierarchical
hierarchicalcontrol
controlalgorithm
algorithm
was
wasusedusedasasaatest
testexample,
example,andandvirtual
virtualAEB
AEBtest
testscenarios
scenariosunder
undervarious
varioustest
testconditions
conditions
were
wereestablished
establishedaccording
accordingto tothe
thestandard.
standard. The
Theproposed
proposedverification
verification system
system isisused
usedin
in
SIL testing and HIL testing to verify and analyze the AEB hierarchical control algorithm.
SIL testing and HIL testing to verify and analyze the AEB hierarchical control algorithm.
4.1. AEB Control Algorithm
4.1. AEB Control Algorithm
The warning model of the AEB control algorithm can be divided into the safety
The warning model of the AEB control algorithm can be divided into the safety dis-
distance model and the time-to-collision (TTC) model [26], which can evaluate the braking
tance model and the time-to-collision (TTC) model [26], which can evaluate the braking
safety state base on safety distance and safety time respectively.
safety state base on safety distance and safety time respectively.
The TTC model judges the braking time by comparing the TTC value of the current
The TTC model judges the braking time by comparing the TTC value of the current
state with the braking time threshold. When TTC is less than the braking time threshold,
state with the braking time threshold. When TTC is less than the braking time threshold,
a warning message will be sent or automatic emergency braking will be executed. The
a warning message will be sent or automatic emergency braking will be executed. The
enhanced TTC model including vehicle acceleration can be described as:
enhanced TTC model including vehicle acceleration can be described as:
 d
 dr  r
vr , q vr > 0, ab ≤ a f
 , 
 2 vr > 0 ,ab ≤ a f
− vr + vr +2 ( a b − a f ) dr
TTC vr =  , ab > a f (3)
ab − a f

(
TTC =  − vr + vTr s+, 2 ab − a f dr
2
)


others (3)
 , ab > a f
 ab − a f
where dr is the relative distance
T , between VUT and VT; vr is the relative speed between VUT
and VT; ab is the acceleration s of VUT; af is the acceleration others of VT; T is the set TTC value in
s
safe
whereconditions.
dr is the relative distance between VUT and VT; vr is the relative speed between
VUTThe andTTCVT;model considers
ab is the the motion
acceleration of VUT; stateaf isofthe
theacceleration
vehicle before the T
of VT; collision. When
s is the set TTC
VT is stationary
value and VUT is braking, TTC can be calculated according to the relative
in safe conditions.
distance
TheandTTC relative
modelspeed. The the
considers TTCmotion
algorithm state willof be
theswitched by comparing
vehicle before the relative
the collision. When
acceleration
VT is stationary and VUT is braking, TTC can be calculated according to the relativeand
when VT is moving at a constant speed or decelerating. If the speed dis-
acceleration value of
tance and relative VUTThe
speed. is less
TTC than or equalwill
algorithm to VT, they willby
be switched notcomparing
collide, and thethe TTC
relative
value is safe. when VT is moving at a constant speed or decelerating. If the speed and ac-
acceleration
The
celeration AEB controller
value of VUT judges the braking
is less than or equalstatus to VT,based on the
they will notTTC value
collide, andandthedetermines
TTC value
the expected acceleration value of the VUT. When the vehicle is running in good road
is safe.
condition, the maximum achievable braking acceleration is about −8 m/s2 [27]. Consider-
ing the comfortableness of automatic emergency braking, the expected acceleration of the
AEB system is divided into three levels based on the principle of finite state machine [28],
namely −2 m/s2 , −4 m/s2 , and −6 m/s2 .
The AEB system should also be designed with a collision warning function. Consider-
ing that a normal driver’s reaction time is about 1 s [29], the warning and braking state can
be defined in four stages [11]. The AEB system will switch its working status according to
the corresponding TTC value.
 ering that a normal driver’s reaction time is about 1 s [29], the warning and braki
can be defined in four stages [11]. The AEB system will switch its working status
ing to the corresponding TTC value.
1. When 4 s ≤ TTC < 3 s, the AEB system enters the brake warning status, and an
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 508 10 of 15
and visual warning signal is issued to remind the driver to brake;
2. When 3 s ≤ TTC < 2.25 s, if the driver still fails to brake timely, the AEB system
1. the braking
When 4 s ≤ TTCstatus named
< 3 s, the level Ienters
AEB system (L I),the
and thewarning
brake value of braking
status, acceleration
and an audible is
3. When
and visual2.25 s ≤ TTC
warning < 1.75
signal s, the
is issued AEB system
to remind enters
the driver the braking status named
to brake;
2. (L Ⅱ), and the value of braking acceleration is −4 m/s2; the AEB system
When 3 s ≤ TTC < 2.25 s, if the driver still fails to brake timely,
enters the braking status named level I (L I), and the value of braking acceleration is
4. When TTC ≤ 1.75 s, the AEB system enters the braking status named level Ⅲ
−2 m/s2 ;
3. It will2.25
When remain
s ≤ TTCin this
< 1.75status untilsystem
s, the AEB the vehicle is completely
enters the braking statusstationary,
named levelor II the TT
increases
(L and
II), and the switches
value of braking to acceleration
another braking
is −4 m/s status.
2; The acceleration value of L Ⅲ
4. ing status
When TTC ≤ is1.75
−6 m/s
s, the. AEB system enters the braking status named level III (L
2

