Downloaded from SAE International by University of Leeds, Sunday, August 12, 2018

The Engineering Society

For Advancing Mobility
Land Sea Air and Space ® 400 COMMONWEALTH DRIVE WARRENDALE, PA 15096

..7•;:zr,:,
.. 'E:. .
,44--.---
---k
r! %'/
,, ..,,,,,A2',...,.. p. 0.7..i ..,.1 .„1-g.---,...., ..
IN ,..„..,,p. --‘,7m.. ..1,' l'. (.r ,f3- ',.' : . •• '
,... 4•" `-v, ,:..mr,-,-x.,-, -.:: - • • . " ' • -'-.
.,,7 i, X %
' ,.;•.!,...,...., --.,:. -•;, ,. ' ':. ::.:C;:;:„ ,., ,.:".
ii% Ari,,ar • .r.,:t r ••••!—;,./ N.,-......., .,2 ...:`,.- 4:4:,„,..c, :-: :.: .4..,7,-.57:' ' ',.:-;---,,..
0 ..
til

880643

Linear Analysis of a Vehicle with Four-

Wheel Steering
J. E. Bernard, M. J. Vanderploeg, and J. E. Shannan
Iowa State Univ.

International Congress and Exposition

Detroit, Michigan
February 29-March 4, 1988
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Leeds, Sunday, August 12, 2018

The appearance of the code at the bottom of the first page of this paper indicates
SAE's consent that copies of the paper may be made for persona! or interne' use, or
for the personal or internal use of specific clients. This consent is given on the con-
dition, however, that the copier pay the stated per article copy fee through the
Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., Operations Center, P.O. Box 765, Schenectady,
N.Y. 12301, for copying beyond that permitted by Sections 107 or 108 of the U.S.
Copyright Law. This consent does not extend to other kinds of copying such as
copying for general distribution, for advertising or promotional purposes, for
creating new collective works, or for resale.

Papers published prior to 1978 may also be copied at a per paper fee of S2.50
under the above stated conditions.

SAE routinely stocks printed papers for a period of three years following date of
publication. Direct your orders to SAE Order Department.

To obtain quantity reprint rates, permission to reprint a technical paper or per-

mission to use copyrighted SAE publications in other works, contact the SAE
Publications Division.

Air SAE AWN a•e

absl • inrcl an0 mCe.c+1,
ire SAE G ,obar MCO'rly araOase

SAE GLOBAL MOBILITY DATABASE

No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form, in

an electronic retrieval system or otherwise, without the prior
written permission of the publisher.

ISSN 0148-7191
Copyright ©1988 Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc.

