Int. J. Vehicle Safety, Vol. 4, No.

4, 2009 315

Rollover stabilisation in electric vehicles

Richa Bansal*, Tushar Sharma and

Sudipto Mukherjee
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Indian Institute of Technology,
Huaz Khas, New Delhi 110016, India
E-mail: bansalr10@gmail.com
E-mail: tusharsharma.iitd@gmail.com
E-mail: sudipto@mech.iitd.ac.in
*Corresponding author

Abstract: Rollover is conventionally resisted in vehicles through passive

design techniques like low CG height to wheel-base ratio and some suspension
design principles. Of late, active traction and suspension control have been
suggested to limit rollover instances. The automobile trajectory is defined by
rigid body kinematics once rollover is initiated. Since a rollover incidence,
from wheel lift off to impact takes as much as 3 sec, the possibility of rollover
prevention by actuating the independent in-wheel motors in electric vehicles is
investigated. The necessary motor orientation and torque to control the rollover
of airborne vehicle are determined. A vehicle solver (VS) code is developed in
CarSim which puts a rollover stabilisation system in effect as soon as the
wheels lift off the ground. Simulation results show that mild to medium vehicle
rollovers can be prevented when a stabilising angular momentum is provided
by rotating the axis of the airborne wheels.

Keywords: electric vehicles; rollover; rollover stabilisation; in-wheel motors;

airborne vehicle; vehicle lift off; Robot Wheels; gyroscopic effect; COM;
centre of mass; active intervention techniques; active torque control; safety.

Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Bansal, R., Sharma, T. and
Mukherjee, S. (2009) ‘Rollover stabilisation in electric vehicles’, Int. J. Vehicle
Safety, Vol. 4, No. 4, pp.315–329.

1 Introduction

The number of electric motor vehicles is rapidly rising with increasing attention towards
environment issues. The development of fuel cells and small electric motors suitable for
passenger cars is accelerating the trend. Electric vehicles with in-wheel motors have the
potential for advanced vehicle motion control and hence increased vehicle safety. The
vehicles with in-wheel motors can use the individualised control of wheel torque and
orientation to achieve efficient and stable driving condition. Establishing a method to
determine the necessary stabilising torque and controlling the vehicle with the target
torque are important parameters which need to be determined to improve the vehicle
performance.

Copyright © 2009 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.

316 R. Bansal, T. Sharma and S. Mukherjee

Rollover stabilisation in this study refers to inhibiting the body rollover after two
wheels of the vehicle have become airborne during motion. Classically, the strategy to
prevent vehicle rollover has been limit to rollover initiation (Eger and Kiencke, 2003;
Myers, 2008; Solmaz et al., 2006). Extensive research has been done in rollover
prevention through active suspension control (Eech, 2000; Yang and Liu, 2003) and
active roll-bar techniques (Eech, 2000; Konik et al., 2000; Lin et al., 1993). Recent
research is being done in preventing rollover by active steering control (Ackermann et al.,
1999; Furleigh et al., 1988). Shim et al. (2008) also investigates the possibility of using
active steering and wheel torque control on the wheels which remain in contact to assist
drivers in avoiding vehicle rollovers in emergency situations. The effectiveness of
steering control alone and the combination of steering/wheel torque control in recovery
from an potentially unstable roll condition have been demonstrated through CARSIM
simulation of both low and high vehicle speeds.
In this conceptual study, we explore the possibility of rollover stabilisation by active
torque control of the ‘free wheels’ after the vehicle has lifted off the ground. Since a
rollover incidence from wheel lift off to impact takes as much as 3 sec (in case of mild
rollovers), there is a possibility of active intervention to stabilise the vehicle by actuating
the motors attached to the airborne wheels. By having independent motors for each
wheel, it is possible in electric vehicles to operate each of the four wheels at different
torques and to control their rotation about the yaw axis, the net effect resulting in rollover
stabilisation of the vehicle.
In the present study, rollover stabilisation is investigated through three possibilities:
using the gyroscopic principle which can be provided by increasing the spin of the two
airborne wheels of the vehicle; providing a stabilising torque by spinning a longitudinal
rotating shaft attached to the vehicle parallel to its wheelbase and by changing the
orientation of the axis of rotation of the two airborne wheels. The vehicle specifications
of the Mitsubishi electric vehicle (MIEV) used for this study are given in the Appendix.

