This article was downloaded by: [University of Calgary]

On: 05 February 2015, At: 17:07

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Vehicle System Dynamics: International Journal of

Vehicle Mechanics and Mobility
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/nvsd20

Human Control of Road Vehicles

a
ERROL R. HOFFMANN
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering , University of Melbourne , Parkville, Victoria, 3052,
Australia
Published online: 27 Jul 2007.

To cite this article: ERROL R. HOFFMANN (1976) Human Control of Road Vehicles, Vehicle System Dynamics: International
Journal of Vehicle Mechanics and Mobility, 5:1-2, 105-126, DOI: 10.1080/00423117508968408

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00423117508968408

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the
Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and
should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for
any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of
the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
 Vehicle System Dynamics 5 (1975/76), pp. 105-126.

Human Control of Road Vehicles

ERROL R. HOFFMANN*

SUMMARY
This paper reviews the present state of knowledge of human control of road vehicles. Lateral
Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 17:07 05 February 2015

and longitudinal control of motorcycles and automobiles are discussed, whenever information is
available. Although knowledge has increased greatly in the last decade, the major part of this
concerns lateral control and most is of an ad hoc nature. Adequate mathematical models for
longitudinal motion of the vehicle are yet to be developed. Their development is a necessary
step in the attainment of a complete understanding of longitudinal control.

1. INTRODUCTION

Studies of the interaction between the driver and the dynamics of the automobile
were first made possible by the development by Segel in 1956 [ l ] of a complete
and experimentally validated model of the lateral dynamics of an automobile. Since
that time, numerous models of greater complexity have been published, [2, 3, 41
but for experiments studying driverlvehicle performance, simplifications of Segel's
linear, 3 degrees of freedom model have proved more useful [5,6].
The first adequate model for single track vehicles was published quite recently,
by Sharp in 1971 [7], so studies of human control of this class of vehicle are
relatively few. To date, a complete model for the longitudinal dynamics of a vehicle
has not been developed, although dynamics of vehicle braking are well understood.
Research into human control of road vehicles has progressed along three main
lines. These are:

(i) Perceptual studies, mainly concerned with the cues available to, and used by,
the driver in controlling his vehicle.
(ii) Mathematical models of the driver/vehicle system.
(iii) Empirical s t ~ d i e sto determine effects of various vehicle characteristics on
performance of the driver/vehcle system with various forms of driving task.

* Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Melbourne, Parkville 3052, Victoria,

Australia.
 These three categories are not mutually exclusive; for example, in [6] the data of
perceptual studies were used in mathematical models to predict likely loop closures
used by the driver. These analyses were then used to predict the results obtained in
experimental studies of the driverlvehicle combination.
The available literature for automobiles and motorcycles is discussed under these
headings in the following pages. Articulated vehicles have not been included.
Although there are mathematical models of these vehicles available, there do not
appear to be any studies specifically on human control. Bicycles are also excluded,
as studies on these have recently been reviewed [8].
Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 17:07 05 February 2015

2. LATERAL CONTROL OF AUTOMOBILES

A. LATERAL-CONTROL VEHICLE DYNAMICS

These factors may be considered under three groupings: fixed control variables, free
control variables and vehicle-driver interface variables.

Fiwed Control Variables

Bundorf [9] has discussed the problem of describing the lateral fued control dy-
namics of the automobile; by means of physical design parameters, equations de-
scribing the steady state and transient responses and by vehicle response characteris-
tics. It is found that the simpler the description, the further we move from simple
relations involving design variables. The simplest of the above, the response charac-
teristic representation, requires four quantities (rise time, overshoot, settling time
and steady state value) to describe each of the side-slip, yaw and roll modes.
For an experimental program an even simpler description is necessary.
Hoffmann [lo] assumed that the roll mode was of secondary importance. For an
understeering vehicle with centre of gravity at about mid wheel base, the vehicle
dynamics could be crudely represented by the yaw rate exponential rise time (t,),
stability factor (K) and yaw moment of inertia. This simple representation was also
used by Sweatman [ l l ] .
McRuer and Klein [6], also considered the two-degree-of-freedom representation
to be adequate for handling studies. They wrote the vehicle transfer functions for
yawing and side-slip motions as,
 HUMAN CONTROL OF ROAD VEHICLES 107

To define completely the yaw rate response requires four quantities these being Tr,
1, W , and the steady state gain G;i. (0).A further three quantities are needed for
the side-slip motion. In their experimental work, McRuer and Klein considered the
yawing motion t o be the dominant mode of control and simply varied the para-
meters describing the yaw rate response.
Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 17:07 05 February 2015

It is difficult t o say which is the better measure of vehicle response time for use
iil vehicle handling studies: the yaw time constant (Tr) or the exponential rise time.
The exponential rise time may give a better description of the actual response of
the vehicle, at other than neutral steer, and hence may be more appropriate as it is
closer t o what the driver perceives.

