Proceedings ofthe 41sl WEE
Conference on Decision and Control
Las Vegas, Nevada USA, December 2002
A Nonlinear Tracking Controller for a Haptic Interface
Steer-by-Wire Systems
P. Setlur, D. Dawson, J. Chen, and J. Wagner
Automotive Research Laboratory
Departinonts of Electrical
Clemson University, Clenmon, SC 29634
Abstract:A nonlinear tracking controller is presented
in this paper f o r the haptic interface in steer-by-wire
automotive s y s t e m . Specifically, the controller is de-
signed to ensure that the steering mechanism (i.e., di-
rectional control assembly) follows the operator com-
manded maneuvers a t the driver interface. firther, the
controller provides the driver with tunable force feed-
back, proportional to the m c t i o n forces at the tire-mad
interface, and hence enhances the drivers performance.
The controller ensures that the corresponding tracking
errors are asymptotically forced to z m in the presence
of parametric uncertainity; however, torque measur-
ments are required. An eztension is also presented that
eliminates torque measurements.
1 Introduction
With t,he automot.ive industry research focus shifting t o
hybrid vehicles and steer-by-wire systems in recent, years
(e.g.:[ll]), t,he need for farce feedback systems in vehicles
has gained importance. The importance of force feedback
has been well understood in both t,he automotive and the
teleoperated robotics field. As document,ed in 151, force
feedback is one of the highest. rated inputs t.o the driver
after vision. While force feedback provides the driver with
an invaluable input, excessive feedback results in the need
for large driver forces t.o steer t h e system. Hence, it. is essen-
t.id for the control st.rat,egy to ensure that, t.he road feel
provided by t.he force feedback can be adjust.ed t o provide
a comfort,able driving environment. Many researchers have
worked on establishing a model for the system and perform-
ing experiments t o identify paramet.ers of the syst.ern wit.h
t.be intention of providing simulated farce feedback (151, [12],
121). In 171, detailed models of t.he hydraulic, elect,ric and
steer-by-wire st,eering sysdems have been presented. In [3],
the authors design a fuzzy logic controller for active steering
system that prevents vehicle spin in wet road condit,ions.
In 141, a novel robot control st,rategy is designed t o force
locking bet,ween the primary and secondary system while
ensuring passivity.
In this paper, a full state feedback controller is designed
t o force locking and provide the desired feedback. The
design is motivated by the impedance cont.ro1 concept. (81
This work is m p p r t , e d in part, hy t.he U.S.NSF Grant. DMI-
g c m 6 7 , DMI-9813213, ONR. Grant ~nnnii-99-1-n589,R DOC
Grant, and RU Automotive Research Center GrRnt, suported by
the U. S. Army Tank Autoinatim Coinmand.
0-7803-7516-5/02/$17.00 02002 IEEE
ThM10-6
1 Compnt,er and Mcchanicnl Engineering
in which a target. system is used t o geuerate the reference
signal far the primary system. The controller adapts for
parametric uncertainties in t,he system while ensuring global
asymptotic tracking far the driver experience error* and
t,he locked error; however, torque measurement8 are re-
quirement. To eliminate torque measurements, we leverage
Gff a recent, idea found in [IO]t,o develop torque observers for
the design of an exact model knowledge tracking controller.
T h e controller ensures that, the torque observation error
converges asympt,otically t o zero while also ensuring global
asymptot,ic tracking for the driver experience error and the
locked error. Roughly speaking, t,he torque observer design
borrows concepts from robust, control techniques that. only
imposes boundedness and smoothness rest,rictions on t.he
unmeasurable torque signals.
T h e paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, the cont.rol
objectives are stated. In Section 3, t.he system model for
the steering system along with the target. signal generat.or
is present.ed followed by t,he open-loop tracking dynamics.
In Section 4, the design of t.he proposed adaptive, t,racking
controller is presnntPd dong wit.h t.he corresponding closod-
loup error system. The st.ability analysis is given ia Section
5. In Section 6, t.he cont,roller is redesigned t o get. an exact
model knowledge tracking cont,roller,that. eliminates torque
measurements. Concluding remarks are presented in Sec-
tion 7.
2 Problem Statement
T h e control objective for the steer-by-wire hapt.ic interface
problem is twofold. First, it is necessary t o ensure t.hat
driver steering angle commands are accurately followed;
hence, it is required that tlre torque cuntrol input provided
by t h e driver mot.or be designed to ensure that, the angu-
lar position of the direct,ional control assembly accurately
t.racks the driver commanded input. Secondly, it is essen-
tial t.o provide the driver wit.h a realistic virt,ual driving
experience. To this end, a reference model, or target dy-
namics for the driver input. device, is designed t,o genernt,e
t,lie desired angular posit,ion of tlie driver input device. The
control torque, provided by the feedback motor is designed
t o ensure that. the response of the driver input. device follows
that of the reference syst.em.
3 Dynamic Model Development
Detailed models for conventional and power assist st,eering
systems can be found in previous research papers in t,his
3112
area [7],[9]. The st,eer-by-wire system involves the removal
of the st,eering column present in a conventional st.eering
system and the introduction of t.wo servo motors. The steer-
ing system is thus separated int,o t,wo subsystems. The first
subsystem, referred to as the primary system, consists ofthe