2 Objective

The intent of the study is to investigate the possibility of rollover mitigation once the
vehicle is airborne. The preferred method discussed is that of the effect of changing the
orientation of the airborne wheels between vehicle lift off and impact, for different
rollover scenarios. The estimated benefits are, thereafter, validated through vehicle
simulations on CarSim and a vehicle solver (VS) Code is generated to test the
stabilisation mechanism.

3 Literature review

3.1 Types of rollover

Rollovers are caused by turning too sharply while moving at high velocity or due to
sideways force on the tire from road features. Rollover can also occur as a vehicle crosses
a ditch or barrier during sideways slip. Such an event can also be triggered by a sudden
turn to avoid a collision, or a loss of traction on water or ice. This accounts for almost
80% of rollover cases (Chou et al., 2005; Roper, 2001). These two causes were
 Rollover stabilisation in electric vehicles 317

investigated for both mild and severe rollovers. The vehicle achieves roll rate of
150 deg sec1 in mild rollover to over 160 deg sec1 for more dynamic rollovers (Marur
and Namdeo, 2007). In severe rollover events, the vehicle may become airborne and roll
rapidly enough to bring the rollover-protection devices into direct impact with the
ground, hence rendering them useless (UMTRI Final Report, 1998).

3.2 Robot Wheels

Robot Wheel is a modular system of units that can drive, brake, steer and suspend an
electric vehicle (Figure 1). These units are referred to as ‘Robot Wheels’ because they are
autonomous elements that can be connected to any electric vehicle chassis. Each unit
includes an electric motor, a steering element, a suspension arm and a connector and the
whole system can fit inside a typical vehicle wheel. The Robot Wheels can be steered
independently up to 180q along the yaw axis (Mitchell and Schmitt, 2007). This property
of Robot Wheels is used in the study as one of the potential methods for rollover
stabilisation.

Figure 1 Robot wheel

Source: Mitchell and Schmitt (2007).

318 R. Bansal, T. Sharma and S. Mukherjee

4 Proposed rollover stabilisation systems

Three methods for rollover stabilisation of airborne vehicle are suggested. In the first
mechanism, gyroscopic effect is generated by spinning up the two airborne wheels.
However, this mechanism is effective only in controlling rollover in the case where the
vehicle is manoeuvring a sharp turn. Such a scenario is shown in Figure 2. The
gyroscopic turning moment Wy = mr2wheel Zx Zz is orthogonal to the spin axis of the wheel
Ȧx and axis of rotation Ȧz of the car. The critical sliding velocity for rollover while
manoeuvring the turn is given by:

M car v 2 h b 2
M car g  mrwheelZ xZ z
r1 2

where v is the critical sliding velocity, b is the track width and r1 is the minimum radius
of turn at that speed.
This method cannot be used for vehicle stabilisation in cases of sideways slip, as
gyroscopic moment necessary to control the Ȧy roll cannot be generated by simply
spinning up the wheel. Also, the percentage change obtained in the minimum radius of
turn for different critical speeds in case of over steering is quite small (Figure 3).
The second mechanism proposed has shafts running along the longitudinal axis of the
vehicle (Figure 4). For this mechanism, even though it is possible to obtain a large
change in the critical radius of turn and the critical sliding velocity after engaging the
mechanism is significantly high (Figure 5), the on-board shaft mass required is a
significant portion of the sprung mass and hence detrimental to the quality of ride of the
vehicle.

Figure 2 Vehicle while turning around a corner

 Rollover stabilisation in electric vehicles 319

Figure 3 Percentage change in Rmin with increase in velocity

Figure 4 Model of a vehicle with shafts on the side

320 R. Bansal, T. Sharma and S. Mukherjee

Figure 5 Percentage change in critical sliding velocity of vehicle with mass of the shaft

4.1 Rollover stabilisation by changing the orientation of wheel axis

In the third concept that is investigated, the orientation of the rotational axis of the
airborne wheels is changed. The resulting torque opposes the roll, thus stabilising the
vehicle. We will refer to it as the active intervention technique. The feasibility of this
concept is based on the design of Robot Wheel (Mitchell and Schmitt, 2007), which when
attached to the vehicle, can be independently manoeuvred and also rotated freely about
the yaw axis. The application of this method will become more practical and feasible
with advance in in-wheel motors and 4-Wheel Drive technologies.
The angular momentum provided by the wheel (when turned by an angle ș) in the roll
direction is computed as follows. Coordinate systems xyz and ijk with the origin at O
(Figure 6) are attached to the wheel and the vehicle body, respectively; and coordinate
system XYZ with origin at Q is fixed on a mass less extension of the wheel at a distance
of b/2 and height h equal to the COM of the vehicle.
The principle moments of inertia are given by:
1 2 1
I xx
2
mr and I yy I zz
12

m 3r 2  t 2 
where m represents the mass of the wheel, r is the radius and t is the thickness of the
wheel.
 Rollover stabilisation in electric vehicles 321