Positions and opinions advanced in this paper are those of Persons wishing to submit papers to be considered for
the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE. The author presentation or publication through SAE should send the
is solely responsible for the content of the paper. A process manuscript or a 300 word abstract of a proposed manus-
is available by which discussions will be printed with the cript to: Secretary, Engineering Activity Board, SAE.
paper if it is published In SAE Transactions. For permission
to publish this paper In full or in part, contact the SAE
Publications Division. Printed in U.S.A.
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Leeds, Sunday, August 12, 2018
Linear Analysis of a Vehicle with Four-
Wheel Steering
J. E. Bernard, M. J. Vanderploeg, and J. E. Shannan
ABSTRACT
Linear anaylsis is a frequently used tool to
aid in the understanding of directional response.
understeer gradient, characteristic or critical
speed, and yaw rate and lateral acceleration
response times have been particularly helpful.
This paper studies the use of these measures
in the context of vehicles with four-wheel
steering. The paper shows that, with only a
slight change in SAE definitions, the understeer
gradient retains its traditional meaning, but the
characteristic speed will depend on the steering
system if the steady state part of the steering
control algorithm is speed sensitive. The paper
also discusses testing for the understeer
gradient, and the anticipated changes in response
time due to four-wheel steering.
SEVERAL ARTICLES HAVE recently appeared
concerning the effect of four-wheel steering on
passenger car directional response. In 1985,
Sant) et. al. (1) used a linear model to study
four-wheel steer. They defined the parameter k
as the ratio of rear to front steer angles. A
positive k value indicates that the front wheels
are steering in the same direction as the rear
wheels.
Sane suggested that k be chosen to hold zero
sideslip angle in a steady turn. He computed the
following expression for k.
Ma ] 2
-b + u
Cc L
cr
lib ] 2
a +
Cc L u
'f
It follows that at low speeds the steer angle
ratio is negative, resulting in a shorter turning
radius and therefore increased maneuverability.
At high speeds the steer angle ratio is positive,
which Reference 1 showed led to reduced lateral
acceleration gain and lateral acceleration
response time.
In 1986, Shibahata et. al. (2) presented
results from an experimental vehicle equipped
with four-wheel steer. The vehicle uses a micro-
0148-7191/88/0229-0643$02.50
Copyright 1988 Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc.
880643
Iowa State Univ.
computer to change the steer angle ratio as a
function of vehicle velocity. The steer angle
ratio k as a function of speed was again
determined based on a zero sideslip angle in a
steady turn. As expected, four-wheel steer
reduced the turning radius at low speeds and
increased the turning radius at high speeds. But
at high speeds lateral acceleration gain was
objectionably low.
Another experimental four-wheel steer
vehicle was developed by Takiguchi et. al. (3).
Again, the steering control system varied the k
as a function of vehicle speed. However, instead
of determining the steer angle ratio based on the
zero sideslip criterion, they chose the steer
angle ratio to equalize the phase lag for yaw
rate and lateral acceleration. This criterion
was based on subjective evaluation which found
the most positive ratings were obtained when the
difference between the phase lags was minimized.
Tests results demonstrated that k selected in
this way led to improved directional response
throughout the driving speed range. Particular
improvement over zero sideslip strategy was the
maintenance of acceptable lateral acceleration
gain at high speeds.
The 1987 work of Fukanaga et. al. (4)
concluded, based on analysis and experiments,
that time delays in the front-to-rear steer
relationships are effective in improving handling
and stability.
There are currently several companies with
four-wheel steer vehicles in production (5-8),
For the vehicle produced by Honda, k is a
(1) function of steer amplitude rather than speed, as
shown in Figure 1. The ratio k ranges from about
0.55 for small steer angles to negative values
for large steer angles (6).
The next section of this paper derives
linear differential equations of motion of
sufficient complexity to aid in assessing
traditional measures of vehicle performance such
as understeer gradient and response time for
vehicles which rely on four-wheel steering.
These equations are then used to derive an
expression for the understeer gradient and the
characteristic and critical speed and an


Downloaded from SAE International by University of Leeds, Sunday, August 12, 2018

2 88064
—
2
LE

t; 1
L
0
0

cc‘
-3
L
-4

‘r-a
a) -6
cr 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
"rent Steer Angle ( 0cgrecs )
yr
Figure 1. Honda Steering Angles

Figure 2. Vehicle Model

approximate expression for response time.

Finally, the equations are solved numerically
to shed some additional light on yaw rate and
lateral acceleration response time. ar
(0+ - 8f) (5a)
yf lilatC
LINEAR ANALYSIS f

It is straightforward to derive linear

differential equations which include steering at br
both front and rear. The model used here, which F C am (5b)
yr (13 8r)
is shown in Figure 2, has two degrees of freedom, 1+C C
occ r
yaw rate and sideslip angle.
The lateral forces are assumed to be linear It is convenient to now rename coefficients
functions of the slip angle.

Fy f - da f of (2a) Caf
C _ (6a)

Fy r - Ca r ar (2b)
af
1+ cet C
f

Since we will be directly concerned with X

O
C (6b)
understeer, it is important to include steering OX
+CC
compliance. This can be done in a straight- CCC r

forward way. The lateral forces are

The new coefficients C and C Car
may be thought
af
Fy i = dat (t3 _ (3a) of as cornering stiffnesses modified by the
effect of steering compliance.
We can now sum forces and moments in the

Fy =
r I
(0 -
br
U
I)
r
(3b)
usual way to get the traditional differential
equations of motion:
aC ccf - bC ccr r at + C ar }
1
+ {uM +
u M {C
where I and I are the front and rear steer
f r
angles, including the effects of compliance.
Now we assume a linear relationship for 1 {C
Flu + orc arj. (7a)
steering compliance:

l t 6 t C t Fyt (4a)
+
1r
I
2
C at e + C b
ar
2 } -
u
1
+ - iC od a C b
I
1
fir= 6 - C F (4b)
r r yr
1
= a6 C b6
I af f or r} (7b)
where 6 and 6 are the steer angles we would
observe in absEnce of compliance, and C f and Cr It is our intention here to discuss the
are constants relating lateral force to change in traditional measures of response time and
steer angle. Using relations Eq. (4) in Eq. (3) understeer gradient in a four-wheel steer
and rearranging yields context. Consider first understeer.


