18th IEEE International Conference on Control Applications

Part of 2009 IEEE Multi-conference on Systems and Control

Saint Petersburg, Russia, July 8-10, 2009

Drivers influence on the performance of an integrated lane departure

avoidance and lane keeping assistance system
Nicoleta Minoiu Enache, Yazid Sebsadji, Sad Mammar, Benoit Lusetti and Sebastien Glaser

the driver on the control law and consequently on the vehicle

trajectory. The interaction driver - steering assistance is in this
case considered with respect to the assistance. Although of
equal importance, the drivers steering feel is not treated in
this paper.
Section II of this paper presents the vehicle model and
the lane departure avoidance system. Section III proposes a
method to study the driver - assistance interaction by estimating the reachability set of the assisted vehicle, for straight
as well as for curvy roads. The theoretical bounds for the
I. I NTRODUCTION
vehicle motion obtained in section III are computed for a
Two main objectives motivate research on automated vehi- prototype vehicle and experimentally validated in section IV.
cle steering control: lane keeping and lane departure avoid- Conclusions are drawn in section V.
ance systems. Although both systems are acting as lateral
II. V EHICLE MODEL WITH INTEGRATED STEERING
controls of the vehicle, the targets are different.
ASSISTANCE FOR LANE DEPARTURE AVOIDANCE
Lane keeping assistance systems are designed mainly to
The vehicle model used for the design of the steering concompensate minor disturbances, for instance road curvature,
road bank angle or wind gusts, in order to decrease drivers trol law is the classical linear bicycle model [9] completed
workload [1], [6]. This type of system is optimized to work by a second order model of the steering column:
simultaneously with the driver, taking into consideration more
x = A x + Bu (Ta + Td ) + B re f ,
(1)
specifically the interaction with the driver on the steering
T

wheel and the passengers confort [7], [8]. In this case the where x = [ , r, L , yL , f , f ] is the state vector (side slip
system has both a comfort and a safety function. On the angle, yaw rate, relative yaw angle, lateral offset, steering
opposite, lane departure avoidance systems are intended to angle, steering angle rate), Ta is the assistance torque provided
increase driving safety, even if passengers confort is not by an electrical motor mounted on the steering column, Td
always preserved [3]. They act by short interventions when the drivers torque and re f the road curvature. The system
the vehicle is about to exceed the boundaries of the lane, and matrices are given by:

prioritize the minimization of lane boundary overshoots in the

a11 a12 0 0
b1
0
lateral response of the vehicle [4], [5], [14], [12].
b2
0
a21 a22 0 0
0
Lane keeping assistance systems as well as lane departure
1
0 0
0
0

A=
(2)
lS
v 0
0
0
avoidance systems can use the same principle of vehicle
,
v
0

0
0
0
0
1
T

lateral control in closed loop. Despite that, the design of an

S
2K c
TSr
0 0 IpRf2 t BISS
unified system is difficult since this design should optimize
IS RS
IS RS
S S
simultaneously the lane overshoot for activations near the

T
,
(3)
Bu = 0 0 0 0 0 RS1IS
border of the lane, the transitory response of the controlled
vehicle toward the center of the lane and the shared control

T
B = 0 0 v 0 0 0
,
(4)
with the driver while following the center of the lane. This
paper studies the lane departure avoidance system presented where
in [12] in view of extending it to a lane keeping assistance
2(cr +c f )
2(l cr l f c f )
a11 = mv
, a12 = 1 + r mv
,
2
system. The study is aiming at identifying the influence of
2(l 2 c +l 2 c )

Abstract This paper proposes an active steering assistance

system that could act as lane departure avoidance and lane
keeping system. The assistance has been designed initially for
a lane departure avoidance purpose. In this paper the driver assistance interaction is studied with the objective to allow a
permanent system activation and hence a lane keeping functionality. The lane keeping performance of the assistance system
is analyzed while the driver is intervening. More specifically,
bounds for the lane keeping performance are theoretically
computed and experimentally validated.