The following formulae are used to transform the moment of inertia from xyz
coordinate system to ijk coordinate system:

Figure 6 Wheel orientations in the suggested stabilisation mechanism

The principal moments of inertia are given by:

I pq  I xx a px aqx  I xy a px aqy  I xz a px aqz
 I yx a py aqx  I yy a py aqy  I yz a py aqz
 I zx a pz aqx  I zy a pz aqy  I zz a pz aqz
322 R. Bansal, T. Sharma and S. Mukherjee

apx represents the direction cosine between the p and x directions, apy represents the
direction cosine between the p and y directions, etc.; where p = i, j, k and q = i, j, k.
Using these two relations, Iijk is found to be as follows:
ª I xx cos 2 T  I yy sin 2 T
«
 
 I xx  I yy sin T cos T 0º
»
Iijk
«
 xx yy 
«  I  I sin T cos T I xx cos 2 T  I yy sin 2 T 0»
»
« 0 0 I zz »
¬ ¼
IXYZ is obtained by translating Iijk to the coordinate system XYZ, using the parallel axis
theorem:
I XYZ I CM of wheel  I transformation

ª I xx cos 2 T  I yy sin 2 T
«
 
 I xx  I yy sin T cos T 0º
»
I XYZ
«

xx yy 
«  I  I sin T cos T I xx cos 2 T  I yy sin 2 T 0»
»
« 0 0 I zz »
¬ ¼

«

ª m y02  z02  -m( x0 y0 ) -m( x0 z0 ) º
»
 «« -m( y0 x0 ) 
m z02  x02  -m( y0 z0 ) »»
« »
¬«
-m( z0 x0 ) -m( z0 y0 ) 
m x02  y02 »
¼ 
where x0 (b / 2) , y0 (h  r ), z0 (W / 2) , W wheel base, b track / 2, and
h height of COM .
For the other airborne wheel, z0 (W / 2), x0 and y0 being the same.
&
The angular velocity of the wheel w.r.t. point Q is Zwheel Zwheel cos T iˆ  Zwheel sin T ˆj
.
The angular momentum of the wheels, about point Q is defined as follows:
(H ) X I XX Z X  I XY Z Y  I XZ ZZ
( H )Y  I XY Z X  I YY Z Y  IYZ ZZ
( H )Z  I XZ Z X  I ZY Z Y  I ZZ ZZ

Using the above equations, the angular momentum of the wheel in roll direction, about
the axis passing through the centre of mass of the vehicle is given by:

HY  
Zwheel cos T ª¬ I xx  I yy cos T sin T  mx0 y0 º¼

  
 Zwheel sin T ª I xx cos 2 T  I yy sin 2 T  m z02  x02 º
¬ ¼ 
The moment that is provided at the centre of mass of the vehicle by the rate of change of
HY is given by:
 Rollover stabilisation in electric vehicles 323

MY H Y
¬  
ZwheelT ª mx0 y0 sin T  m z02  x02 cos T  4 I xx cos T sin 2 T

 2 I xx cos3 T  I yy cos T @
This moment available at the COM of the vehicle can be doubled by using both airborne
wheels.
The stabilising moment at the COM of the vehicle is directly proportional to the spin
rate of the wheel. The maximum speed at which the wheel can be spun was taken to be
1,500 rpm, as limited by the specifications of the in-wheel motors. Also, the stabilising
moment produced is proportional to the rate of change of the wheel axis and the higher is
this rate, higher is the moment produced. Unlike the wheel spin, change of wheel axis is
limited and as it reaches the extreme position, the rate of turning perforce becomes zero
and so does the applied moment. Hence, the rate of change of the wheel axis has to be
optimised for efficacy.