Downloaded from SAE International by University of Leeds, Sunday, August 12, 2018

880643 3

UNDERSTEER

We begin the discussion with the steady

state yaw rate, which can be derived by setting
the derivatives to zero in Eq. (7). In that case

r "f - Sr)
u - 2W W ) (8)
u2 r .i. L
i Ca Co
11'f 'r.

where r/u is the inverse of the turning radius.

Multiplying by u 2 yields the lateral acceleration

( 6f - 8r)
(9)
Ay - 1{ W f // r) L
Caf Ca +

We can rewrite Eq. (9) in a way that will

facilitate our discussion of understeer

6 - 6 .
f r R
K AY (10)
where
Figure 3. Ackerman Angle for Front Steer Vehicle
W
f Wr
Caf Car
and thus the Ackerman angle is
and where R is the turn radius and K is the
expression for the understeer gradient of a . (14)
6a R
front steer vehicle.
To facilitate a detailed discussion of
The term K Ay/g in Eq. (12) indicates the change
understeer in a four-wheel steer vehicle, it
in steer from the Ackerman angle which is
will be useful to discuss the more traditional
required to negotiate a given turn because of the
analysis of vehicles with front steer only. This
understeer or oversteer qualities of the vehicle.
material is found throughout the vehicle dynamics
Reference 12 uses the term understeer in the
literature. References 9, 10, and 11 are a good
following way: "A vehicle is understeer if the
representative sample.
ratio of the steering wheel angle gradient to the
overall steering ratio is greater than the
UNDERSTEER GRADIENT OF A FRONT STEER VEHICLE
Ackerman steer angle gradient." The coefficient K
is referred to as the understeer gradient, which
Consider the front steer vehicle. From Eq.
is defined as "the quantity obtained by subtract-
(10) we have
ing the Ackerman steer angle gradient from the
L ratio of the steering wheel angle gradient to the
6 . K AY (12)
f R overall steering ratio." This definition can be
elucidated by differentiating Eq. (12) with
respect to Ay/g. That operation yields
There are various important effects, such as roll
steer, for example, which have not been included
here. These effects tend to be proportional to K =' (15)
6f
Ay, at least at steady state, and so can be
included in K (11). Thus Eq. (12) has far wider
where the prime indicates differentiation with
utility than might be understood because of the
respect to Ay/g at constant speed. While the
many assumptions underpinning our derivation.
units of K in Eq. (15) are radians, many vehicle
We can view L/R, the so called Ackerman dynamicists describe the understeer gradient in
angle, as the steer angle required for a neutral terms of degrees per g.
steer vehicle to turn in a circle of radius R.
The definitions in Reference 12 indicate
There is a familiar geometric interpretation that
that the understeer gradient K is defined at
should be noted here, as shown in Figure 3. The
constant trim, i.e., at constant speed. That
Ackerman angle is the steer required for any
does not indicate that K needs to be measured
vehicle to negotiate a turn of radius R at very
using a constant speed test. Eq. (12) indicates
low speed. Since the slip angles are zero for
that when steer is plotted against lateral
this maneuver, the figure shows that, for small
acceleration in g's in a constant radius test,
steer angles
the slope will be K. And when steer is held
constant and L/R is plotted against lateral
R6 = L (13)
acceleration in g's, the slope will be -K.
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Leeds, Sunday, August 12, 2018

4 880643

The constant speed test yields a slightly

more complicated result. Note that the Ackerman
angle may be written
LL ,ft),
R - = 2 (16)
u

Thus when steer is plotted against steady state

Ay/g in a constant speed test, we see from Eq.
(12) that the slope is

tv - 15j= + K (17)
- 2
u

2
and we find K by subtracting gL/u from the
measured slope.

UNDERSTEER GRADIENT OF A FOUR-WHEEL STEER VEHICLE

To analyze the understeer gradient of a four-

wheel steer vehicle we reconsider Eq. (10).

