Citation

Grant PR, Blommer M, Artz B, Greenberg J. Veh. Syst. Dyn. 2009; 47(9): 1075-1093.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2009, Informa - Taylor and Francis Group)

DOI

10.1080/00423110802450185

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

A paired comparison experiment using 23 subjects was run on the VIRTTEX driving simulator to compare a lane position based motion drive algorithm (MDA) with a classical MDA for a highway speed, lane change manoeuvre. Two different tuning states of the lane position algorithm and four different tuning states for the classical algorithm were tested. The subjective fidelity of the six different motion cases was compared with each other and a Bradley-Terry model was fit to find the fidelity merit of each case. In addition, the driving performance of the subjects for six motion cases was recorded and compared. The motion-tuning cases were selected such that the trade-off in motion quality between overall motion scaling and motion shape distortion (shape-error), as well as the trade-off between lateral specific force and roll-rate motion errors, could be studied. It was found that when the overall scaling is the same, drivers perform better with the lane position algorithm than with the the classical algorithm. A well-tuned, manoeuvre-specific, classical MDA, however, did achieve a subjective fidelity level on a par with the lane position MDA. A generically tuned classical MDA, however, has a significantly reduced fidelity and driving performance when compared with a lane position algorithm with the same scale factor. A strong trade-off between motion shape-errors and overall motion scaling was found. A small increase in motion cue shape-error, combined with an increase in the scale factor from 0.3 to 0.5, led to improved performance and increased subjective fidelity. The results of the experiment also suggest that simulator motion can be improved by reducing the angular-rate shape-error at the expense of the specific force shape-error (while keeping the total normalised shape-error constant).