III). It will remain in this status until the vehicle is completely stationary, or the TTC
The lower controller of the AEB system adopts the PID control strategy to ad
value increases and switches to another braking status. The acceleration value of L III
braking acceleration
braking status is −6value,
m/s2 . stabilize VUT acceleration at the target acceleration val
realize error control of AEB acceleration. The PID control algorithm can be expres
The lower controller of the AEB system adopts the PID control strategy to adjust the
 stabilizeeVUT
braking acceleration value, (t ) = acceleration
atar (t) − abe (at t) the target acceleration value, and
 acceleration. The
realize error control of AEB PID control algorithm can be expressed as:
( t de(t)
 
u(t) = Kep (et()t )=+aKtari (t0)e−
Rt
(t )dt + Kd
a be ( t ) dt (4)
de(t)
u(t) = K p e(t) + Ki 0 e(t)dt + Kd dt
where e(t) is the error between the target acceleration value and the actual one a
awhere
tar(t) is e(t)the target
is the erroracceleration valueacceleration
between the target at time t; avalue
be(t) isand
thetheactual
actualacceleration
one at time value
t; aKtarp,(t)
t; Kiis, and
the target
Kd isacceleration
the proportional time t; abe (t) isintegral
value at coefficient, the actual acceleration
constant andvalue at
differential c
time t; Kp , Ki , and Kd is the proportional coefficient, integral constant and differential
respectively.
constant respectively.
TheAEB
The AEB control
control modelmodel
built in built in is
Simulink Simulink is shown
shown in Figure in Figure
9. It mainly 9. It
includes TTCmainly i
TTC calculation,
calculation, AEBstatus
AEB braking braking status
decision, anddecision, and PID
PID acceleration acceleration
control module. control modu

Figure
Figure 9.9.AEB
AEB control
control algorithm
algorithm model.model.

4.2. Typical Test Conditions of AEB

4.2. Typical Test Conditions of AEB
As the main verification platform of the passenger car AEB system, the verification
Aswas
system thebuilt
mainwithverification
test scenariosplatform
according of the passenger
to typical car AEB
test conditions of the system,
passengerthe veri
car AEB system to fully verify the performance of the AEB control algorithm.
system was built with test scenarios according to typical test conditions The AEB test
of the pa
demanded in GB/T 33577–2017 and GB/T 38186–2019 were refined, as shown in Table 5,
car AEB system to fully verify the performance of the AEB control algorithm. T
including three test conditions, i.e., Car-to-Car Rear stationary (CCRs), Car-to-Car Rear
moving (CCRm), Car-to-Car Rear braking (CCRb) [30,31].
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 16

test demanded in GB/T 33577–2017 and GB/T 38186–2019 were refined, as shown in Table
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 508 11 of 15
5, including three test conditions, i.e., Car-to-Car Rear stationary (CCRs), Car-to-Car Rear
moving (CCRm), Car-to-Car Rear braking (CCRb) [30,31].

Table 5. Passenger car AEB test conditions.