2(l c l c )

N. Minoiu Enache, Y. Sebsadiji, B. Lusetti, S. Glaser

INRETS/LCPC-LIVIC,
Vehicle - Infrastructure - Driver
Interactions
Research Unit, 14 Route de la Mini`ere, 78000 Versailles, France

minoiu,netto,glaser@lcpc.fr
S. Mammar Member IEEE IBISC/CNRS-FRE 3190 Universite dEvry
Val dEssonne, 40 Rue du Pelvoux CE 1455, 91025, Evry, Cedex, France.

said.mammar@iup.univ-evry.fr

978-1-4244-4602-5/09/$25.00 2009 IEEE

119

a21 = r r J f f ,
cr = cr0 ,
2c
b1 = mvf ,
2Kp c f t
TS = RS ,

a22 = r Jv f ,
c f = c f 0 ,
2c l
b2 = Jf f ,
2Kp c f l f t
TSr = RS v .

(5)

The values of the above parameters are given in Table III in

the Appendix.

In this paper it has been assumed that the road curvature

max , and that it is meahas a bounded magnitude, |re f | re
f
surable. This is realistic since the measure of the curvature is
possible, for example, by lane sensing video systems. Using
the boundedness of the road curvature, (eq. (1)) becomes
max
x = A x + Bu (Ta + Td ) + B re
f w1 ,

(6)

with w1 R, |w1 | 1.
The steering assistance torque satisfies the control law
developed in [12]: Ta = Kx + Ff re f (K R16 , Ff R).
This control law combines a state feedback gain K with a
feedforward action of the road curvature of gain Ff . The
assistance has been designed to get activated when the vehicle
is drifting off the lane due to a drivers lapse of attention.
Its control law has been designed to minimize the lateral
displacement of the vehicle front wheels and to keep it
always below an upper bound, despite the road curvature.
After activation and lane departure avoidance, the steering
assistance steers the vehicle to follow the lane.
In [12], the drivers actions on the steering wheel has
been considered to be bounded to a small value (|Td | Tdmin )
and has been neglected since the driver has been supposed
inattentive during the assistance intervention.
In this paper, the assumption has been made, that the driver
can act on the steering wheel with a limited torque |Td |
Tdmax . Using a scaled parameter as above, w2 R, |w2 | 1,
the system description becomes
x = Acl x + Bw1 w1 + Bw2 w2 , where
d
and
w2 = TTmax
d
max (B + B F ), B
max .
Acl = Ax + Bu K, Bw1 = re

u f
w2 = Bu Td
f

Fig. 1.

Normal driving set, reachability set and invariant set.

simultaneous with the assistance system intervention can be

obtained in such a way.
On the basis of quadratic functions, the sought invariant set
has the shape of an ellipsoid (P) (P = PT positive definite,
P R66 ) that satisfies the properties below [11], [13]:
(P) = {x R6 : xT Px 1} and
L (Z N ) (P) and
V (x)
V (x) = xT Px, t < 0, (x R6 s. t. xT Px 1), and
6
(x R s. t. (eq. (7)) is satisfied) and
(w1 R s. t. |w1 | 1), and (w2 R s. t. |w2 | 1).

(8)

The negative definite condition of the quadratic function V (x)

in (eq. (8)) for the bounded perturbations w1 and w2 can be
written by using the S-procedure as follows:
V (x) 1 (1 xT Px) + 2 (wT1 w1 1) + 3 (wT2 w2 1).

(9)

Writing the above (eq. (9)) in a matrix inequality it yields:

ATcl P + PAcl + 1 P

BTw1 P

BTw2 P
0

(7)

PBw1
2
0
0

PBw2
0
3
0

0
 0.