driver input device (e.g., st,eering wheel ) and a servo motor
t o provide the driver with force feedback. The second sub-
system, referred t o as the secondary subsystem, consists of
the.directiona.1 control assembly (e.g., rack and pinion sys-
tem) and a servo motor that provides the necessary torque
input t.o drive t,his assembly (and hence steer t.he vehicle).
3.1 M o d e l Formulation
The det.ailed dynamics of the steering system, as presented
in [i],
may be written in a simplified form as follows
1181+ N I (si,81) = a ~ +rT I~
1282 + (s,,&)
N 2 = azrz + Tz
where 0 , ( t ) , O,(t), & ( t ) E W' denote the angular posit,ion,
velocity, and acceleration, respectively, of the driver input
device, I , , Iz E R'denate the inertias of the driver input
device and the vehicle direcdional control assembly, respec-
tively. N,(o,,&) E 8' is an auxiliary nonlinear function
t.hat is used to described t,he dynamics on the driver side,
r l ( t ) E W' denotes t.he driver input torque, n ( t ) E 91'
denotes a can!rol input torque applied to the driver input
device, 0,(t)>&(t), 0 2 ( t ) E R' denote the angular position,
velocity, and accelerat.ion, respect.iaely, of the vehicle direc-
tional control assembly, Nz (s,,&) E W' is an auxiliary
nonlinear function that. is used t,o described the dynam-
ics of the vehicle directional cont,rol assembly, r 2 ( t ) E W'
denotes the reaction torque between the .mt.uator on the
direct.iona1 control assembly and mechanical subsystem ac-
tuat,ed by l.he direct,ional cont.ro1 assembly, and TZ(t) E W1
denotes B control input. t,orque applied to the direcrional
cont,rol assembly. The const.ant,s 0 1 r a 2 E $3' are scaling
factors t,hat could arise due to gearing in t.he system.
Remark 1 The damping and friction effects modeled b y
N I(.) and N2 (.) are assumed to be lzneorly parometerirable
N2 (s,,&) =Y N (&,&)
~ bN2.
where Y m (.) E PX*, Y h (.) E R ' x * ~regression
~ ma-
trices containing the measurable signals, and ddV, PXlI
r$,v2 E Wqx' are c0nstan.t matrices containing the unknown
parameters in the modelNI (.) and Nz (.). Further, it is also
asrimed that if 81 ( t ) ,@I ( t ) E C- then. N I
( ' ) E C-
R1,01
EL-.
a n d i j 8 2 ( t ) , & ( t ) E C m thenNz
( ')
R2,&
3.2 Reference Model Development
As mentiuned in Section 2. one cunt.rol objective is to pra-
vide the driver with a "feel" fur the road. To this end, some
concepts associated with impedance control concept 18)used
oft.en for robot manipulator position/force control problems
have been borrowed. Specifically, a reference model, or t,he
t.arget. dynamics for t,he driver input device, is designed as
fullows
IT8dl + NT ( s d 1 , b d I ) = QTlTl f aT272 (3)
where Q d , ( t ) . 6,1(t),$ d I ( t ) E W' denote the desired angu-
lar position, velocity, and acceleration, respectively, of the
driver input, device, NT o d l . 8 d l E 8' denotes an auxil-
(
iary target dynamic function for the driver input device,
and Q T I , am E 92' are scaling constants. The structure for
(3) is motivated by the following observation. If a ( t ) wm
exactly equal t o wrz(t) in (Z), t,hen the dynamics given
by (1) would give t,he driver a rea,listic driver experience
provided the auxiliary t.erm N I (.) in ( 2 ) could be designed
or const,ruct,ed according to some desirable mechanical re-
sponse. Along this line of reasoning, the NT (.) term in
(1) (3) is designed t o simulate t.he desired driving experience,
and hence, t,he dynamics given by (3) serve as a desired
(2) t,raject,orygenerator for control design purposes for (1).
R e m a r k 2 The target dynamic function NT (.) must be se-
lected to ensure that the desired driver input device tmjec-
tory and its first two derivatives remain bounded ot all time
(i.e., R d i ( t ) ,0.31 (t).o d l ( t ) E Em). For ezampk, suppose
h;. (.) is selected as follows
where B T , KT E 8 ' are some positive design constants.
With NT (.) selected according to (4), s t a n d m i linear argu-
m.en.t.3 can be em.ployed to show that R d l ( t ) ,R d l ( t ) , ( t )E
C-. hrr(.)can also be constrvcted DJ a nonlinear 'tlurnp-
ing" junction b y utilizing Lyapunov type arguments.
3.3 Open-Loop Error System Development
To qnantify the rnisrnat,ch het.wesn the target, syst,ern and
the primary system ( i . e . , the "driver experience tracking
error"), and between the primary and the secondary sys-
tern (i.e., the "locked tracking error"), fibered error signals.,
rl (t), 72 ( t ) $3' are defined as follows
PI = & t plel (5)
~2 = Bz t p2ez (6)
where p l 9 p aE 82' represent posit.ive cant.rol gains, and the
enor signals el (t), e2 ( t ) E W' are defined as
el = 8dl - 81 (7)
e2 = 8, - 02. (8)
After taking the first time derivative of equations (5) and
( 6 ) : and substituting t.he dynamics given in equations ( 1 )
and (2) and the target system given in equation (3); the
open loop error systems for t,he two systems can be writ,ten
1IS f"ll"V.S ,
Ilil = Y I $ -Ti
~ (9)
I& = Y2d2- Tz (10)
where Y,(.) E R"', Yz (.) E $3"' are regression matrices
consisting of measurable quantities, and 4, E W X ' ,b2 E
y p are constant. unknown vectors.
3113
R e m a r k 3 Based on the definition ofrl ( t )and PZ ( t ) given
in equations (5) and (0, standard arguments [l]con be w e d
to p T v e that: (i) i f r l ( t ) , rz ( t ) E L,, then el ( t ) ,e2 ( t ) ,
el ( t ) , 62 ( t ) E L,, and (ii) if TI ( t ) and r2 (t) are asymp-
totically regulated, then el ( t ) and ez ( t ) ore asymptotically
regulated.
4 C o n t r o l Development
P r o o f To prove Theorem 1. a non-negative, scalar func-
tion, denoted by V ( t )E S1,
is defined as follows
After taking the time derivative of equation (20) and mak-
ing the appropriate substitutions from equations (15), (16),
(17), and (18), the following expression is obtained