Conditions
Conditions Speed Speed
of VUT/(km/h)
of VUT/(km/h) TestTest
Distance/m
Distance/m Speed
Speedof
ofVT/(km/h)
VT/(km/h) Target Acceleration/(m/s
Target Acceleration/(m/s2 ) 2)

CCRs
CCRs 80 80 120 120 00 00
CCRm
CCRm 80 80 120 120 32
32 00
CCRb
CCRb 80 80 30 30 80
80 −−3
3

4.3.
4.3. Test
Test Results of AEB
Results of AEB Control
Control Algorithm
Algorithm
4.3.1. CCRs Condition
CCRs Condition
The parameters
parameters ofof the
theCCRs
CCRscondition
conditionare
areset
setasasfollows:
follows:the the relative
relative distance
distance is 120
is 120 m,
m,
thethe initial
initial speed
speed of of
VUTVUT is 80
is 80 km/h,and
km/h, andthe
thespeed
speedofofVT VTisis0.0. SIL
SIL testing and HIL testing
results in the CCRs condition are shown in Figure 10.

LI LⅡ LⅢ LI LⅡ LⅢ

(a) (b)
Figure
Figure 10.
10. HIL
HIL testing
testing and
and SIL
SIL testing
testing results
results of
of CCRs
CCRs condition:
condition: (a)
(a) speed
speed of
of VUT
VUT and
and acceleration
acceleration
of VUT; (b) relative speed and relative distance.
of VUT; (b) relative speed and relative distance.

Take the HIL

Take the HIL testing
testing curve
curve in
in Figure
Figure 1010 as
as an
an example,
example, at
at 2.7
2.7 s,
s, the
the VUT
VUT enters
enters the
the L
L
II braking
braking status.
status.Then,
Then,thetheVUT
VUTenters
entersthe LL
the Ⅱ II
andandLⅢ AEB
L III braking
AEB brakingstatus at 3.1
status s and
at 3.1 3.9
s and
s,
3.9respectively. At the
s, respectively. Atend
the of braking
end at 7.2 at
of braking s, the
7.2 speed of VUTofdecreases
s, the speed to 0. Thetorelative
VUT decreases 0. The
distance is 5.02 m when the VUT stops, the collision between the
relative distance is 5.02 m when the VUT stops, the collision between the VUTVUT and the VT
andisthe
effec-
VT
tively avoided with the AEB control.
is effectively avoided with the AEB control.

4.3.2. CCRm
CCRm Condition
Condition
The parameters
The parametersof ofthe
theCCRm
CCRmcondition
condition are
are setset
as as follows:
follows: the the relative
relative distance
distance is
is 120
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 16
120the
m, m, the initial
initial speed
speed of VUT
of VUT is 80
is 80 km/h,
km/h, and
and thethe
VTVT runsatata aconstant
runs constantspeed
speedofof 32
32 km/h.
km/h.
The HIL testing and SIL testing results in the CCRm condition are are shown
shown inin Figure
Figure 11.
11.

LI LⅡ LI LI LⅡ LI

(a) (b)
Figure 11.
Figure 11. HIL
HIL testing
testing and
and SIL
SIL testing
testing results
results of
of CCRm
CCRm condition:
condition: (a)
(a) speed
speed of
of VUT
VUT and
and acceleration
acceleration
of VUT; (b) relative speed and relative distance.
of VUT; (b) relative speed and relative distance.

Take the HIL testing curve in Figure 11 as an example, at 6.1 s, the VUT enters the L
I AEB braking status. The VUT enters the L Ⅱ AEB braking status at 7.1 s. At 8.8 s, the VUT
returns to the L I AEB status. At the end of braking at 9.8 s, the speed of VUT is consistent
with that of VT. At the end of AEB braking, the relative distance is 11.19 m, and there is
 LI LⅡ LI LI LⅡ LI

(a) (b)
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 508 12 of 15
Figure 11. HIL testing and SIL testing results of CCRm condition: (a) speed of VUT and acceleration
of VUT; (b) relative speed and relative distance.