0
1 + 2 + 3
(10)

By multiplying (eq. (10)) by a matrix which has on the

diagonal (P1 ,1,1,1) and zeros otherwise, and by denoting
P1 = Q, the following bilinear matrix inequality (BMI) due
to the term in 1 is obtained:

III. D RIVER S INFLUENCE ON THE LANE KEEPING

PERFORMANCE

A. Estimation of the reachability set

In order to estimate the influence of the drivers actions

on the lane keeping performance, the minimum reachable set
outgoing from a normal driving set is sought. Moreover, the
drivers influence can be cumulated with the road curvature
effect.
The normal driving set contains states of the vehicle
system in which a lane keeping maneuver has been already
established, i.e. the set of all points having a fixed longitudinal
max . This normal
velocity v and road curvatures less than re
f
driving set can be represented in the state space by a
polytope L (Z N ) (see Fig. 1) and is defined by bounds on
the vehicle state variables: | | N , |r| rN , |L | LN ,
|yL | yNL , | f | fN and | f | fN .
The main idea is to find an invariant set (P) for the system
given in (eqs. (7)), for the bounded perturbations |w1 | 1 and
|w2 | 1, and containing the normal driving set L (Z N ).
Thus, each system trajectory having a starting point in L (Z N )
will remain within this invariant set, i.e. the reachability set
of the system is included in this invariant set (see Fig. 1).
Upper bounds on the vehicle dynamics for the drivers action

QATcl + Acl Q + 1 Q

BTw1

BTw2
0

Bw1
2
0
0

Bw2
0
3
0

0
 0.

0
1 + 2 + 3
(11)

To minimize the reachability set with the initial states in

L (Z N ), the minimum invariant set (P) that includes L (Z N )
is sought. The inclusion of L (Z N ) in (P) can be expressed
as (zNi )T P(zNi ) < 1, or, by using the Schur complements, as
follows:


N T
1
zN
i

(zi )
Q

 0,

i = 1, . . . , 32,

(12)

where zNi , i = 1, . . . , 32, are half of the vertices of L (Z N ).

Consequently, the following BMI optimization problem
results:
min

trace(Q)
i > 0, i = 1, . . . , 3,
Q  0,
eq. (11), eq. (12).

(13)

The decision variables of the above BMI optimization problem given in (eq. (13)) are the matrix Q = QT , Q R66 and
the real scalars i R+ , i = 1, . . . , 3.

120

Fig. 3.

Fig. 2.

Normal driving set, reachability set and several invariant sets.

Eq. (13) is a BMI optimization problem whose result is an

upper bound for the reachability set of the controlled vehicle
under drivers and curvature influence. In sections III-B and
III-C this BMI optimization problem will be used to study:
1) the influence of the driver and of the road curvature on
the magnitude of the controlled vehicle dynamics,
2) the influence of the same perturbations on the lateral
displacement of the vehicle on the lane, i.e. on the lane
keeping performance.
B. Influence on the magnitude of the controlled vehicle dynamics
In order to get an upper bound of the controlled vehicle
dynamics, the maximum state values reachable within the
ellipsoid (P) can be computed. These maximum values are

given by the projections of (P) on each axis, i.e. ximax = qii ,

where xi is the ith component of the vector x and qii is the
ith component of the diagonal of Q.
Trying to obtain bounds ximax as small as possible, it has
been noticed that all invariant ellipsoids containing the set
L (Z N ) contain also the reachability set with initial states
in L (Z N ), as shown in Fig. 2 and in reference [10]. Consequently, the BMI optimization over all axis contained in
(eq. (13)) can be replaced by six BMI optimization problems,
where Q has been replaced by Qk , k = 1, . . . , 6. These new
BMI problems minimize in one of the six axis as folllows:
min

(vk )T Qk vk
k
i > 0, i = 1, . . . , 3,
Qk  0,
eq. (11), eq. (12),

Vehicle on the lane.

