Method, device, equipment and storage medium for cooperative control of braking and active suspension

Abstract

The application discloses a method, device, equipment and storage medium for coordinated control of braking and active suspension, and relates to the technical field of vehicle control. The method comprises the following steps: determining an available capability index of an active suspension system based on a force output capability percentage, a response speed percentage and a function integrity percentage of the active suspension system, and comparing the available capability index with a preset threshold; if the available capability index is greater than or equal to the preset threshold, controlling the active suspension system to perform pitch suppression, and controlling the braking system to normally brake; and if the available capability index is less than the preset threshold, determining a fault level according to the available capability index, and executing a corresponding coordinated control strategy based on the determined fault level. The application solves the problem that the anti-pitch capability of the active suspension system cannot be maintained when the anti-pitch capability of the active suspension system is reduced due to faults or capability attenuation, realizes active compensation of the suspension capability loss of the braking system, and improves braking smoothness and system robustness.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This application relates to the field of vehicle control technology, specifically to a method, apparatus, device, and storage medium for coordinated control of braking and active suspension. Background Technology

[0002] With the rapid development of the automotive industry and people's increasing demands for driving experience, vehicle driving safety, ride comfort, and handling stability have become key indicators for measuring overall vehicle performance. Under braking conditions, how to coordinate the vehicle's longitudinal braking motion with the vertical suspension motion to suppress vehicle pitch and ensure braking comfort is an important research direction in the field of vehicle control technology.

[0003] In related technologies, to achieve posture stability during braking, a scheme involving coordinated control of the braking system and active suspension is typically employed. In these schemes, the active suspension is responsible for suppressing brake dive, while the braking system is responsible for providing braking force; the two work together to enhance the driving experience.

[0004] However, some existing braking and active suspension coordinated control schemes assume that the active suspension is in normal working condition. When the anti-pitch capability of the suspension decreases due to actuator overheating, hydraulic leakage, sensor failure or communication interruption, the expected braking comfort cannot be maintained. Summary of the Invention

[0005] This application provides a method and apparatus for achieving coordinated control of braking and suspension, which can solve the problem that existing active suspensions cannot maintain the expected braking comfort when their anti-pitch capability decreases due to malfunctions or capacity degradation.

[0006] In a first aspect, embodiments of this application provide a method for coordinated control of braking and active suspension, the method comprising: Based on the percentage of force output capability, response speed, and functional integrity of the active suspension system, the availability index of the active suspension system is determined and compared with a preset threshold. If the available capability index is greater than or equal to the preset threshold, the active suspension system is controlled to suppress pitch, and the braking system brakes normally. If the available capability index is less than the preset threshold, the fault level is determined based on the available capability index, and the corresponding collaborative control strategy is executed based on the determined fault level.

[0007] In conjunction with the first aspect, in one implementation method, the determination of the availability index is specifically as follows: The minimum value among the percentage of force output capability, percentage of response speed, and percentage of functional integrity is used as the available capability index.

[0008] Furthermore, the percentage of force output capability is determined based on the ratio of the available output force of the active suspension actuator to the target required force; The percentage of response speed is determined based on the delay time from the time the active suspension controller issues a command to the actual action of the actuator; The percentage of functional integrity is determined based on whether the sensor data is valid, whether the communication is normal, and whether the actuators of each wheel are online.

[0009] In addition, the fault levels include a first fault level, a second fault level, and a third fault level; When the available capability index is less than a preset threshold but greater than or equal to a first threshold, the fault level is determined to be the first fault level. When the available capability index is less than the first threshold and greater than or equal to the second threshold, the fault level is determined to be the second fault level. When the available capability index is less than the second threshold but greater than or equal to the third threshold, the fault level is determined to be the third fault level.

[0010] Furthermore, when the fault level is the first fault level, the corresponding cooperative control strategy is: The braking force ratio of the front axle is lowered from the baseline value, and the braking force ratio of the rear axle is correspondingly increased to make the braking force ratio of the rear axle greater than that of the front axle. Specifically, the reduction in the proportion of braking force on the front axle is calculated as Δβ=Δβ max1 ×(Y1-Index) / (Y1-Y2), Δβ represents the reduction in the proportion of front axle braking force. max1 Y1 represents the maximum allowable reduction amount when the fault level is first, Y2 represents the current available capability index, Y1 represents the preset threshold, and Y2 represents the first threshold.