Take the HIL

Take the HIL testing
testing curve
curve inin Figure
Figure 11
11as
asananexample,
example,atat6.16.1s,s,the
theVUT
VUTenters
entersthetheLLI
IAEB
AEBbraking
brakingstatus.
status.The
TheVUT
VUTenters theLLIIⅡAEB
entersthe AEB braking
braking status
status at
at 7.1
7.1 s.
s. At
At 8.8 s, the VUT
8.8 s, the VUT
returns
returns to the L I AEB status. At the end of braking at 9.8 s, the speed of VUT is
to the L I AEB status. At the end of braking at 9.8 s, the speed of VUT is consistent
consistent
with that of
with that of VT.
VT.At Atthe
theend
endofofAEB
AEBbraking,
braking,the
therelative
relative distance
distance is is 11.19
11.19 m,m,
andand there
there is
is no
no collision
collision between
between thethe
VUTVUT
andandthethe
VT.VT.

4.3.3. CCRb
CCRb Condition
Condition
The
The parameters of of the
the CCRb
CCRbcondition
conditionare areset
setasasfollows:
follows:the
the relative
relative distance
distance is 30
is 30 m,
thethe
m, initial speed
initial of VUT
speed andand
of VUT the initial speed
the initial of VT
speed ofare
VTboth 80 km/h,
are both and the
80 km/h, andVTtheoperates
VT op-
at an acceleration
erates of −3 m/s
at an acceleration of 2−3
. The
m/sHIL
2. Thetesting and SILand
HIL testing testing
SILresults
testinginresults
the CCRb condition
in the CCRb
are shownare
condition in Figure
shown 12.
in Figure 12.

LⅡ LⅢ LⅡ LⅡ LⅢ LⅡ

(a) (b)
Figure
Figure 12.
12. HIL
HIL testing
testing and
and SIL
SIL testing
testing results
results of
of CCRb
CCRb condition:
condition: (a)
(a) speed
speed of
of VUT
VUT and
and acceleration
acceleration
of VUT; (b) relative speed and relative distance.
of VUT; (b) relative speed and relative distance.

Take
Take the
the HIL
HIL testing
testingcurve
curveininFigure
Figure1212asasananexample,
example,thethe
relative speed
relative reaches
speed 24
reaches
km/h
24 km/hat 2.3
ats,2.3
and the VUT
s, and startsstarts
the VUT braking. Then,Then,
braking. the TTC thevalue
TTC rapidly decreases
value rapidly to below
decreases to
2.25
belows, 2.25
and s,the
andVUT the directly entersenters
VUT directly Ⅱ AEB
the Lthe braking
L II AEB status.
braking As the
status. VT VT
As the continues
continuesto
decelerate,
to decelerate,the the
collision riskrisk
collision continues to increase,
continues and the
to increase, andVUT entersenters
the VUT Ⅲ AEB
the L the L IIIbrak-
AEB
ing status at 3.4 s. At the end of the braking at 7.4 s, the speed of VUT and the
braking status at 3.4 s. At the end of the braking at 7.4 s, the speed of VUT and the speed speed of VT
both
of VTdecrease to 0. During
both decrease the braking
to 0. During process,process,
the braking the minimum relative relative
the minimum distancedistance
is 5.11 m,is
and
5.11 there
m, and is there
no collision betweenbetween
is no collision the VUTthe and
VUTthe and
VT. the VT.

Discussion
5. Discussion
Based on the
Based theproposed
proposedverification
verificationsystem, anan
system, AEB hierarchical
AEB control
hierarchical algorithm
control was
algorithm
tested.
was Under
tested. the test
Under theconditions of CCRs,
test conditions CCRm,
of CCRs, and CCRb,
CCRm, the AEB
and CCRb, thehierarchical control
AEB hierarchical
algorithm
control can keepcan
algorithm thekeep
relative
the distance
relative between
distance the VUT and
between the VT
the VUT within
and a safe
the VT range,
within a
successfully avoiding vehicle collisions, which proves the effectiveness of the algorithm.
However, when the AEB braking of the VUT ends, the relative distance between the VUT
and the VT is large, which indicates that the AEB hierarchical control algorithm can be
further optimized to avoid AEB triggering prematurely.
The SIL testing results of the AEB hierarchical control algorithm are similar to the HIL
testing results, but the specific values are different. The acceleration establishment time is
defined as the time when the VUT reaches the target deceleration minus the time when the
braking level is switched. The delay time is defined as the HIL acceleration establishment
time minus the SIL acceleration establishment time. As shown in Figures 10–12, under
each test condition, the AEB braking level of the VUT has been switched four times. The
delay time of each braking level switching under the CCRs condition is 0.3 s, 0.3 s, 0.1 s,
and −0.1 s. The delay time of each braking level switching under the CCRm condition is
0.2 s, 0.2 s, 0.3 s, and 0.3 s. The delay time of each braking level switching under the CCRb
condition is 0.1 s, 0 s, 0.2 s, and 0 s. The average time delay of each braking level switching
under three test conditions is 0.16 s. The braking delay of HIL testing is mainly caused by
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 508 13 of 15