L
6 = - + KAy (18)
f - 6 r Rg

Figure 4 illustrates that L/R is again the steer

angle required to negotiate a very low speed
turn. Thus, the first term on the right hand
side of Eq. (8) may again be viewed as the
Ackerman angle. The second term is the change in
front and rear steer from the Ackerman angle Figure 4. Ackerman Angle for Four-Wheel Steer
required to negotiate a given turn because of the
understeer or oversteer properties of the
vehicle.
Now we can derive an expression for the
understeer gradient by differentiating Eq.(18)
with respect to Ay/g under conditions of constant
. _rt.} 6'
speed. (23)
r a6
f f

"f - 81.
)1
'
L2.+ K (19)
Now let
u
"r . ki, (24)
This equation has a satisfying symmetry with
Eq. (17). In short, if we are willing to modify
the traditional SAE definitions to admit the and we can rewrite Eq. (22) as
influence of front and rear steer, then K in Eq.
(19) remains the definition of understeer 1
gradient. k' . 1 (kL - k)6i (25)
We can rewrite Eq. (19) to shed some light f
on the derivative term. Again let k be the ratio
of rear steer angle to front steer angle. Then And then

8f - 6r = 6 f (1-k) (20) (6f - 6r )' = 6i (1 - kL) (26)

Now differentiate to get And now we have, from Eq. (10) and Eq. (17)
(6f - 6r )' = 61 ' (1-k) - 6 f ic' (21)
6'(1 - k L ) = El= + K (27)
f 2
Now we need an expression for k' u

6' 8 - ' 6
Sr It is clear from Eq. (27) that, although K
61-11 f r retains its usual definition, it may well be more
k' = { - f - (22)
2 difficult to determine experimentally in the
6
f presence of rear steer. In particular, test
results will be influenced by the rear steer
But at constant speed angle.
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Leeds, Sunday, August 12, 2018

880643 5

In general, it is obvious from Eq. (18) that Constant Spoeu of 25 m/s

we will need detailed knowledge of both 6, and 8r 5

to determine K. There are instances, however,

L
where a knowledge of the general makeup of the O "
steering system can lead to a preferred test 0
procedure. - 3
Consider, for example, the zero-sideslip
steering system described by Eq. (1). In this M 2
case, the relationship between 8 f and 8 rdepends
only on speed, so a constant speed test may be ▪L
U
useful. This is illustrated in Figure 5, which
compares simulated constant speed test results ▪ 0
M
Logone
for the vehicle of Table 1 equipped with (i) :ore siao Sl1p Stour ID
Frcnt Kneol Steer (II:
zero-sideslip steering, and (ii) front wheel

steering only. As we would expect from Eq. (27), • 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0 .5
simulated data from both tests yield a straight Lateral Acce;eration I g's I
line, and the difference between the slopes of
the lines is the factor 1 - k . Figure 5. Constant Speed Test
L
Now consider the case where 8 depends on Sf
but not on speed, as in Figure 1. r In this case,
a constant steer test may be useful. This is
illustrated in Figure 6 which compares simulated Constant Front Steer Angle of 2.5 negreo
constant steer test results for the vehicle of 3
Legend
Table 1 equipped with (i) 8 rdependent on 8 f as HoMa p 4 Hhau; Stem- II)
in Figure 1, and (ii) front wheel steering only. --Front Wheel Stear Iki)
1'l
The figure verifies that in both cases, the slope
is -K. O 2

CHARACTERISTIC SPEED AND CRITICAL SPEED It

Sm.

So.

SIM
It is also appropriate here to discuss key SU.

measures traditionally related to the understeer

gradient, namely, the characteristic speed and
the critical speed. The characteristic speed is 0
defined as, "The forward speed for an under- 0,0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0 5
steer vehicle at which the steering sensitivity Lateral Acceleration I g's )
at zero lateral acceleration trim is one half the
steering sensitivity of a neutral steer vehicle" Figure 6. Constant Steer Test
(12). Put more simply, given a constant steer
angle, the characteristic speed is the speed at
which the radius of the turn will be twice the
very low speed radius.
It is straightforward to solve for the 6
characteristic speed. From Eq. (8) we have 1 f
(31)
R 2
8 (1-k) Mbu
1 f a + CafL
(28)
R - 2
Ku
+L
g and the characteristic speed becomes
Thus we see that, as long as k is not speed
dependent, we get the traditional expression for a CcefL
the characteristic speed, (32)
UCHAR = E ff-

gL
(29) This can be written
U CHAR - K

But if k is a function of speed, the character-

istic speed will change from the traditional W C f (33)
UCHAR
value. For example, if k is defined by the zero f a
sideslip angle algorithm of Eq. (1), then

, Mau l Comparison of Eq. (29) and Eq. (33) indicates

-" CarL that the characteristic speed for the zero-side
1f slip vehicle is much lower than the traditional
1 (30)
R - 2
Ku Mbu value.
+ L a + ft Note in particular that
g
This can be reduced to ga < gL (34a)
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Leeds, Sunday, August 12, 2018