[0011] When the fault level is the second fault level, the corresponding collaborative control strategy is: Limit the maximum braking deceleration, adjust the front and rear axle braking force distribution, and optimize the pressure relief slope at the end of braking. The maximum braking deceleration is calculated as a. limit =a max ×(Index / Index normal ), where a limit Indicates the maximum permissible comfortable braking deceleration, a max This indicates the maximum permissible comfort braking deceleration in normal mode. Index represents the current available capability index. normal This represents a reference value for the normal availability index; Specifically, in the front-to-rear axle braking force distribution, the reduction in the proportion of braking force on the front axle is calculated as follows: Δβ=Δβ max2 ×(Y2-Index) / (Y2-Y3) Where Δβ is the amount by which the proportion of front axle braking force is reduced, Δβ max2 Y2 represents the maximum allowable reduction amount when the fault level is second, Y3 represents the second threshold, and Y2 represents the first threshold. Specifically, the pressure relief slope at the end of the braking phase is optimized. The calculation method for the optimized pressure relief slope at the end of the braking phase is as follows: S degrade =S normal ×(Index / Y1) Among them, S degrade It is the corrected pressure relief slope, S normal This is the normal mode pressure relief slope, Index is the current available capacity index, and Y1 is the preset threshold.

[0012] When the fault level is the third fault level, the corresponding collaborative control strategy is: The active suspension system disables pitch suppression and switches to passive damping, allowing the braking system to adjust the vehicle's attitude and control comfort.

[0013] Secondly, embodiments of this application provide a braking and active suspension coordinated control device, comprising: The suspension condition assessment module determines the availability index of the active suspension system based on the percentage of force output capability, response speed, and functional integrity of the active suspension system, and compares it with a preset threshold. The fault level determination module is used to determine the fault level based on the availability index if the availability index is less than a preset threshold. The degradation strategy execution module is used to execute the corresponding collaborative control strategy based on the determined fault level.

[0014] Thirdly, embodiments of this application provide a braking and active suspension coordinated control device, the braking and active suspension coordinated control device including a processor, a memory, and a braking and active suspension coordinated control program stored in the memory and executable by the processor, wherein when the braking and active suspension coordinated control program is executed by the processor, the steps of the braking and active suspension coordinated control method as described above are implemented.

[0015] Fourthly, embodiments of this application provide a computer-readable storage medium storing a braking and active suspension coordinated control program, wherein when the braking and active suspension coordinated control program is executed by a processor, it implements the steps of the braking and active suspension coordinated control method as described above.

[0016] The beneficial effects of the technical solutions provided in this application include: 1. Added cooperative control under conditions of insufficient suspension capacity. Existing solutions do not consider scenarios where suspension capability decreases significantly due to actuator overheating, hydraulic leakage, sensor failure, or communication interruption. This application proposes a master-slave degradation control architecture where the braking system actively compensates for suspension capability loss. When suspension capability decreases, the braking system can actively adjust its strategy to compensate for the reduced pitch suppression capability, ensuring that braking comfort does not deteriorate due to suspension capability degradation.

[0017] 2. It achieves quantitative perception of suspension availability and hierarchical dynamic matching of braking strategies. This application comprehensively evaluates the real-time status of the suspension through three dimensions: force output capability, response speed, and functional integrity, outputting a unified availability index. This availability index is divided into four intervals, corresponding to the main control mode, the first fault level, the second fault level, and the third fault level. Each level is matched with a differentiated braking compensation strategy—Level 1 only adjusts the braking force distribution; Level 2 adds deceleration limits and optimizes the pressure relief slope; and Level 3 allows the suspension to disengage completely under braking control, achieving a dynamic balance between safety and comfort.

[0018] 3. The reliability of fault diagnosis is improved by fusing multi-dimensional capability perception. The suspension capability status is cross-verified using multiple methods, including force output deviation monitoring, response delay measurement, and sensor / communication status checks, to output the availability index with the most conservative principle. This approach avoids missed detections or misjudgments that may occur with a single diagnostic method, ensuring that degradation strategies are only triggered when truly necessary, thus improving the overall robustness of the system. Attached Figure Description

[0019] Figure 1 This is a flowchart illustrating the method for coordinated braking and active suspension control in this application. Figure 2 This is a functional module diagram of an embodiment of the braking and active suspension coordinated control device of this application; Figure 3 This is a schematic diagram of the hardware structure of the braking and active suspension coordinated control device involved in the embodiments of this application. Detailed Implementation

[0020] To enable those skilled in the art to better understand the present application, the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present application will be clearly and completely described below with reference to the accompanying drawings. Obviously, the described embodiments are only some embodiments of the present application, and not all embodiments. Based on the embodiments in the present application, all other embodiments obtained by those of ordinary skill in the art without creative effort are within the scope of protection of the present application.