In light of the error definitions in Section 3.3, the control (21)

objective, is the design of a controller that asymptotically
forces the target follouring and locking t,racking error signals
to zero while adapting for t,he system paramet,ers that are
assumed to be unkown. It is assumed that the signals
B1 ( t ) ,112 ( t ) , ll1 ( t ) ,& ( t ) , r 1 ( t ) ,and rz (t) are available for
measurement. It is also assumed t,hat TI ( t ) ,rz ( t )E L x .
where the fact that ri,r2 are constant diagonal gain ma-
4.1 C o n t r o l Formulation trices has been utilized along with the following equalities.
Based on the subsequent,stability analysis and the struct,ure
of the open-loop error syst.em @Yen in equations (9) and
(lo), the control inputs T, (t) and Tz(t) are now designed
t o he as follows
After cancelling common terms; it is easy to see that we
TI = kiri Yid, + (11) can upper bound V ( t ) as follms
Tz = k2rZ + Yz& (12)
V 5 -klrf - kzr;. (22)
where k l . k z E 32' are constant pasit.ive cont,ral gainsl and
4, (t) E E"', & (t) E X'' are adaptive estimates for the From equat,ions (22) and-(lO), it is straightforward t o see
unknown parameter matrices. The adaptive update laws that TI ( t ) ,rz ( t ) ,d1 ( t ) . & (t) E C ,. After utilizing equa-
are designed based on the subsequent stability analysis as tions (17), (IS), andRemark 3: we can conclude that,el ( t ) ,
e, ( t ) ,e2 ( t ) , Bz ( t ) ,C1( t ) ,d2 ( t ) E f m . Using Remark 2,
equat,ions (7),,(8) and their first derivat,ives: it is clear that
J,= r,YFr, (13)
81 (t),2'6 (t),Qi ( t ) 82 ( t ) E L,. From the explicit defini-
t.ion for Y, (.) and using the fact, t.hat, T I ( t ) ,rz (t) E f,, it
&= r2Y,Tr2 (14) is easy t.o see that Y, (.) E C ,
. From equation ( l l ) , it is
clear that. t,he cont.rol t,orque TI (t) E C ,
. Again, from the
vhere r, E 32"';rl E 32"' are positive constant diagonal
definition of Ya (.) and from t.he above facts, Yz (.) E L,.
gain matrices.
From eqnation (12), it, is clear t.hat, T z ( t ) E L,. Using
standard signal chasing argumeats, it can be shown that all
4.2 Closed-Loop Error System Development the signals in the closed-loop syst,em remain bounded. In
After suhstit.ut.ing the control torques given in equations particular, from equat.ion (15) and (16), i.1 ( t ) , i.2 ( t ) E C,.
(11) and (12) into t,he open-loop dynamics given in qua.- After employing a corollary t o Barhalat's Lemma [ 6 ] ,it is
t.ions (9) and (10) respectively, the closed-loup error system easy t o show t,hat
is obtained and can be written as