Free Control Variables

Very little work has been reported on variables affecting free control of the auto-
mobile. Segel [12] showed that the free-control case has five degrees of freedom
compared with three for the fixed control vehicle. The response of the vehicle to a
steering torque is dynamically unstable unless a certain amount of Coulomb friction
exists in the steering mechanism and then the stability is a critical function of the
relative magnitudes of the aligning stiffness and the inertia of the steering system.
Four modes of oscillation of the free-control vehicle are defined;two of these are
the primary directional modes of the free-control vehicle. Because of the non-
linearity of the equations, computer solution is necessary. As yet, very little experi-
mentation involving free control variables has been reported.

VehiclelDriver Interface Variables

In normal driving, the driver does not use control responses t o visual inputs which
are directly related t o either the f u e d o r free control vehicle dynamics. That is, it is
unlikely that the driver responds simply by changing either steering wheel angle or
steering torque. His response is likely t o be some combination o f these and the
proportions are likely to be dependent on the type of task being performed. For
example, in a tightly constrained tracking task, the driver's dominant input is likely
t o be steering wheel position, whereas in an emergency avoidance manoeuver, it is
likely t o be steering torque.
Hoffmann and Joubert [13] used the"steeringsensitivity"~ , where G = steering
GL
ratio and L = wheelbase, t o define a f u e d control interface variable. This is equiv-
 108 E. R. HOFFMANN

alent to the low speed (or neutral steer) path curvature-steering wheel response, as
defined by the equation

This measure has also been used by Sweatman [ l I]. McRuer and Klein [6] used
the steady-state yaw velocity to steering wheel angle gain which is simply related to
Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 17:07 05 February 2015

the fixed control yaw velocity-steer angle gain by the steering ratio. This quantity
has the advantage that it gives a direct measure of the control gain. Opposed to this
1
however, is the fact that it varies with speed. The variables - and K also define the
GL
steady state gain, more indirectly as far as the driver is concerned, but relatively
independent of vehicle speed.
Forbes [14] used self centering torque as a measure in experiments in low speed
manoeuvers. Segel [IS] considered the gradient of steering force with lateral ac-
celeration. At the present time, the "feel" variables have not been properly investi-
gated. It may be that it is rlecessary to describe the vehicle with values of Coulomb
friction, steering damping and natural frequency, on-centre force gradient with
lateral acceleration and steering angle and, if the force increases non-linearly, then a
force to hold say 0.3 g lateral acceleration.
The range of some of the interface variables to be found in production vehicles
has been discussed by Bundorf [9] and Hoffmann [16]. It is seen that excellent
dynamical models of the vehicle are available. The problem remaining is t o deter-
mine the simplest model that is adequate for empirical investigations of driver/
vehicle performance. It is likely that this description will have to be carried out
along with experiments so that the variables chosen to describe the vehicle are
significant t o the overall driverlvehicle performance.

B. PERCEPTUAL STUDIES
These are aimed at determining the visual cues used by the driver in controlling
the lateral motions of the vehicle. Basically, the driver must obtain information
related to the heading angle of the vehicle as well as the lateral position of the
vehicle within a traffic lane.
Gibson [17] suggested that a driver uses the "centre of expansion" of the veloc-
ity field pattern to guide his vehicle. Johnston and White [18] have shown, howev-
er, that subjects cannot accurately locate this centre. Cordon [19] puts forward a
theory in which the driver uses the velocity field pattern for alignment and directio-
nal control. Biggs [20] suggested a similar theory and conjectured that central vision
 HUMAN CONTROL OF ROAD VEHICLES 109
is used for obstacle avoidance while peripheral vision is used for tracking and
directional guidance.
Drivers' eye movements have been studied [21, 22, 23, 241. One of the general
results is that peripheral vision is used to monitor vehicle steering control.
McLean and Hoffmann [25, 26, 27, 281 have studied drivers' steering control
movements and attempted to relate them to a bimodal model of steering control in
which the driver normally uses information from heading angle and lane position
[25, 261 but can be forced to change to a different control strategy for more
difficult driving tasks, such as with high speeds in narrow lanes [26] or reduced
Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 17:07 05 February 2015