the characteristics of the pneumatic braking system, including the mechanical action time
and the time of establishing and releasing braking pressure. The existence of braking delay
will affect vehicle operation and AEB decision-making.
The relative distance is an important observation parameter to verify the AEB con-
trol algorithm, which can be used to evaluate the anti-collision effect and safety margin.
Equation (5) is used to evaluate the relative deviation value of the relative distance:

De = |drs − drh | (5)

where De is the relative deviation of the relative distance between SIL testing and HIL
testing; drs is the relative distance in SIL testing; drh is the relative distance in HIL testing.
Under CCRs and CCRb conditions, the relative deviation of VUT at rest is 1.2 m and
0.6 m, respectively. Under the CCRm condition, when the speed of VUT is consistent with
that of VT, the relative deviation is 3.3 m. The average relative deviation under the three
test conditions is only 1.7 m, indicating that the SIL testing result is close to the HIL testing
result. However, the control and optimization of relative distance should consider the
influence of this factor.
When the verification system and test scenarios are established, the time required for
SIL testing or HIL testing is defined as a single test time, which is expressed as:

TA = t1 + t2 + t3 + t4 (6)

where TA is the single test time; t1 is the establishment time of the data interface; t2 is
the parameter adjustment and compilation time; t3 is the simulation time; t4 is the data
collection time.
Taking the verification process in Chapter IV as an example, the operations in Equation (6)
were repeated 5 times. Typical time values of each stage are shown in Table 6. The data in
Table 6 is the sum of the test time of the three test conditions.

Table 6. Typical values of test time.

Test t1 /s t2 /s t3 /s t4 /s
SIL 89 40 54 45
HIL 146 74 54 45

Table 6 shows that the single test time for SIL testing of the AEB hierarchical control
algorithm is 228 s, and the single test time for HIL testing is 319 s. Note that the single test
time does not include the time to verify the system construction and debugging.
Based on the above reasons, we suggest that when the AEB control algorithm needs to
be modified repeatedly or the test scenario needs to be updated continuously, SIL testing is
preferred. HIL testing is more suitable for AEB control algorithm verification. For example,
when relative distance is used as the control parameter, the HIL testing results have higher
confidence. If conditions permit, it is recommended to compare and verify SIL testing and
HIL testing to improve reliability.

6. Conclusions
In order to quickly verify the AEB control algorithm for passenger cars, the working
mechanism of the AEB system and the verification requirements of the AEB control method
were analyzed, and a scheme of the AEB verification system for passenger cars was pro-
posed. The dynamic pressure regulation performance of the pneumatic braking system
was verified. The passenger car simulation parameters are configured, and the passenger
car AEB verification system including the IPG simulation platform, dSPACE controller,
and pneumatic braking bench is built. The verification system can provide SIL testing and
HIL testing methods for AEB control algorithm verification, and provide a platform for the
development of passenger car AEB controllers.
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 508 14 of 15