Finally, Remark 3 can be used to prove t,he result. st,at.ed in

I2i.2 = -?w3 +K& (16) equation (19).0
?here the parameter estimation error signals. denoted by
d1 (t) E Srx',d2( t )E Sex'are defined as 6 Extension: Elimination of T o r q u e Measurements

In t,his sect,ion, it. is s1ioa.n that for tile system equations

given in (1) and (2): a controller can be designed t.o elim-
inate the need for torque sensom ( i . e . , it is assumed that.
t,he driver input torque, denoted by TI ( t ) ,and the reac-
t,ion t,orque bet,ween t,he act.ustor on the direct.iona1 cont,rol
5 Stability Analysis assembly and mechanical subsystem actuated by the direc-
tional control assembly, denoted by rz (t), are not avail-
T h e o r e m 1 Gwen the closPd-loop system of (15) and (16),
the tmcking ermr szgnols defined zn (7) and (8) we globally able fur meaurement). Fur control design purposes, it as-
sumed that the dynamic model given in (1) and (2) is ex-
asymptoheally regulated zn the seme that
actly known wit.h the exception of t.he torque signals T I (t)
and T Z It). In addition it is assumed that t.he signals 01(t),
lim el (t) , ez ( t ) = 0. (19)
t-m llz (t), Q1 (t), and 6'2 (t) are axcilable for measurement,. To