[0021] To make the objectives, technical solutions, and advantages of this application clearer, the embodiments of this application will be described in further detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings.

[0022] Firstly, see [the following] Figure 1 As shown in the figure, this application provides a method for coordinated control of braking and active suspension, the method comprising: S1: Based on the percentage of force output capability, response speed, and functional integrity of the active suspension system, determine the availability index of the active suspension system and compare it with a preset threshold. If the availability index is greater than or equal to the preset threshold, proceed to S2; if the availability index is less than the preset threshold, proceed to S3. S2: This controls the active suspension system to suppress pitch, while the braking system brakes normally. S3: The fault level is determined based on the available capability index, and the corresponding collaborative control strategy is executed based on the determined fault level.

[0023] In this embodiment, the force output capability percentage is used to measure how much available output force the suspension has left, the response speed percentage is used to measure the response time of the suspension, and the functional integrity percentage is used to measure whether the suspension system is in normal condition. The real-time status of the active suspension system is quantitatively evaluated through these three dimensions: force output capability percentage, response speed percentage, and functional integrity percentage.

[0024] Preferably, a preset threshold of 95% is set. If the available capability index is greater than or equal to 95%, the system enters the main control mode, where the active suspension is fully responsible for pitch suppression and actively outputs force according to the target anti-nose torque. The braking system performs normal braking force distribution, and no additional restrictions are imposed on deceleration, thus not affecting the braking distance.

[0025] If the availability index is less than 95%, the suspension is deemed insufficient, and a degraded control mode is entered. The system will classify the system into corresponding fault levels based on the specific range of the availability index and execute corresponding degraded collaborative control strategies. Preferably, when the availability index is greater than or equal to 75% but less than 95%, it is the first fault level; when the availability index is greater than or equal to 55% but less than 75%, it is the second fault level; and when the availability index is greater than or equal to 0 but less than 55%, it is the third fault level.

[0026] In conjunction with the first aspect, in one implementation method, the determination of the availability index is specifically as follows: The minimum value among the percentage of force output capability, percentage of response speed, and percentage of functional integrity is used as the available capability index.

[0027] Furthermore, the percentage of force output capability is determined based on the ratio of the available output force of the active suspension actuator to the target required force; The percentage of response speed is determined based on the delay time from the time the active suspension controller issues a command to the actual action of the actuator; The percentage of functional integrity is determined based on whether the sensor data is valid, whether the communication is normal, and whether the actuators of each wheel are online.

[0028] In this embodiment, the most conservative evaluation principle is adopted for determining the availability index, namely, taking the minimum value among the force output capability percentage, response speed percentage, and functional integrity percentage. The force output capability percentage reflects the ratio of the currently available output force of the active suspension actuator to the target required force, that is, the ratio of the maximum force that the active suspension actuator can provide to the force required by the control system. The available output force is obtained based on the real-time evaluation of the actuator status, ambient temperature, power supply voltage, sensor status, etc., of the active suspension system. The response speed percentage is quantified by the delay time between the suspension controller issuing a command and the actuator actually taking action. The longer the delay time, the weaker the response capability. The response speed percentage can be obtained through calibration. Preferably, a delay time of less than 20ms is considered normal, corresponding to an availability index of 95%-100%. A delay time of more than 20ms but less than 50ms is considered the first fault level, corresponding to an availability index of 75%-95%. A delay time of more than 50ms but less than 100ms is considered the second fault level, corresponding to an availability index of 55%-75%. A delay time of more than 100ms is considered the third fault level, corresponding to an availability index of 0%-55%.

[0029] The functional integrity percentage is a comprehensive assessment of the overall health of the system, including whether sensor data is valid, communication is normal, and whether the actuators of each wheel are online. The final percentage is determined based on the calibration performance of the actual vehicle. For example, if a single wheel fails, the functional integrity percentage drops to 65%; if the entire axle fails, it drops to 20%; and if it fails completely, it drops to 0%.