Indeed, the coordinates of the front wheels of the vehicle on

the lane, yl and yr , can be linearly approximated as functions
of the lateral offset and of the relative yaw angle (see Fig. 3)
as in [14]:
yl = yL + (l f lS )L + a2 ,

yr = yL + (l f lS )L 2a ,

(15)

where l f is the distance from the vehicle center of gravity,

CG, to the front axle and a is the vehicle width.
Moreover, it has been shown in [14] that having the front
wheels in a central lane strip of width 2d on the lane can be
translated to the space between two parallel hyperplanes yL +
(l f lS )L = 2da
2 in the state space (see Fig. 4). Therefore,
if (P) is not exceeded during the automated steering control,
then the tangent hyperplanes will not be exceeded neither (see
Fig. 4). Consequently, the front wheels of the vehicle will
remain in the corresponding 2d lane strip during the control
process.
Looking into details, the hyperplanes tangent to the ellipsoid (P) have the equations |Fx| = 1, where F, f R6 are
2(l f lS )
2
1
such that F = (0, 0, 2da
, 2da
, 0, 0) and F = ( 2da
) f . The
T
tangency condition is FQF = 1, which further yields:
d=

a 1p
+
fQfT.
2 2

(16)

Consequently, in order to obtain an invariant ellipsoid containing the reachability set and that gives a minimum upper bound
of the front wheels displacement on the lane, the following
BMI optimization problem has to be solved:

(14)

min

fQfT
i > 0, i = 1, . . . , 3,
Q  0,
eq. (11), eq. (12).

(17)

The decision variables of the BMI optimization problem given

in (eq. (17)) are the matrix Q = QT , Q R66 and the real
+
where k = 1, . . . , 6 and vk R6 are vectors such that vkk = 1 scalars i R , i = 1, . . . , 3.
and vkp = 0 for p 6= k. The decision variables of the above BMI
IV. E XPERIMENTAL RESULTS
optimization problem given in (eq. (14)) are the matrix Qk =
(Qk )T , Qk R66 and the real scalars ik R+ , i = 1, . . . , 3. A. Experimental setup
The steering assistance has been tested on a track located
Thus, it yields (xkmax )2 = (vk )T Qk vk = qkkk as objective function
in
Versailles, 20Km west of Paris. The track is 3.5Km long
to be minimized.
with various road profiles including straight and curved lanes.
C. Influence on the lane keeping performance
The prototype vehicle implementing the control law has been
The ellipsoid (P) can be linked to the vehicle position on equipped with a CORREVIT that measures the side slip
the lane. If the system trajectory stays within this ellipsoid angle of the velocity vector, an Inertial Navigation System
during the control activation, the front wheels will stay in a measuring the yaw rate and an odometer for the vehicle speed.
bounded region on the lane.
The steering angle has been obtained from an optical encoder.

121

Fig. 6.

Fig. 4.

Model of the upper part of the steering column.

The Luenberger observer [16] chosen to estimate the

drivers torque is given by :

Central lane strip of width 2d represented in the state space.

The look-ahead positioning variables are measured by means

of a front view camera, installed near the wind shield. This
camera can detect the lane markers using image processing
algorithms and provides estimates for the lateral offset, for
the relative yaw angle and for the road curvature [15].
B. Drivers torque observer
Although the steering wheel is equipped with a sensor to
measure the steering torque, a Luenberger observer has been
designed with the goal to eliminate later this sensor. Two
torque sensors and a DC motor have been mounted on the
steering column as shown in Fig. 5. The Luenberger observer
uses the measured steering wheel angle , the assistance
torque Ta and the resistant torque Tr . To validate the estimated
drivers torque, the sensor installed on the steering wheel is
used.