3114
account, for t.he lack of torque measmment.s, t,he torque ob- where sgn (.) denotes the st.andard signum function, K., p l ,
servation errors, denot.ed by i ,( t ) ,i z ( t ) E P, are defined p, E P are a positive control gains and the auxilary signals
as follows pl ( t ) ,pz (t) E Pare defined as follows
= T I -?I (23)
PI = e l +?,el (32)
72 = 1 2 - i z (24)
where i l (t), i z ( t ) E 32 denote the yet to be designed ob-
m = e2 + Plez (33)
server signals for the driver input torque and the react,ion where P, was int.roduced in (28) and (29). Based on the
subsequent stability analysis, t.he control inputs TI (t) and
t,orque, respect,ively. Thc t,arget. dynamics are now gener-
T2 (t) are designed BS follows
ated as follows
TI = N I (.) -alii (34)
+ +
I T ~ ~NTI (Bdi,Qdi) = ~ T I ~ U
LT Z ~ Z . (25)
+ (2) (-NT(.) + a ~ i ifi a ~ z i z )
R e m a r k 4 It is assumed that the driver input t o q u e TI ( t )
and the reaction torque r2 ( t ) and their first two derivatives Tz = N2 (.) (35)
r ~ m a i nbounded at all times (i.e., 7 1 ( t ) ,i r ( t ) , 71(1): rz ( t ) ,
+(~)(-N~(.)+r,+a,i,)-aziz.
i z ( t ) ,iz ( t ) EL,).

6.1 Open-Loop E r r o r S y s t e m Development R e m a r k 5 To facilitate the subsequent stability analysis,

After t,aking t,wo time derivatives of (7) and (8), and sub- we define the two auxillarg disturbance signals, dmoted
stitul.ing the dynamics given in equat.ions (1) and (?) and by qI ( t ) , q2 (1) E B, os follows
the target dynamics given in equation ( ? 5 ) , t,he open loop
error syst.ems for the two systems can be written as 91 = (3 +- (il (P, + K , + 1) 1 1 ) (36)

BI = (i) (-Ar(.)+a~lil+arziz) (?6) q2 = (2) + (0, +

(i2 K,Z + 1) 7 2 ) . (3i)
Based on Remark4, it is easy to see that7, (t), q2 ( t ) , fi, ( t ) ,
q2 ( t ) E C,. Based o n the definitions of (36) and (U),
the subsequent closed-loop e r o r system deuelopment and the
stability analysLs ore facilitated b y selecting the control gains
p, and p2, intmduced in (30) and (31), as follows

(38)

To simplify further analysis, t,ao filtered tracking error sig- (39)

nals, denoted by SI ( t ) ,m ( t ) E PI, are defined in the fol-
loaing manner
6.3 Closed-Loop Error S y s t e m Development
si = B i + (PI + 1 ) e l +,&el (28) After subst.itut.ing the cuntrol tuques given in equatiuns
(34) and (35) into the open-loop dynamics given in equa-
~z=ez+(P~+l)e2+P~ez (29) tions (26) and (26), respect.ively. t,be closed-loop error sys-
where PI E W is a constant positive control gain. tem is obtained and can be written as follows

6.2 C o n t r o l Development
Based on the subsequent. stability analysis and cont.rol de-
sign, at: well as t.he structure of t,he open-loop error syst,em
given by equations (26) and (Zi), t h e driver input. torque . . . .
observer and t,he reaction torque observer are designed as After taking t,he first time derivative of ( 2 8 ) and (29), and
follows using (40), (41),and their first dcrivatives, the closed-loop
error system can be rewritten in the following convenient

-
il = - ( P I

oil
+K&el+
+ K s + 1) ?I

[(PI + K8 (P1 + 1)) el

p I w n (PI)]
(30) form
i , = -K a i - 9, - p l w (PI)
QZ = -K .sz + 71 - 72 - p z w n ( p z )
where (36). (37), (30), and (31) have been utilized.
142)
(43)

R e m a r k 6 Based on the definition u j s , ( t ) and sz ( t )given

in equati0n.s (28) and (29), eztensions of the arguments
made in [l] can be used to pmue that: (i) i j s j ( t ) ,82 ( t ) E
L-: then el (t), e l ( t ) , el ( t ) , e z ( t ) , EI ( t ) . e 2 ( t ) E L,
and (ai) i f s , ( t ) andsz (t) are asymptotically regulated, then
el (t), e2 ( t ) , el ( t ) , dz ( t ) ,el (t),e 2 ( t ) a m also asymptoti-
cally reyulntcd [l3].