[0030] By comprehensively considering the above three dimensions and addressing their shortcomings, we can fully and reliably quantify the true usability of an active suspension system at any given time.

[0031] In addition, the fault levels include a first fault level, a second fault level, and a third fault level; When the available capability index is less than a preset threshold but greater than or equal to a first threshold, the fault level is determined to be the first fault level. When the available capability index is less than the first threshold and greater than or equal to the second threshold, the fault level is determined to be the second fault level. When the available capability index is less than the second threshold but greater than or equal to the third threshold, the fault level is determined to be the third fault level.

[0032] Preferably, when the availability index is less than 95% but greater than or equal to 75%, the fault level is determined as the first fault level; when the availability index is less than 75% but greater than or equal to 55%, the fault level is determined as the second fault level; and when the availability index is less than 55% but greater than or equal to 0, the fault level is determined as the third fault level.

[0033] Furthermore, when the fault level is the first fault level, the corresponding cooperative control strategy is: The braking force ratio of the front axle is lowered from the baseline value, and the braking force ratio of the rear axle is correspondingly increased to make the braking force ratio of the rear axle greater than that of the front axle. Specifically, the reduction in the proportion of braking force on the front axle is calculated as Δβ=Δβ max1 ×(Y1-Index) / (Y1-Y2), Δβ represents the reduction in the proportion of front axle braking force. max1 Y1 represents the maximum allowable reduction amount when the fault level is first, Y2 represents the current available capability index, Y1 represents the preset threshold, and Y2 represents the first threshold.

[0034] In this embodiment, when the fault level is the first fault level, only the front and rear axle braking force distribution ratio of the braking system is adjusted; the total deceleration is not actively limited, and the braking distance is not affected. Specifically, based on the braking system, the braking force of each of the four wheels can be applied independently. The proportion of front axle braking force is actively reduced from a baseline value (e.g., 60%), while the proportion of rear axle braking force is correspondingly increased. This reduces the pitching moment caused by front axle load transfer, thereby reducing the requirement for suspension anti-dive capability. The adjusted ratio should make the front axle proportion smaller than the rear axle proportion, and the adjustment magnitude should be positively correlated with the monitored response delay increment—the greater the delay, the greater the reduction in the front axle braking force proportion.

[0035] Preferably, the preset threshold is 95%, the first threshold is 75%, and the reduction in the proportion of front axle braking force is Δβ=Δβ max1 ×(95%-Index) / (95%-75%).

[0036] In addition, to ensure vehicle braking safety, the proportion of front axle braking force should not be set too low (e.g., ≥40%); to prevent rear axle lock-up, the rear axle braking force should not be set too high, and the maximum value of rear axle braking force is determined by axle load and tire characteristics. If the calculated value of Δβ exceeds the constraint boundary, it is limited to the boundary value.

[0037] When the fault level is the first fault level, the total braking force remains unchanged and the braking distance is not affected. The insufficient suspension capacity is only slightly compensated by changing the front and rear axle braking force distribution ratio.

[0038] When the fault level is the second fault level, the corresponding collaborative control strategy is: Limit the maximum braking deceleration, adjust the front and rear axle braking force distribution, and optimize the pressure relief slope at the end of braking. The maximum braking deceleration is calculated as a. limit =a max ×(Index / Index normal ), where a limit Indicates the maximum permissible comfortable braking deceleration, a max This indicates the maximum permissible comfort braking deceleration in normal mode. Index represents the current available capability index. normal This represents a reference value for the normal availability index; Specifically, in the front-to-rear axle braking force distribution, the reduction in the proportion of braking force on the front axle is calculated as follows: Δβ=Δβ max2 ×(Y2-Index) / (Y2-Y3) Where Δβ represents the reduction in the proportion of front axle braking force, Δβ max2 Y2 represents the maximum allowable reduction amount when the fault level is second, Y3 represents the second threshold, and Y2 represents the first threshold. Specifically, the pressure relief slope at the end of the braking phase is optimized. The calculation method for the optimized pressure relief slope at the end of the braking phase is as follows: S degrade =S normal ×(Index / Y1) Among them, S degrade S represents the corrected pressure relief slope. normal Y1 represents the normal mode pressure relief slope, Index represents the current available capacity index, and Y1 represents the preset threshold.