A x + B u + Lob (y C x ),

(20)

where x is the state estimate and Lob is the observer gain.

y = is the measured output of the system. The matrix C is
thus : C = [1 0 0]. This observer has been implemented on the
prototype vehicle and validated on the test track. Fig. 7 shows
a comparison between the drivers torque measured by the
torque sensor installed in the steering wheel and the observed
drivers torque for a gain matrix Lob = (48.02, 801.02, 57.60).
This gain has been chosen such that the dynamics of the
observation error x = (A Lob C)x, with x = x x , are stable
and present a good trade-off between the convergence speed
and the overshoot. The eigenvalues of the observer are in this
case 20, 15 and 10.

Fig. 7.

Estimated and measured drivers torque.

C. Numerical and experimental results

Fig. 5.

Model of the upper part of the steering column.

The mechanical representation of the upper part of the

steering column is shown in Fig. 6, where Is is the steering
wheel inertie, B s is the steering damping coefficient, K s is
the steering column stiffness, Td is the drivers torque, Tr
is the resistant torque measured downstream the DC motor
and Ta is the DC motor assistance torque. The inertia and
stiffness parameters have been identified in a previous work
and their values are: IS = 0.0192 Kg m2 , B S = 0.058 and K S =
0.1145 Nm/rad.
The mechanical system is depicted hence by the following
equation:
Is

B s + K s + Ta + Td Tr .

(18)

Eq. (18) can be written assuming a small variation of the

drivers torque as follows:

0

= K s
Is
Td
0

B s
Is

1
Is

+ 1
Is
Td
0
0

1
Is

Ta
Tr


.

The maximum value of the road curvature, for which the

max = 0.01m1 .
control law in [12] has been developed is re
f
This value has been imposed by the real test track used for
tests. The longitudinal speed for the experiments has been
set to v = 15m/s as in [12], speed that ensures a confortable
lateral acceleration during lane following (0.22g). Moreover,
it has been chosen to study the influence of a driver torque
below Tdmax = 15Nm, value obtained as a maximum during
testing.
During a normal driving the driver is following the lane
without any special maneuver. Although the state variables
are bounded during a normal driving, their bounds are
difficult to estimate. Bar et al. have studied in [2] accidents
due to unintended lane departures and have provided mean
values of the vehicle dynamics during the drifting off. The
normal driving set has been chosen as maximum among
these values and it is defined in Table I. This set contains
the steady state values of the vehicle in curves for v = 15m/s
and re f 0.01m1 . Subsequently, the invariant sets (P)
have been computed for the two optimization problems given

(19)

122

in (eq. (14)) and (eq. (17)) using the PENBMI solver [17]
along with YALMIP [18].
After solving the optimization problem given in (eq. (14)),
the maximum values of the vehicle state under the simultaneous action of the steering assistance and of the driver are
given in Table II. The results of the optimization problem of
(eq. (17)) is a maximum lateral displacement for the front
wheels of 2.19 m with respect to the center of the lane.
TABLE I
L IMITS OF THE NORMAL DRIVING REGION L (Z N ).
N
1.84
0.03rad

rN
23 /s
0.40rad/s

LN
2.3
0.04rad

yN
L
0.23m
0.23m

fN
2.3
0.04rad

Although this paper presents only a study of the technical

performance of the steering assistance system under drivers
action, and the drivers steering feel is out of scope, some
remarks will be provided on this topic. When the driver
followed the lane simultaneously with the steering assistance,
he felt a delay of the steering assistance in cornering, with
respect to his own action. When counteracting the steering
assistance, the driver experienced a significant resistance in
the steering wheel, which increased with the offset from the
center of the lane.