The HIL and SIL comparison tests of the AEB hierarchical control algorithm under
typical test conditions verified the effectiveness of the proposed algorithm. In the test
results, the SIL curve and the HIL curve have high consistency, and the average relative
deviation is only 1.7 m. Without considering the time of building and debugging the
verification system, the single test time of SIL testing is 228 s, and the single test time of
HIL testing is 319 s. It is recommended to adopt SIL testing when verifying the function
of the AEB control algorithm. If there is a higher requirement for accuracy, HIL testing
is preferred.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, J.X.; methodology, L.L. and R.Z.; software, L.L. and F.D.;
data curation, L.L., R.Z. and F.D.; writing—original draft preparation, L.L. and R.Z.; writing—review
and editing, J.X. and G.L.; visualization, J.X. and L.L.; project administration, G.L.; funding acquisition,
J.X. and G.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by the Key Research and Development Program of Hubei
Province of China, grant number YFXM2022000405 and 2022BEC014.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: The study did not report any data.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. National Bureau of Statistics. China Statistical Yearbook; China Statistics Press: Beijing, China, 2021.
2. Ren, Y.; Li, J.; Yan, G.; Wang, W.; Liu, X.; Zhang, J. Modeling of the Chinese driver’s braking behavior in the simulated traffic
scene of rear-end collision avoidance. IET Conf. Proc. 2011, 92–97. [CrossRef]
3. Fildes, B.; Keall, M.; Bos, N.; Lie, A.; Page, Y.; Pastor, C.; Pennisi, L.; Rizzi, M.; Thomas, P.; Tingvall, C. Effectiveness of low speed
autonomous emergency braking in real-world rear-end crashes. Accid. Anal. Prev. 2015, 81, 24–29. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
4. Hu, L.; Li, H.; Yi, P.; Huang, J.; Lin, M.; Wang, H. Investigation on AEB Key Parameters for Improving Car to Two-Wheeler
Collision Safety Using In-Depth Traffic Accident Data. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 2022, 1–16. [CrossRef]
5. Belgiovane, D.J.; Chen, C.C.; Chien, S.Y.P.; Sherony, R. Surrogate Bicycle Design for Millimeter-Wave Automotive Radar Pre-
Collision Testing. IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst. 2017, 18, 2413–2422. [CrossRef]
6. Choi, Y.; Baek, S.; Kim, C.; Yoon, J.; Lee, S.M. Simulation of AEBS Applicability by Changing Radar Detection Angle. Appl. Sci.
2021, 11, 2305. [CrossRef]
7. Xique, I.J.; Buller, W.; Fard, Z.B.; Dennis, E.; Hart, B. Evaluating Complementary Strengths and Weaknesses of ADAS Sensors. In
Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE 88th Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC-Fall), Chicago, IL, USA, 27–30 August 2018; pp. 1–5.
8. Stöckle, C.; Utschick, W.; Herrmann, S.; Dirndorfer, T. Robust Function and Sensor Design Considering Sensor Measurement
Errors Applied to Automatic Emergency Braking. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV), Paris,
France, 9–12 June 2019; pp. 2284–2290.
9. Niu, W. A Petri Net Based Model for AEB Systems Considering Vehicle and Pedestrian/Cyclist in a Certain Area. Ph.D. Thesis,
Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA, 2017.
10. Yang, W.; Liu, J.; Zhou, K.; Zhang, Z.; Qu, X. An Automatic Emergency Braking Model considering Driver’s Intention Recognition
of the Front Vehicle. J. Adv. Transport. 2020, 2020, 5172305. [CrossRef]
11. Alsuwian, T.; Saeed, R.B.; Amin, A.A. Autonomous Vehicle with Emergency Braking Algorithm Based on Multi-Sensor Fusion
and Super Twisting Speed Controller. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 8458. [CrossRef]
12. Zhang, R.; Li, K.; He, Z.; Wang, H.; You, F. Advanced Emergency Braking Control Based on a Nonlinear Model Predictive
Algorithm for Intelligent Vehicles. Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 504. [CrossRef]
13. Schratter, M.; Bouton, M.; Kochenderfer, M.J.; Watzenig, D. Pedestrian Collision Avoidance System for Scenarios with Occlusions.
In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV), Paris, France, 9–12 June 2019; pp. 1054–1060.
14. Shin, S.G.; Ahn, D.R.; Baek, Y.S.; Lee, H.K. Adaptive AEB Control Strategy for Collision Avoidance Including Rear Vehicles. In
Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE Intelligent Transportation Systems Conference (ITSC), Auckland, New Zealand, 27–30 October 2019;
pp. 2872–2878.
15. Park, M.K.; Lee, S.Y.; Kwon, C.K.; Kim, S.W. Design of Pedestrian Target Selection With Funnel Map for Pedestrian AEB System.
IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 2017, 66, 3597–3609. [CrossRef]
16. Song, Z.; Cao, L.; Chou, C.C. Development of Test Equipment for Pedestrian-Automatic Emergency Braking Based on C-NCAP
(2018). Sensors 2020, 20, 6206. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
17. Schulze, T.; Stavesand, J.-E. Hardware-in-the-Loop Test Process for Modern E/E Systems. In Proceedings of the Simulation and
Testing for Vehicle Technology, Berlin, Germany, 12–13 May 2016; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2016; pp. 343–360. [CrossRef]
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 508 15 of 15