[0039] In this embodiment, when the active suspension system's capabilities are limited, the cooperative control strategy achieves a balance between comfort and braking performance by limiting the maximum comfort braking deceleration, adjusting the front and rear axle braking force distribution, and optimizing the pressure relief slope at the end of braking. The maximum comfort braking deceleration is derived inversely based on the current available capability index, ensuring that the deceleration used is within the range where the residual suspension capacity can effectively suppress pitch. Similarly, in the second downgrade strategy, to ensure vehicle braking safety, the proportion of front axle braking force should not be set too low (e.g., ≥40%); to prevent rear axle lock-up, the rear axle braking force should not be set too high, and the maximum value of the rear axle braking force is determined by the axle load and tire characteristics. If the calculated value of Δβ exceeds the constraint boundary, it is limited to the boundary value.

[0040] Meanwhile, at the end of braking (i.e., when the vehicle speed is close to zero), the suspension needs to respond quickly to suppress the final nose-dive. In the second fault level, if the suspension response is lagging or the force is insufficient, and the braking pressure is still released quickly using the normal pressure relief slope, the suspension rebound caused by the sudden decrease in pitch moment cannot be effectively controlled, resulting in a noticeable jerk at the moment of stopping. At this time, by slowing down the pressure relief slope (i.e., the slower the brake release), more time is given to the suspension to respond, thus avoiding the jerk.

[0041] Overall, this strategy precisely matches the remaining capacity of the suspension system by actively adjusting the braking deceleration and the front axle load transfer amplitude, ensuring basic braking performance while maximizing ride comfort.

[0042] Preferably, the preset threshold is 95%, the first threshold is 75%, and the second threshold is 55%.

[0043] When the fault level is the third fault level, the corresponding collaborative control strategy is: The active suspension system disables pitch suppression and switches to passive damping, allowing the braking system to adjust the vehicle's attitude and control comfort.

[0044] In this embodiment, when the active suspension system completely fails, its pitch suppression function is completely deactivated and switched to passive damping. At this time, the braking system fully takes over the vehicle's attitude adjustment and comfort control tasks, entering a "longitudinal comfort braking mode." In this mode, the suspension no longer responds to any anti-pitch control requests, and the braking system independently plans the braking pressure curve based on the current vehicle speed and its rate of change. While ensuring that the maximum permissible braking distance constraint is met, it adopts the smoothest possible pressure build-up and depressurization gradient, effectively mitigating brake dive through a gradual braking process. This strategy, under the extreme condition of complete suspension failure, actively abandons the control logic of pitch suppression by the suspension, and instead relies solely on the braking system to ensure driving safety and maintain a minimum level of ride comfort.

[0045] Secondly, see Figure 2 As shown, this application provides a braking and active suspension coordinated control device, including: The suspension condition assessment module is used to determine the availability index of the active suspension system based on the percentage of force output capability, response speed, and functional integrity of the active suspension system, and compare it with a preset threshold. The fault level determination module is used to determine the fault level based on the availability index if the availability index is less than or equal to a preset threshold. The degradation strategy execution module is used to execute the corresponding collaborative control strategy based on the determined fault level.

[0046] The functions of each module in the above-mentioned braking and active suspension coordinated control device correspond to the steps in the above-mentioned braking and active suspension coordinated control method embodiment, and their functions and implementation processes will not be described in detail here.

[0047] Thirdly, embodiments of this application provide a braking and active suspension coordinated control device, which can be a personal computer (PC), laptop computer, server, or other device with data processing capabilities.

[0048] Reference Figure 3 , Figure 3 This is a schematic diagram of the hardware structure of the braking and active suspension coordinated control device involved in the embodiments of this application. In the embodiments of this application, the braking and active suspension coordinated control device may include a processor, a memory, a communication interface, and a communication bus.

[0049] The communication bus can be of any type and is used to interconnect the processor, memory, and communication interface.

[0050] The communication interface includes input / output (I / O) interfaces, physical interfaces, and logical interfaces used for interconnecting components within the braking and active suspension coordinated control device, as well as interfaces used for interconnecting the braking and active suspension coordinated control device with other devices (such as other computing devices or user equipment). Physical interfaces can be Ethernet interfaces, fiber optic interfaces, ATM interfaces, etc.; user equipment can be displays, keyboards, etc.