6 880643

W 0.12
f a
>K (34b)
Cc 0.:o
(f
Now consider the critical speed of an c.os
oversteer vehicle. The critical speed is defined
as, "The forward speed of an oversteer vehicle at 0.06
which the steering sensitivity at zero lateral
• 00.
acceleration trim is infinite" (12). The critical '
speed is the speed at which the denominator in
— 0.02
Eq. (28) is zero. Clearly, for finite values of
k we get the traditional expression for the • 0.00
critical speed
-0.02
• 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2,0 2 5
Tima ( Seconds )
UCRIT = (35)

Figure 7. Yaw Rate Response

and the critical speed is unaffected by the
steering mechanism.
It is also of interest to consider the
effect of four-wheel steer on response time.

RESPONSE TIME OF A FOUR-WHEEL STEER VEHICLE

* (1-k)
t (40)
The calculation of response time is more Carkb
tedious than the calculation of understeer
gradient. Thus we will begin here with an
approximation to the yaw rate response time, This can be written
followed by simulated results derived from
Eq. (7). *
t (41)
It is suggested in Reference 9 that a useful - Ok)
measure of response time can be derived from the
calculated response to a step steer. In short, where
the approximate measure t * is the steady state
yaw rate divided by the time derivative of the C b
ar
yaw rate immediately following the step steer - (42)
C a
input. af

t ---
ss For a neutral steer vehicle, 0=1, and Eq.
m (36) *
(41) indicates that t ii s not dependent on k.
Figure 7, which presents the calculated response For understeer vehicles, Q > 1 and t * increases
of the vehicle of Table 1 at 25 m/sec and 0.5
front steer angle, gives an intuitive sense of with k, and for oversteer vehicles, Q < 1 and t *
this measure. decreases with k.
The slope m of the yaw rate at the The acceleration response time is more
initiation of the maneuver can be derived by tedious to study analytically. Thus Figure 8
setting r and 0 to zero in Eq. (76). presents the results of numerical work which
illustrate the principles involved. All the
C a - C ba calculations are done at 25 m/sec for the vehicle
af f ar r of Table 1, and we define response time as the
m_ (37)
I time required to reach 90% of the steady state
value.
Now again setting S f = kat. , we have Figure 8a indicates that both four-wheel
steer vehicles have lower response times than the
C kb front wheel steer vehicle. This is expected
ar
(38)
I since the base vehicle is understeer and, in both
cases, k > O. The figure indicates that, as
where i is the slope corresponding to front steer expected, response time for the zero-sideslip
only. In the same way, from Eq. (8) the steady vehicle doesn't change with steer amplitude. But
state yaw rate is for the steering system of Figure 1, where k
depends on steer amplitude, the figure shows the
expected decrease in response time as front steer
-r (1-k) (39)
rss increases and k decreases.
The zero acceleration response time shown in
where F is the steady state yaw rate of the front Figure 8b for low steer angles reflects the fact
steer vehicle. The approximate response time t* that step steer input at high-k values leads to
is now an initial response of at least 90% of steady
state. This is illustrated in Figure 9.
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Leeds, Sunday, August 12, 2018

880643 7

CONCLUSIONS

0.5 Understeer gradient, characteristic speed,

Legona
Zo,u SiOu Silp Steer critical speed, and yaw rate and lateral
• 0.5 4 Whets]. Steer
acceleration response times are traditional
tl Front Whool Steer
metrics which have been used to help understand
T1 ' 0.4
directional response. This paper studies these
measures in the context of four-wheel steering.
d 0.3 --------
Some conclusions are:

U
0.2 1) The yaw rate gain and the lateral
2
0 acceleration gain depend on the ratio
aO 0.1 of rear steer to front steer. In particular,
if the ratio of rear steer to front steer is
2 0.0
0 2 3 .1 positive, yaw rate gain and lateral
Front Steer Angle I Degrees ) acceleration gain decrease compared to front
wheel steer only.
Figure 8a. Yaw Rate Response Times for Constant
2) We can define understeer gradient in the
Forward Velocity of 25 m/s.
traditional way if we define steer angle
gradient and Ackerman angle in a way that
considers both front and rear steer.
— 1,0
Logenu
Zere Sf.do 5110 Steer 3) Testing for understeer gradient is more
C. Honou 4 Wnoel. St ear complex in a four-wheel steer context.
Front Hhool Steer

V;• 0.5 4) The characteristic speed of the four-wheel

r-
/ steer vehicle depends on the steering system
0.4
S if the ratio of rear steer to front steer is
/ speed dependent.
0.2
C.
/ 5) Critical speed does not depend on the
. 0.0
a steering system.
,

0 1 2 2 4 6) For understeer vehicles, we expect yaw rate
Front Steer Angle Degrees 1 response time to increase with the ratio of
rear steer to front steer. Lateral accelera-
Figure Ob. Lateral Acceleration Response Times tion is a more complicated issue because of
for Constant Forward Velocity of the trade off between the initial response to
25 m/s. step steer input at the rear wheels and the
longer term transient effects.