3115
6.4 Stability Proof After using t.he bounds for V.,(t) and & ( t ) obtained in
(48) and (51), the following upper bound is obtained for
Theorem 2 Given the closed-loop system of (42) and (43),
V.(t)
the tmcking e m r signals defined i n (7) and (8) along with
the toque observation errors defined i n (23) and (24) are
globally asymptotically regulated in the sense that
lim el ( t ), e2 ( t ) , i i ( t ) , i z ( t )= 0.
t-m (44)

Proof To prove Theorem 2, a non-negative, scalar func-

tion, denoted by V.,(t) E W', is defined as follows to

v,, 1 2
= -SI. (45)
+
where CO = CO, Coz. Clearly, from the inequality in (54),
2 LL ( t ) E Cm. From t,he definition of V, ( t ) in (53), SI ( t ) ,
sz ( t ) E Cm. From Remark 6, el ( t ) , e2 (t), e1 ( t ) , 6 2 ( t ) ,
After taking the t,ime derivative of (45) and making appro-
priate substitutions from (42), t.he following expression is & ( t ) , & ( t ) E C-. From (42), (43), (32) and (33) and
Remark 5, it is easy t.u see that $1 ( t ) ,$2 ( t ) ,p l ( t ) .p z ( t ) E
obtained for V-1 (t)
C-. From (40) and (41), it. is now clear that. i ,(t),i z ( t )E
%I =-K.s:+Oj~+~,)(-l)~-p,sgn@1)) (46) Cm. From equation (34), it can be shown that TI( t ) E C,.
Using this fact,, it is easy to see from (35) that ' I 2 ( t ) E C,.
where the definit,ions of SI ( t ) and pl ( t ) given in (28) and Standard signal chasing arguments can now be employed to
(32) have been ut,ilized. After int,egrat,ingboth sides of (46), show that, all signals in the system remain bounded. If n-e
and performing mme mathematical manipulations, the fol- know rewrite (54) follows
lowing inequality can be obts,ined

/
L

v.1 ( t ) -XI (to) 5 -Ks 9: (U)&

f0

+/ IPl(u)l(lOII + p%Pl- P I ) dn (47)

it, is obvious t,hiLt SI ( t ) ,82 ( t )E Lg. Barbalat's Lemma 161
to can now be applied to sliow t.hat
+ lPll (IT11 - P J
+sl ( t o ) p i ( t o ) + P I lpi ( t o l l . lim
t-m si ( t ), sz (t) = 0, (56)
After applying the inequa1it.y given in (38)to the bracketed
terms in ( 4 i ) , V.1 ( t ) can be upper bounded DS follows and hence: from Remark 6, we have

vd ( t ) 5 Vd ( t o ) - K .
1
to
2 (e)7,d + col (45)
&e1 ( t ) :ez ( t ) , el ( t ) : e 2 ( t ) , e1 ( t ) , e 2 ( t )= 0. (57)
Since P I (t) and PZ ( t ) are regulated to zero as indicated
by (57), we can see from (40) and (41) and the definitions
where Col E 8' is a positive constant which is explicitly provided in (23) and (24) that,
defined 8s follows
lim i t
1-m ( t ), i z( t )= 0. (53)
CO1 = 01 (t0)Pl ( t o ) + P I lPl (to)l. (49)
For the error syst,em given in (43), a second non-negat.ive, 0
scalar funct,ion: denot,ed by Vaz(t)E R', is defined as follows
Remark 7 The structure of the torq?le obseruers given. b y
v
,2 2s;.
=A (50)
(30) and (31) contain discontirwous ternts; houleuel; it is
Following a similar analysis to that presented above, the interesting to note that emtml inputs that ape applied to the
following upper bound c m be obtained far V,,(t) plant are not discontinuous. That is; after a close ezamina-
tion of (30) and (31), it clear that signals il( t ) and i z ( t )
are low pass filtered outputs of a discontinuous contml sig-
V-2 ( t )5 V-2 ( t o ) - K.
J
*a
:s (U)do + 502 (51) nal. Therefore, since the control strategy only utilizes the
signals i l ( t ) and i z ( t ) , the contml signals applied to the
plant will not be discontinuous.
where CO* E W' is a positive constant which can be explicitly
defined as follows
7 Conclusion
d z = oz (tala( t o ) - 01 ( t o ) a ( t o ) + PZ Ipl (toll . (52)
In t.liis paper, t.lie desigu of an adaptive, tionlinear tracking
To complete the nnolysis. the following composite non- controller has been presented which ensures t.hat: i) the di-
negative, scalar function, V.(t) E %', is defined as follows rect.ionaJ cont.rol assembly fallows t,he driver commanded in-
put, and ii) the dynamics of the driver input device follows
v, = Val+ V k = -SI
1 2
2
+ -21s;. (53) that of a target system. A complet,e stability analysis. using