[0051] Memory can be various types of storage media, such as random access memory (RAM), read-only memory (ROM), non-volatile RAM (NVRAM), flash memory, optical storage, hard disk, programmable ROM (PROM), erasable PROM (EPROM), electrically erasable PROM (EEPROM), etc.

[0052] The processor can be a general-purpose processor, which can call the braking and active suspension coordinated control program stored in memory and execute the braking and active suspension coordinated control method provided in the embodiments of this application. For example, the general-purpose processor can be a central processing unit (CPU). The method executed when the braking and active suspension coordinated control program is called can be referred to in the various embodiments of the braking and active suspension coordinated control method of this application, and will not be repeated here.

[0053] Those skilled in the art will understand that Figure 3 The hardware structure shown does not constitute a limitation of this application and may include more or fewer components than shown, or combine certain components, or have different component arrangements.

[0054] Fourthly, embodiments of this application also provide a computer-readable storage medium.

[0055] The present application has a computer-readable storage medium storing a braking and active suspension coordinated control program, wherein when the braking and active suspension coordinated control program is executed by a processor, it implements the steps of the braking and active suspension coordinated control method as described above.

[0056] The method implemented when the braking and active suspension coordinated control program is executed can be referred to in various embodiments of the braking and active suspension coordinated control method of this application, and will not be repeated here.

[0057] The terms "comprising" and "having," and any variations thereof, in the specification, claims, and accompanying drawings of this application are intended to cover non-exclusive inclusion. For example, a process, method, system, product, or apparatus that includes a series of steps or units is not limited to the listed steps or units, but may optionally include steps or units not listed, or may optionally include other steps or units inherent to such process, method, product, or apparatus. The terms "first," "second," and "third," etc., are used to distinguish different objects, etc., and do not indicate a sequence, nor do they limit "first," "second," and "third" to different types.

[0058] In the description of the embodiments of this application, terms such as "exemplary," "for example," or "for instance" are used to indicate examples, illustrations, or explanations. Any embodiment or design described as "exemplary," "for example," or "for instance" in the embodiments of this application should not be construed as being more preferred or advantageous than other embodiments or designs. Specifically, the use of terms such as "exemplary," "for example," or "for instance" is intended to present the relevant concepts in a concrete manner.

[0059] In the description of the embodiments of this application, unless otherwise stated, " / " means "or". For example, A / B can mean A or B. The "and / or" in the text is merely a description of the relationship between related objects, indicating that there can be three relationships. For example, A and / or B can mean: A exists alone, A and B exist simultaneously, and B exists alone. In addition, in the description of the embodiments of this application, "multiple" means two or more.

[0060] In some processes described in the embodiments of this application, multiple operations or steps are included in a specific order. However, it should be understood that these operations or steps may not be executed in the order they appear in the embodiments of this application, or they may be executed in parallel. The sequence number of the operation is only used to distinguish different operations, and the sequence number itself does not represent any execution order. In addition, these processes may include more or fewer operations, and these operations or steps may be executed sequentially or in parallel, and these operations or steps may be combined.

[0061] Through the above description of the embodiments, those skilled in the art can clearly understand that the methods of the above embodiments can be implemented by means of software plus necessary general-purpose hardware platforms. Of course, they can also be implemented by hardware, but in many cases the former is a better implementation method. Based on this understanding, the technical solution of this application, in essence, or the part that contributes to the prior art, can be embodied in the form of a software product. This computer software product is stored in a storage medium (such as ROM / RAM, magnetic disk, optical disk) as described above, and includes several instructions to cause a terminal device to execute the methods described in the various embodiments of this application.

[0062] The above are merely preferred embodiments of this application and do not limit the patent scope of this application. Any equivalent structural or procedural transformations made using the content of this application's specification and drawings, or direct or indirect applications in other related technical fields, are similarly included within the patent protection scope of this application.

Claims

1. A method for coordinated control of braking and active suspension, characterized in that, The method includes: Based on the percentage of force output capability, response speed, and functional integrity of the active suspension system, the availability index of the active suspension system is determined and compared with a preset threshold. If the available capability index is greater than or equal to the preset threshold, the active suspension system is controlled to suppress pitch, and the braking system brakes normally. If the available capability index is less than the preset threshold, the fault level is determined based on the available capability index, and the corresponding collaborative control strategy is executed based on the determined fault level.

2. The method for coordinated control of braking and active suspension as described in claim 1, characterized in that, The determination of the availability index is as follows: The minimum value among the percentage of force output capability, percentage of response speed, and percentage of functional integrity is used as the available capability index.

