Longitudinal Control for Connected and Automated Vehicles in Contested Environments

The Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) defines six levels of driving automation, ranging from Level 0 to Level 5. Automated driving systems perform entire dynamic driving tasks for Levels 3–5 automated vehicles. Delegating dynamic driving tasks from driver to automated driving systems can elimina...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Shirin Noei, Mohammadreza Parvizimosaed, Mohammadreza Noei
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2021-08-01
Series:Electronics
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9292/10/16/1994
id doaj-c4d265ec7fe849d9af30524f98e1915f
record_format Article
spelling doaj-c4d265ec7fe849d9af30524f98e1915f2021-08-26T13:41:46ZengMDPI AGElectronics2079-92922021-08-01101994199410.3390/electronics10161994Longitudinal Control for Connected and Automated Vehicles in Contested EnvironmentsShirin Noei0Mohammadreza Parvizimosaed1Mohammadreza Noei2Center for Energy Systems Research, Tennessee Technological University, Cookeville, TN 38505, USADepartment of Computer Engineering, K. N. Toosi University of Technology, Tehran 16317-14191, IranDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran 14117-13116, IranThe Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) defines six levels of driving automation, ranging from Level 0 to Level 5. Automated driving systems perform entire dynamic driving tasks for Levels 3–5 automated vehicles. Delegating dynamic driving tasks from driver to automated driving systems can eliminate crashes attributed to driver errors. Sharing status, sharing intent, seeking agreement, or sharing prescriptive information between road users and vehicles dedicated to automated driving systems can further enhance dynamic driving task performance, safety, and traffic operations. Extensive simulation is required to reduce operating costs and achieve an acceptable risk level before testing cooperative automated driving systems in laboratory environments, test tracks, or public roads. Cooperative automated driving systems can be simulated using a vehicle dynamics simulation tool (e.g., CarMaker and CarSim) or a traffic microsimulation tool (e.g., Vissim and Aimsun). Vehicle dynamics simulation tools are mainly used for verification and validation purposes on a small scale, while traffic microsimulation tools are mainly used for verification purposes on a large scale. Vehicle dynamics simulation tools can simulate longitudinal, lateral, and vertical dynamics for only a few vehicles in each scenario (e.g., up to ten vehicles in CarMaker and up to twenty vehicles in CarSim). Conventional traffic microsimulation tools can simulate vehicle-following, lane-changing, and gap-acceptance behaviors for many vehicles in each scenario without simulating vehicle powertrain. Vehicle dynamics simulation tools are more compute-intensive but more accurate than traffic microsimulation tools. Due to software architecture or computing power limitations, simplifying assumptions underlying convectional traffic microsimulation tools may have been a necessary compromise long ago. There is, therefore, a need for a simulation tool to optimize computational complexity and accuracy to simulate many vehicles in each scenario with reasonable accuracy. This research proposes a traffic microsimulation tool that employs a simplified vehicle powertrain model and a model-based fault detection method to simulate many vehicles with reasonable accuracy at each simulation time step under noise and unknown inputs. Our traffic microsimulation tool considers driver characteristics, vehicle model, grade, pavement conditions, operating mode, vehicle-to-vehicle communication vulnerabilities, and traffic conditions to estimate longitudinal control variables with reasonable accuracy at each simulation time step for many conventional vehicles, vehicles dedicated to automated driving systems, and vehicles equipped with cooperative automated driving systems. Proposed vehicle-following model and longitudinal control functions are verified for fourteen vehicle models, operating in manual, automated, and cooperative automated modes over two driving schedules under three malicious fault magnitudes on transmitted accelerations.https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9292/10/16/1994traffic microsimulation toolcooperative automated driving systemsvehicle powertrainsafetyroad capacitycontested environments
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Shirin Noei
Mohammadreza Parvizimosaed
Mohammadreza Noei