3116
Lyaponnv-based t,echniques, hn? been prrsent.nd to demon-
strate l,lial, the proposed control law guarantees global a.-
ymytot,ic regulation of t.he locked tracking error and t.he
driver experience t,racking error. Finally, an ext.ension
wi-as presented that eliminat,ed torque measurements and
developed an exact model knowledge t,racking cont,roUer.

References
[l] Dawsoq, D., Hu, J., and Burg, T., Nonlinear Con-
trol of Electric Machinery, New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc.,
1998.
[2] Gillespie, B. R., Hasser, C., Tang, P., Cancellotion
of Feedthrough Dynamics Using a Force-Reflecting Joy-
st,ick A S M E Intern.ationa1 Mechanirai En.gin.eerin.g Con-
ference and Ezposition, Nashville, T N , Nuvember 1999.
[31 Huh, K.,S a , C., Kim: J., Hong, D.: Active Steer-
ing Cunt,ral Based on the Estimaled Tire Forces, Proceed-
ings of the Amencan Control Conference, San Diego, CA,
June 1999, pp. 729-733.
[4] Lee, D., Li, P. Y., Passive Control of Bilateral Tele
operated hlanipulators: Robust Control and Experiments,
Pmceedings of the American Control Conjereneq Arlington,
VA.>June 2001, pp. 1612.1618.
[5] Liu, A., Chang, S., Force Feedback in a Stationary
driving Simulator, Proceedings of the IEEE International
Conference on Systems: M a n and Cybernetics, Val. 2, 1995.
pp-1711-1716
[6] Slotine, J. J. and Li, W. Applied Nonlinear Can-
troy, Englenrood Cliff, 213:Prentice Hall, Inc.. 1991.
171 Mills, V., Wagner, J., Dawson, D, Nonlinear Model-
ing and Analysis of Steering Syst,eins for Hybrid Vehicles
Proceedings of IMECE U1 2UUI ASME International Me-
chanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, November
11-16,New York, Xew York.
[S] Lcwis, F. L., Abdalleh, C. T., and Dawson, D.
hl., Control of Robot Manipulators, Graduate Textbook,
Macmillan Publishing Company, 1993, ISBN 0-02-370501-
9.
[91 Post, J. W., and Law, E. H.., hlodeling, Sirnula-
t,ion and Testing of Automobile Power Steering Syst,erns far
t,he E d u a t i o n of On-Center Handling, SAE Paper No.
960178, 1996.
[lo] Qu, Z., Xu, J., Model Based Learning Cont,rols and
t.heir Comparisons using Lyapunov Direct Method Asian
Journal of Control, Special Ijsue on Learnin,g Control, Val.
4,No.1, March 2002; accepted t,o appear.
(111 Setlur, P., Dawson, D., Wagner, J.: Fang, Y.;Nan-
linear tracking Controller Design for Steer-by-wire system-
s, Proceedings of the American Contml Conferrnce, An-
chorage, AK., hlay POOZ,Accept,edto appear.
[E]Ryu, J., and Kim, H., Virtual environment for De-
veloping Elect,ronic Power Steering and St,eer-hy-Wire Sys-
tems, Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Confer-
ence on Intelligent Robots and System4 pp. 1374-1379, Pis-
0
cataxmy, 3.J. 1999
1131 Desoer, C. A., Vidyasagar, M., Feedback syst.ems:
Input-output, properties, Academic Press, 1975.

3117