5 Results

5.1 CarSim simulations

The active intervention technique was simulated using CarSim 7.1b (Mechanical
Simulation Corporation, 2008), which is a software package for simulating and analysing
the behaviour of four-wheeled vehicles in response to steering, braking and acceleration
inputs. It produces the same kind of outputs that might be measured with physical tests
involving instrumented vehicles. A vehicle model based on the specifications of
Mitsubishi MIEV was created and rollover conditions were simulated. The stabilisation
mechanism was then tested by developing a VS Code in CarSim.
For the simulated rollovers, the airborne wheels were spun up to a maximum of either
1,000 or 1,500 rpm. The time taken by the vehicle to roll over for different initial roll
rates was estimated. This time was used to estimate the rate at which the airborne wheels
may be turned. A lag of 0.2 sec was taken to account for rollover initiation sensing delay
and to switch to evasive measures. It was found from simulations that a vehicle of MIEV
specifications would roll over for initial roll rate of around 160 deg sec1. At this roll rate,
the vehicle took 2.72 sec for the CG to come over the support line which would lead to a
complete rollover.
With increase in the initial roll rate, the time available for application of this moment
decreases (Figure 7). The same was validated by the vehicle simulations and the average
moment that must be applied at the COM of the vehicle to prevent it from rollover is
shown in Figure 8. As expected, larger moments need to be applied to stabilise the
vehicle for higher roll rates. It is assumed that the moment is uniform over the available
actuation interval which is calculated by deducting 0.2 sec from the time the vehicle takes
to rollover.
Combining the analytical results and the simulation results, the following graph
(Figure 9) is obtained to estimate the minimum angle by which the airborne wheels have
to be rotated to prevent vehicle rollover:
324 R. Bansal, T. Sharma and S. Mukherjee

Figure 7 Rollover time vs. initial vehicle roll rate (see online version for colours)

Figure 8 Moment required for stabilisation vs. initial vehicle roll rate (see online version for
colours)
 Rollover stabilisation in electric vehicles 325

Figure 9 Minimum angle of turn of wheel vs. initial roll rate (see online version for colours)

5.2 Vehicle solver code and test runs

After the minimum angle by which the wheels must be turned to prevent rollover is
estimated, simulations were conducted to test the stabilisation mechanism for the vehicle
model for different road conditions and rollover scenarios using the VS.
The stabilisation mechanism gets activated when the reaction forces on the wheels
from the ground on the either side of the vehicle become zero. In simulation, the forces
are sensed by virtual force sensors, which are mounted on the hub of each wheel. The
output of the initial roll rate of the vehicle is used in conjunction of a look up of a table to
find the time available in which the airborne wheels must be spun up and rotated to
prevent the rollover. Following the minimum angle by which the wheels must be turned
to impart the stabilising moment is estimated. To keep a margin for safety, the wheels are
turned 10q more than the minimum value required to generate the necessary stabilising
moment.
This code was run for different situations in which rollover may take place. Two
cases of rollover are described here and the animation screenshots as well as time history
of dynamic variable are shown below. The first case (Figures 10 and 11) simulates
rollover of a vehicle which hits a divider with a high sliding velocity. As the vehicle tires
lift off, the force sensors sense zero reaction force and the stabilising mechanism are
activated. The vehicle is forced back to the ground due to the application of the applied
stabilising moment.
326 R. Bansal, T. Sharma and S. Mukherjee

The second case (Figures 12 and 13) demonstrates vehicle rollover when it
encounters a steep ramp at a high forward velocity on one side, generating a corkscrew
type rollover. Without the stabilising mechanism, the vehicle tilts off the ramp and rolls
over. However, with the stabilisation mechanism, rollover is prevented as the applied
stabilising moment continuously pushes the vehicle back on the ramp as soon as its tyres
lift off the ground.

Figure 10 CarSim 7.1b screen shots for sideways slip, without stabilisation (see online version for
colours)

Figure 11 CarSim 7.1b screen shots for sideways slip, with stabilisation (see online version for
colours)
 Rollover stabilisation in electric vehicles 327

Figure 12 CarSim 7.1b screen shots for rollover on steep ramp, without stabilisation (see online
version for colours)

Figure 13 CarSim 7.1b screen shots for rollover on steep ramp, with stabilisation (see online
version for colours)

6 Discussions and conclusion

Conventionally, rollover is resisted in vehicles by controlling initiation through passive

design techniques like low CG height to wheel-base ratio and some suspension design
principles. Of late active suspension and traction control have been shown to inhibit
initiation of rollover. However, action to inhibit rollover using active electrical modules
while the vehicle is airborne has not been reported before. This study introduces the
concept of rollover prevention by active intervention between wheel lift off and tip over.
Hence, a mechanism is suggested which when actuated, stabilises the airborne vehicle
and prevents it from rolling over by generating a stabilising moment about the roll axis.
When the airborne wheels are turned about the yaw axis as the CG of the vehicle keeps
rising. A VS Code in CarSim is used to demonstrate the working principle for two types
of rollover situations. The stabilisation system can be incorporated in electric vehicles to
328 R. Bansal, T. Sharma and S. Mukherjee

mitigate mild to medium rollovers. It’s feasibility of implementation will increase with
developments in technology and in-wheel motors.