spellingShingle Shirin Noei
Mohammadreza Parvizimosaed
Mohammadreza Noei
Longitudinal Control for Connected and Automated Vehicles in Contested Environments
Electronics
traffic microsimulation tool
cooperative automated driving systems
vehicle powertrain
safety
road capacity
contested environments
author_facet Shirin Noei
Mohammadreza Parvizimosaed
Mohammadreza Noei
author_sort Shirin Noei
title Longitudinal Control for Connected and Automated Vehicles in Contested Environments
title_short Longitudinal Control for Connected and Automated Vehicles in Contested Environments
title_full Longitudinal Control for Connected and Automated Vehicles in Contested Environments
title_fullStr Longitudinal Control for Connected and Automated Vehicles in Contested Environments
title_full_unstemmed Longitudinal Control for Connected and Automated Vehicles in Contested Environments
title_sort longitudinal control for connected and automated vehicles in contested environments
publisher MDPI AG
series Electronics
issn 2079-9292
publishDate 2021-08-01
description The Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) defines six levels of driving automation, ranging from Level 0 to Level 5. Automated driving systems perform entire dynamic driving tasks for Levels 3–5 automated vehicles. Delegating dynamic driving tasks from driver to automated driving systems can eliminate crashes attributed to driver errors. Sharing status, sharing intent, seeking agreement, or sharing prescriptive information between road users and vehicles dedicated to automated driving systems can further enhance dynamic driving task performance, safety, and traffic operations. Extensive simulation is required to reduce operating costs and achieve an acceptable risk level before testing cooperative automated driving systems in laboratory environments, test tracks, or public roads. Cooperative automated driving systems can be simulated using a vehicle dynamics simulation tool (e.g., CarMaker and CarSim) or a traffic microsimulation tool (e.g., Vissim and Aimsun). Vehicle dynamics simulation tools are mainly used for verification and validation purposes on a small scale, while traffic microsimulation tools are mainly used for verification purposes on a large scale. Vehicle dynamics simulation tools can simulate longitudinal, lateral, and vertical dynamics for only a few vehicles in each scenario (e.g., up to ten vehicles in CarMaker and up to twenty vehicles in CarSim). Conventional traffic microsimulation tools can simulate vehicle-following, lane-changing, and gap-acceptance behaviors for many vehicles in each scenario without simulating vehicle powertrain. Vehicle dynamics simulation tools are more compute-intensive but more accurate than traffic microsimulation tools. Due to software architecture or computing power limitations, simplifying assumptions underlying convectional traffic microsimulation tools may have been a necessary compromise long ago. There is, therefore, a need for a simulation tool to optimize computational complexity and accuracy to simulate many vehicles in each scenario with reasonable accuracy. This research proposes a traffic microsimulation tool that employs a simplified vehicle powertrain model and a model-based fault detection method to simulate many vehicles with reasonable accuracy at each simulation time step under noise and unknown inputs. Our traffic microsimulation tool considers driver characteristics, vehicle model, grade, pavement conditions, operating mode, vehicle-to-vehicle communication vulnerabilities, and traffic conditions to estimate longitudinal control variables with reasonable accuracy at each simulation time step for many conventional vehicles, vehicles dedicated to automated driving systems, and vehicles equipped with cooperative automated driving systems. Proposed vehicle-following model and longitudinal control functions are verified for fourteen vehicle models, operating in manual, automated, and cooperative automated modes over two driving schedules under three malicious fault magnitudes on transmitted accelerations.
topic traffic microsimulation tool
cooperative automated driving systems
vehicle powertrain
safety
road capacity
contested environments
url https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9292/10/16/1994
work_keys_str_mv AT shirinnoei longitudinalcontrolforconnectedandautomatedvehiclesincontestedenvironments
AT mohammadrezaparvizimosaed longitudinalcontrolforconnectedandautomatedvehiclesincontestedenvironments
AT mohammadrezanoei longitudinalcontrolforconnectedandautomatedvehiclesincontestedenvironments
_version_ 1721193955328000000