sight distance [27]. Recently [29], it has been found that, in freeway driving, the
dominant frequency of drivers' steering control movements is dependent very
strongly on vehicle dynamics, changing from about 0.04 Hz for a vehicle with an
exponential rise time of 0.23 sec, to 0.35 Hz for a vehicle with a rise time of 0.41
sec.
These results are in agreement with the theoretical models of driver control
developed by Weir and McRuer [30, 31,32,33,34,35] at Systems Technology Inc.
and discussed in the following section.
Shaw [36] experimentally derived describing functions of the driver and, using a
model based on transmission of information in the various possible control-loop
closures, concluded that the most probable control cues used by the driver were the
vehicle's yaw rate and inertial lateral deviation. These conclusions are in agreement
with the models of Weir and McRuer.

C. MATHEMATICAL MODELS OF DRIVER STEERING CONTROL

Models may be conveniently categorized as:
(i) quasi-linear
(ii) predictive
(iii) information processing
(iv) optimal control
(v) empirical
(vi) information theory.
(i)Quasi-linear models
An excellent summary of this model and its basis is given by McRuer and Krendel
[37]. The "crossover" model as described in [37] was used in [30-351 to model
driver steering control and t o determine the most likely loop closures used by the
driver. The outer loop is control of lateral position which is needed to satisfy the
basic guidance and control requirement for precision path following. This loop by
itself is unstable. Stability can be provided either by generating low frequency lead
 in the lateral deviation feedback loop or by using other inner perceptual feedback
loops. "Good" inner loops include path angle, path rate, heading angle and heading
rate. In this work a number o f possible multi-loop structures have been considered.
The most highly developed form is that presented in [31], which has been experi-
mentally validated in a simulator [31] and t o a limited extent in real driving [6].
The experiments of Shaw [36] also support the analytical work of McRuer and
Weir. However, automobile steering control is more than simply the monitoring of a
few definite cues, and the quasi-linear models can only describe the predominantly
perceptual-motor response aspect of steering.
Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 17:07 05 February 2015

(ii) Predictive Models

Kondo and Ajimine [38] postulated that the lateral deviation of the drivers sight
point from the predetermined course is his input cue for steering control. Yoshimoto
[39] postulated a model in which the input cue was the lateral deviation from the
course of the predicted position of the vehicle in a given prediction time. These
models are in many ways similar t o the "time advanced lateral deviation" model
[30]; all are single loop models but each has different input cues.

(ii) Information Processing Models

Crossman and Szostak [40] proposed a digital-type information processing model
with continuous control models describing the different stages within the model.
The model is conceptually similar t o that of Weir and McRuer and includes an open
loop mode of control using preview.

(iv) Optimal Control Models

The describing function model may be adequate for lane-keeping type tasks, but in
situations where course planning and other forms of manoeuvre are required an
"optimal control" type o f model may be more appropriate. Such a model has been
outlined by Roland and Sheridan [41, 421, but very few experimental results have
been reported. The central problem with this type of model is in determining the
driver's cost weighting.

(v) Empirical Steering Control Models

Weirwille, Gagne and Knight [43] obtained data in a simulator in which the dynam-
ics were those for lateral position control o f a vehicle, but without heading control
dynamics. Weir and Wojcik [33], Weir and McRuer [31] and McRuer and Klein [ 6 ]
have reported data for simulators having heading angle and lateral position inputs.
All found good agreement with theoretical models. As noted previously, data ob-
tained from real vehicles [ 6 , 361 also agree with the quasi-linear models.
 HUMAN VONTROL 01: ROAD VI<HICLL;S 111

(vi) Information Tlzeory Model

Shaw [36] has developed methods for determining the rates of information trans-
mission in the various possible loop closures. Combining these information rates
with a single-channel processing model of the driver and a number of postulates
regarding the flow of information, he formed a basis for identifying the control
loops used by the driver. Shaw's experimental results for straight lane and circular
path driving are probably the most extensive yet available in the literature o n
automobile steering control.
Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 17:07 05 February 2015