Acknowledgement

The authors would like to acknowledge discussions with P. Marur of GM’s India Science
Lab, Bangalore, India in conceiving the problem.

References
Ackermann, J., Odenthal, D. and Bunte, T. (1999) ‘Advantages of active steering for vehicle
dynamics control’, 32nd International Symposium on Automotive Technology and Automation,
pp.263–270.
Chou, C.C., et al. (2005) ‘A literature review of rollover test methodologies’, Int. J. Vehicle Safety,
Vol. 1, Nos. 1/2/3, pp.200–237.
Eech, I. (2000) ‘Anti-roll and active roll suspensions’, Vehicle System Dynamics, No. 33,
pp.91–106.
Eger, R. and Kiencke, U. (2003) ‘Modelling of rollover sequences’, Control Engineering Practice,
Vol. 11, pp.209–216.
Furleigh, D.D., Vanderploeg, M.J. and Oh, C.Y. (1988) ‘Multiple steered axles for reducing the
rollover risks of heavy articulated trucks’, SAE Paper No. 881866.
Konik, D., Bartz, R., Barnthol, F., Bruns, H. and Wimmer, M. (2000) Dynamic Drive-the New
Active Roll Stabilization System from the BMW Group-System Description and Functional
Improvements, AVEC.
Lin, R.C., Cebon, D. and Cole, D.J. (1993) ‘An investigation of active roll control of heavy road
vehicles’, Proceedings of 14th IAVSD Symposium, pp.308–321.
Marur, P.R. and Namdeo, S. (2007) ‘Techniques for reducing computational time in vehicle
rollover simulations’, Int. J. Vehicle Safety, Vol. 2, No. 4, pp.441–456.
Mitchell, J. and Schmitt, P. (2007) Autonomous and Modular Electric Vehicle Drive, Brake, Steer,
and Suspend Unit. Available at: \\hub\peter\public_html\master_thesis_peter_schmitt.pdf.
Accessed on 2007.
Myers, M.L. (2008) ‘Continuous overturn control of compactors/rollers by rollover protective
structures’, Int. J. Vehicle Safety, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp.45–59.
Roper, L.D. (2001) Physics of Automobile Rollovers. Available at: http://arts.bev.net/roperldavid.
Accessed on March 2001.
Shim, T., Toomey, D., Ghike, C. and Sardar, H.M. (2008) ‘Vehicle rollover recovery using active
steering/wheel torque control’, Int. J. Vehicle Design, Vol. 46, No. 1, pp.51–71.
Solmaz, S., Corless, M. and Shorten, R. (2006) ‘A methodology for the design of robust rollover
prevention controllers for automotive vehicles: Part 2-active steering’, HYCON-CEMaCS
Joint Workshop on Automotive Systems and Control, 1–2 June 2006.
UMTRI Final Report, University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute, Ann Arbor (1998)
The Dynamics of Tank-Vehicle Rollover and the Implications for Rollover-Protection Devices.
Available at: http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov_documents_umtrireport.pdf. Accessed on November
1998.
The Mechanical Simulation Corporation (2008) User’s Manual of CarSim, Version 7.1(b).
Available at: www.carsim.com. Accessed on May 2008.
Yang, H. and Liu, L. (2003) ‘A robust active suspension controller with rollover prevention’, SAE
Paper No. 2003-01-0959.
 Rollover stabilisation in electric vehicles 329

Appendix

Lancer evolution MIEV specifications (Base model: Lancer Evolution IX)

Length 4,490 mm
Width 1,770 mm
Height 1,450 mm
Curb weight 1,590 kg
Seating capacity 5
Max. speed 180 km/hr
Cruising range/charge
(10–15 driving pattern) 250 km
Motor Type Permanent magnetic synchronous
(outer-rotor type)
Maker Toyo Denki Seizo K.K.
Max. output 50 kW
Max. torque 518 N m1
Max. speed 1,500 rpm
Dimensions 445 mm (dia.) u 134 mm
No. fitted 4
Battery system Type Lithium-ion
Maker GS Yuasa Corporation
Capacity 95 Ah
Voltage 14.8 V
LuW u H 388 mm u 175 mm u 116 mm
No. of modules 24
Controller Inverter
Drive 4WD
Tires 255/30ZR20