3. The method for coordinated control of braking and active suspension as described in claim 2, characterized in that: The percentage of force output capability is determined based on the ratio of the available output force of the active suspension actuator to the target required force; The percentage of response speed is determined based on the delay time from the time the active suspension controller issues a command to the actual action of the actuator; The percentage of functional integrity is determined based on whether the sensor data is valid, whether the communication is normal, and whether the actuators of each wheel are online.

4. The method for coordinated control of braking and active suspension as described in claim 1, characterized in that: The fault levels include a first fault level, a second fault level, and a third fault level; When the available capability index is less than a preset threshold but greater than or equal to a first threshold, the fault level is determined to be the first fault level. When the available capability index is less than the first threshold and greater than or equal to the second threshold, the fault level is determined to be the second fault level. When the available capability index is less than the second threshold but greater than or equal to the third threshold, the fault level is determined to be the third fault level.

5. The method for coordinated control of braking and active suspension as described in claim 4, characterized in that, When the fault level is the first fault level, the corresponding collaborative control strategy is: The braking force ratio of the front axle is lowered from the baseline value, and the braking force ratio of the rear axle is correspondingly increased to make the braking force ratio of the rear axle greater than that of the front axle. Specifically, the reduction in the proportion of braking force on the front axle is calculated as Δβ=Δβ max1 ×(Y1-Index) / (Y1-Y2), Δβ represents the reduction in the proportion of front axle braking force. max1 Y1 represents the maximum allowable reduction amount when the fault level is first, Y2 represents the current available capability index, Y1 represents the preset threshold, and Y2 represents the first threshold.

6. The braking and active suspension coordinated control method as described in claim 4, characterized in that, When the fault level is the second fault level, the corresponding collaborative control strategy is: Limit the maximum braking deceleration, adjust the front and rear axle braking force distribution, and optimize the pressure relief slope at the end of braking. The maximum braking deceleration is calculated as a. limit =a max ×(Index / Index normal ), where a limit Indicates the maximum permissible comfortable braking deceleration, a max This indicates the maximum permissible comfort braking deceleration in normal mode. Index represents the current available capability index. normal This represents a reference value for the normal availability index; Specifically, in the front-to-rear axle braking force distribution, the reduction in the proportion of braking force on the front axle is calculated as follows: Δβ=Δβ max2 ×(Y2-Index) / (Y2-Y3) Where Δβ represents the reduction in the proportion of front axle braking force, Δβ max2 Y2 represents the maximum allowable reduction amount when the fault level is second, Y3 represents the second threshold, and Y2 represents the first threshold. Specifically, the pressure relief slope at the end of the braking phase is optimized. The calculation method for the optimized pressure relief slope at the end of the braking phase is as follows: S degrade =S normal ×(Index / Y1) Among them, S degrade S represents the corrected pressure relief slope. normal Y1 represents the normal mode pressure relief slope, Index represents the current available capacity index, and Y1 represents the preset threshold.

7. The method for coordinated control of braking and active suspension as described in claim 4, characterized in that, When the fault level is the third fault level, the corresponding collaborative control strategy is: The active suspension system disables pitch suppression and switches to passive damping, allowing the braking system to adjust the vehicle's attitude and control comfort.

8. A braking and active suspension coordinated control device, characterized in that, include: The suspension condition assessment module is used to determine the availability index of the active suspension system based on the percentage of force output capability, response speed, and functional integrity of the active suspension system, and compare it with a preset threshold. The fault level determination module is used to determine the fault level based on the availability index if the availability index is less than a preset threshold. The degradation strategy execution module is used to execute the corresponding collaborative control strategy based on the determined fault level.

9. A braking and active suspension coordinated control device, characterized in that, The braking and active suspension coordinated control device includes a processor, a memory, and a braking and active suspension coordinated control program stored in the memory and executable by the processor, wherein when the braking and active suspension coordinated control program is executed by the processor, it implements the steps of the braking and active suspension coordinated control method as described in any one of claims 1 to 7.

10. A computer-readable storage medium, characterized in that, The computer-readable storage medium stores a braking and active suspension coordinated control program, wherein when the braking and active suspension coordinated control program is executed by a processor, it implements the steps of the braking and active suspension coordinated control method as described in any one of claims 1 to 7.

Images