18. Yuan, Y.; Zhang, J.; Li, Y.; Lv, C. Regenerative brake-by-wire system development and hardware-in-loop test for autonomous
electrified vehicle. In Proceedings of the SAE World Congress Experience, Detroit, MI, USA, 4–6 April 2017. [CrossRef]
19. Cheng, S.; Li, L.; Guo, H.Q.; Chen, Z.G.; Song, P. Longitudinal Collision Avoidance and Lateral Stability Adaptive Control System
Based on MPC of Autonomous Vehicles. IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst. 2020, 21, 2376–2385. [CrossRef]
20. Zhang, N.; Wang, J.; Li, Z.; Li, S.; Ding, H. Multi-Agent-Based Coordinated Control of ABS and AFS for Distributed Drive Electric
Vehicles. Energies 2022, 15, 1919. [CrossRef]
21. Solmaz, S.; Holzinger, F. A Novel Testbench for Development, Calibration and Functional Testing of ADAS/AD Functions. In
Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE International Conference on Connected Vehicles and Expo (ICCVE), Graz, Austria, 4–8 November
2019; pp. 1–8.
22. Schyr, C.; Inoue, H.; Nakaoka, Y. Vehicle-in-the-Loop Testing—A Comparative Study for Efficient Validation of ADAS/AD
Functions. In Proceedings of the 2022 International Conference on Connected Vehicle and Expo (ICCVE), Lakeland, FL, USA, 7–9
March 2022; pp. 1–8.
23. Wang, F.; Peng, Q.; Zang, X.; Xue, Q. Adaptive Cruise Control for Intelligent City Bus Based on Vehicle Mass and Road Slope
Estimation. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 12137. [CrossRef]
24. Bours, R.; Rauf, K.; Kietlinski, K. A method for developing aeb systems based on integration of virtual and experimental tools. In
Proceedings of the 23rd International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles (ESV) National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, Yokohama, Japan, 3–6 April 2013.
25. You, M.; Zhang, J.; Sun, D.; Gou, J. Characteristics analysis and control study of a pneumatic proportional valve. In Proceedings
of the 2015 IEEE Advanced Information Technology, Electronic and Automation Control Conference (IAEAC), Chongqing, China,
19–20 December 2015; pp. 242–247.
26. Chen, Y.L.; Shen, K.Y.; Wang, S.C. Forward collision warning system considering both time-to-collision and safety braking
distance. In Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE 8th Conference on Industrial Electronics and Applications (ICIEA), Melbourne,
Australia, 19–21 June 2013; pp. 972–977.
27. Mitschke, M.; Wallentowitz, H. Dynamik der Kraftfahrzeuge; Springer: Berlin/Heidenberg, Germany, 2004.
28. Zhang, M.; Li, N.; Girard, A.; Kolmanovsky, I. A Finite State Machine Based Automated Driving Controller and its Stochastic
Optimization. In Proceedings of the ASME Dynamic Systems and Control Conference, Tysons, VA, USA, 11–13 October 2017;
American Society of Mechanical Engineers: New York, NY, USA, 2017; p. V002T007A002.
29. Makishita, H.; Matsunaga, K. Differences of drivers’ reaction times according to age and mental workload. Accid. Anal. Prev.
2008, 40, 567–575. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
30. GB/T 33577–2017; Intelligent Transportation Systems-Forward Vehicle Collision Warning Systems-Performance Requirements
and Test Procedures. Standards Press of China: Beijing, China, 2017.
31. GB/T 38186–2019; Performance Requirements and Test Methods for Advanced Emergency Braking System (AEBS) of Commercial
Vehicles. Standards Press of China: Beijing, China, 2019.

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.