N
f

6.9 /s
0.12rad/s

TABLE II
G UARANTEED VEHICLE STATE LIMITS DURING

DRIVER - ASSISTANCE

INTERACTION .

max
8.65
0.15rad

rmax
56.37 /s
0.98rad/s

Lmax
15.54
0.27rad

ymax
L
1.59m
1.59m

fmax
11.00
0.19rad

Fig. 9.

max
f
87.83 /s
1.53rad/s

To test the validity of the found bounds, experimental tests

have been performed with the prototype vehicle. The results
of one of these tests are given in Figs. 8 to 11. The prototype
vehicle has been driven on a section of the test track that has
the road curvature profile given in Fig. 10, which is below
max = 0.01m1 .
re
f
During the test, the steering assistance was activated and
the driver followed the lane or counteracted the assistance.
Fig. 9 shows the drivers action. For this sample, the initial
values of the state variables are inside the fixed set called
normal driving set, as shown in Figs. 8 (at t = 20s) and
in the Table I. In Figs. 8 the solid lines represent the state
variables and the dotted lines the limits of the normal
driving set. That shows that all the requirements are satisfied,
so that the computed bounds for the state variables and for
the displacement of the front wheels on the lane should hold.
Looking at the state variables in Fig. 8, they do not
exceed the limits of the normal driving set, i.e. neither the
computed limits from Table II, except for the lateral offset
(Fig. 8 (d)) and the steering angle (Fig. 8(e)). The lateral offset
reaches 0.9m, significatively lower than the guaranteed limit
at 1.59m. The maximum steering angle is less than 0.05rad,
i.e. below the guaranteed limit at 0.192rad. One notes that
the computed upper bounds are generally conservative with
respect to the recorded values. This might be due to the
assumption of the optimization problem in (eq. (14)) that the
max and the strongest drivers torque T max
highest curvature re
f
d
could appear simultaneously, which is not the case here.
The trajectories followed by the front wheels during this
test are represented in Fig. 11 in solid line. The limits of the
lane are represented in red solid line at 1.75m with respect
to the center of the lane (the origin), and the computed bounds
are represented in dotted line at 2.19m with respect to the
center of the lane. One can notice that the computed bounds
are not exceeded, even during curve negotiation, around t =
27s and around t = 36s.

Observed drivers torque and assistance torque.

Fig. 10.

Fig. 11.

Road curvature.

Front wheels trajectories with respect to the borders of the lane.

V. C ONCLUSIONS
This paper investigates the feasability of an integrated lane
departure avoidance assistance with a lane keeping assistance
system. While the lane departure assistance system has been
already designed and tested in [12], the main focus in this
paper is on the lane keeping performance of the steering assistance system under drivers action, for straight and curved
roads. A theoretical method based on invariant sets and BMI
optimization has been proposed to compute bounds on the
state variables and on the front wheels lateral displacement
in case of mixed action driver - steering assistance system.
The computed bounds are subsequently tested with an instrumented prototype vehicle on a test track. All theoretical
computed bounds have been verified in practice.
The most relevant contributions of this paper are
1) the use of a general theoretical method on a concrete
vehicle application;
2) the total compliance of the theoretical results with the
experimental results;

123

(a)

(d)

Fig. 8.

(b)

(c)

(e)

(f)

Vehicle state variables.