Step Steer ,Sesponse

Honda Four Wheel Steer
Front Steer Angle of 1 Degree ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Forward Velocity of 25 m/s
.00,20 Thanks to Ron Leffert of General Motors for
helpful suggestions concerning the definition of
understeer gradient.
0 0.15

0.10 Table 1

0 Parameters For a Typical Vehicle

110.05—
• . 1360 Kg
y 0.00-
• 0 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2 0 a = 1.113 m
Time ( Seconds )
b . 1.427 m
2
Figure 9. Lateral Acceleration Response for = 2500 Kg-m
Honda Four-Wheel Steering at 25 m/s.
= 61170 N/rad
mf

• or = 76470 N/rad

K = 2.64 degrees/g
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Leeds, Sunday, August 12, 2018

8 880643

NOMENCLATURE References

a distance from front wheels to cg

1. Sano, S., Furukawa, Y. and Shiraishi, S.,
b distance from rear wheels to cg "Four-Wheel Steering System with Rear Wheel
Steer Angle Controlled as a Function of
-t- 1 total front tire cornering stiffness Steering Wheel Angle," SAE Paper 860625,
a
1986.
-t- total rear tire cornering stiffness
ar Shibahata, Y., Irie, N., Itoh, H. and
2.
C effective front cornering stiffness Nakamura, K., "The Development of an
af Experimental Four-Wheel Steering Vehicle,"
C effective rear cornering stiffness SAE Paper 860623, 1986.
ar
C front lateral force steering compliance 3. Takiguchi, T., Yasuda, N., Furutani, S.,
f Kanazawa, H. and Inoue, H., "Improvement of
C rear lateral force steering compliance Vehicle Dynamics by Vehicle-Speed-Sensing
r Front-Wheel Steering System," SAE Paper
F front lateral tire force 860624, 1986.
Yf
F rear lateral tire force 4. Fukunaga, Y., Irie, N., Kuroki, J. and
Yr Sugasawa, F., "Improved Handling and
g acceleration due to gravity Stability using Four-Wheel Steering," The
11th International Conference on
I yaw moment of inertia Experimental Technical Safety Vehicles,
Washington, D.C., May 12-15, 1987.
k ratio of rear to front steer angles
5. Popular Science, pp. 60-65, Feb. 1986.
K understeer gradient
6. Car and Driver, pp. 40-45, Aug. 1987.
wheelbase (a + b)
7. Popular Science, pp. 50-53, Aug. 1987.
li mass of the vehicle
8. Automotive Industries, pp. 64-65, Aug. 1987.
r yaw rate
9. Bundorf, R. T. and Leffert, R. L., "The
u forward speed Cornering Compliance Concept for Description
of Vehicle Directional Control Properties,"
u critical speed SAE Paper 760713, 1976.
CRIT
u characteristic speed 10. Wong, J. Y., Theory of Ground Vehicles,
CHAR Wiley, 1978.
W weight of the vehicle
11. Bundorf, R. T., "The Influence of Vehicle
of front tire sideslip angle Design Parameters on Characteristic Speed,"
SAE Paper 670078, 1967.
a rear tire sideslip angle
r 12. SAE Vehicle Dynamics Terminology, SAE J670d.
0 vehicle sideslip angle

6 front steer angle

f
8 rear steer angle
r
If front steer angle including the effects
of compliance

Ir rear steer angle including the effects

of compliance
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Leeds, Sunday, August 12, 2018

Positions and opinions advanced In this paper are those of
the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE. The author
is solely responsible for the content of the paper. A process
is available by which discussions will be printed with the
paper if It is published in SAE Transactions. For permission
to publish this paper In full or in part, contact the SAE
Publications Division.
Persons wishing to submit papers to be considered for
presentation or publication through SAE should send the
manuscript or a 300 word abstract of a proposed manus-
cript to: Secretary, Engineering Activity Board, SAE.
Printed in U.S.A.