3) the confirmation of the robusteness of the linear control

law developed with the assumption of no perturbation.
Nevertheless, the drivers feel of the steering assistance
system hasnt been studied. The next step is to investigate
in more detail the acceptability by the driver of the steering
assistance, by taking it into account in the design process of
the assistance system.
R EFERENCES
[1] H. Peng, W. Zhang, M. Tomizuka and S. Shladover, A Reusability
Study of Vehicle Lateral Control System, in Vehicle System Dynamics,
Vol. 23, pp. 259-278, 1994.
[2] F. Bar, Y. Page, Les sorties de voie involontaires, Technical report,
CEESAR, 2002.
[3] T. Pilutti, G. Ulsoy and D. Hrovat, Vehicle Steering Intervention
Through Differential Braking, Proceedings of the American Control
Conference, pp. 590-595, 1995.
[4] N.Minoiu, S. Mammar, M. Netto and B. Lusetti Driver steering
assistance for lane departure avoidance based on hybrid automata
and on composite Lyapunov function, IEEE Trans. on Intelligent
Transportation Systems, accepted paper, to be published in 2009.
[5] N.Minoiu, M. Netto, S. Mammar and B. Lusetti Driver steering
assistance for lane departure avoidance, Control Engineering Practice,
accepted paper, to be published in 2009.
[6] T. Raharijaoana, G. Duc and S. Mammar Robust Control and analysis with application to Lateral Driving Assistance, in Proceedings
of IEEE Intelligent Transportation Systems, pp. 247-252, 2003.
[7] P. Leelavansuk, H. Yoshida, and M. Nagai, Cooperative Steering
Characteristics of Driver and Lane-Keeping Assistance System, International Journal of ITS Research, Vol. 1, No. 1, 2003, pp. 17-24.
[8] H. Yoshida, S. Takamura and M. Nagai, Steering Torque Design
of Attitude Control Assistance System for Lane-Keeping Situation,
Proceeding of International Symposium on Advanced Vehicle Control,
Vol. 1, pp. 40-45, 2008.
[9] U. Kiencke and L. Nielsen, Automotive Control Systems: For Engine,
Driveline and Vehicle, Springer Verlag, 2004.
[10] K. L. R. Talvala, N. Minoiu Enache, S. Mammar, C. J. Gerdes, Vehicle
control at the limits of handling: Lanekeeping and Yaw Stability via
Lyapunov Functions, Technical Report, Dynamic Design Laboratory,
Stanford University, June 2008.
[11] S. Boyd, L. El Ghaoui, E. Feron and V. Balakrishnan, Linear Matrix
Inequalities in System and Control Theory, Society for Industrial and
Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia, 1994.
[12] N. Minoiu Enache, S. Mammar, B. Lusetti and M. Netto Driver
steering assistance: lane departure prevention for curvy roads using
feedforward correction and BMI optimization, Proceeding of AVEC
International Symposium, pp. 22-27, Kobe 2008.

[13] K. Nagpal, J. Abedor, K. Poolla, An LMI Approach to Peak-toPeak Gain Minimization: Filtering and Control, Proceedings of the
American Control Conference, pp. 742-746, Baltimore, Maryland,
1994.
[14] N. Minoiu Enache, B. Lusetti, S. Mammar and M. Netto, Assistance
preventive a` la sortie de voie : Cas de la conduite en virage (Driver
steering assistance to lane departure avoidance: Case of curvy roads),
CIFA, Bucarest 2008.
[15] R. Labayrade, J. Douret, J. Laneurit and R. Chapuis, A Reliable
and Robust Lane Detection System based on the Parallel Use of
Three Algorithms for Driving Safety Assistance, IEICE Trans. on
Information and Systems Online, Vol. E89-D, No. 7, pp. 2092-2100,
2006.
[16] D.G. Luenberger, An introduction to observers, IEEE Trans. on
Automatic Control, Vol. 16, pp. 896-602, 1971.
[17] M. Kocvara and M. Stingl, PENBMI Users Guide (Version
2.1), PENOPT GbR, Igensdorf OT Stockach, Germany, 2006.
http://www.penopt.com.
[18] M. Grant and S. Boyd, CVX: Matlab software for disciplined convex
programming (web page and software), http://stanford.edu/boyd/cvx,
2008.

124

A PPENDIX
TABLE III
V EHICLE PARAMETERS VALUES

Parameter
BS
cf0
cr0
IS
J
KP
lf
lr
lS
a
m
RS
v
t

Value
steering system
damping coefficient
front cornering stiffness
rear cornering stiffness
inertial moment of steering system
vehicle yaw moment of inertia
manual steering
distance form CG to front axle
distance from CG to rear axle
look-ahead distance
vehicle width
total mass
steering gear ratio
longitudinal velocity
tire length contact
adhesion
lane width

15
40000 N/rad
35000 N/rad
0.05kgm2
2454 kgm2
1
1.22m
1.44 m
0.98m
1.5m
1600 kg
16
16m/s
0.13m
1
3.5m