D. VEHICLE CHARACTERlSTlCS AND DRIVER/VEHICLE PERFORMANCE

Since the development of Segels's model of the automobile in 1956, there have
been numerous studies carried out on the effects o f changes in vehicle "handling"
variables on performance of the driver-vehicle system. Most o f these studies have
been of a fairly ad hoc nature, usually varying one vehicle parameter at a time while
attempting t o hold others constant. Only recently, in the work of Sweatman [ l l ] ,
has the interaction between variables been studied extensively, but even in this
work the results may be of limited value because of the low vehicle speeds used. In
this section, the effects of the following vehicle and interface variables are reviewed:
Yaw rate response time, stability factor, steering forces, steering gain (or steering
sensitivity), and finally, the known interactions between these variables.

Vehicle Response Time

Whitcomb, Milliken and Fonda in the discussion of [5] suggested that the most
important single parameter for good handling was likely t o be the exponential rise
time. Experiments since then have largely justified this statement.
Bundorf [9] first demonstrated that response time affected driving performance.
A similar experiment was carried out by Hoffmann and Joubert [13], using a larger
range of response time. It was found that driver steering performance, measured in
terms o f the number o f traffic cones touched, was best with a vehicle response time
of 0.2 sec. In both of these experiments there was also some variation of stability
factor which was probably secondary in its effect. Lincke, Richter and Schmidt
[44], in a study of subjective evaluations by the driver in a simulator, found that
fast vehicle responses and a small side-slip angle lead t o a more favourable driver
judgement. At the same time, objective measures of driving performance improved.
They also tested four real vehicles in a severe lane-change manoeuvre, and again the
subjective rating o f the vehicle was more favourable with decreasing yaw response
time. Response time has been found t o have signifant effects in the experiment of
Sweatman [ I I], Sweatman and Joubert [45] and McRuer and Klein [ 6 ] . These
papers are discussed in the section o n interaction between variables. Hoffmann and
 112 1.: R. HOFFMANN

Joubert [46]found that drivers are able to detect small changes in exponential rise
time, as small as 0.03sec. in a vehicle which had a response time of 0.35sec.

Stability Factor
By changing tyre pressures, Hildebrandt and Poskocil [47]changed the amount of
understeer without significantly altering the exponential rise time (although the
time to achieve 90% of the steady state yaw rate was altered). As a performance
measure they used the mean maximum speed at which a severe lane change could
be completed. Changes in understeer steer coefficient from 92 to 195 degreeslg
Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 17:07 05 February 2015

reliably affected the mean-maximum speed achieved in the test. Bergman [53]
presented data which show that subjective rating was lower with excessive increase
or decrease of understeer far beyond the range employed in passenger car designs.
Hales and Jurkat [48]found in a simulator experiment that drivers had signifi-
cantly higher error scores with an oversteering vehicle. Hoffmann and Joubert [46]
determined just noticeable differences in stability factor and found values ranging
from 0.22 to 1.61 x sec2/ft2. Sweatman and Joubert [49]show that, in
detecting changes in stability factor, the driver may actually be detecting changes in
vehicle yaw rate gain. When yaw rate gain was changed by means of changes in
steering ratio, stability factor or vehicle speed, the just noticeable differences when
expressed as changes in yaw rate gain, were not significantly different. Further
evidence that the driver is sensitive to yaw rate gain comes from [6,1 1,451.

Steering Gain or Sensitivity

Haynes, Mika and Forbes [SO]first carried out experiments with changes of steering
ratio, using fmed ratios of 18:1 and 10:1 and variable ratios of 27:l-18: 1 and
18:1-1 0:1. The constant ratio of 18:1 was both objectively and subjectively the
best in these experiments. Shoemaker, Dell'Arnico and Chwalek [51] report a
similar experiment with a larger range of constant and variable ratios. They found
that steering accuracy was better with the more direct steering but this ratio ( 5 : l )
was generally disliked.
Hoffmann and Joubert [13]measured steering performance with three different
steering sensitivities (.0041,.Of348and .0057 ft-l) and found no significant dif-
1
ference in steering accuracy, although it was best withE= 0.0048ft-l. The ability
of drivers to discriminate between differing steering ratios has been studied by
Hoffmann and Joubert [46] and Sweatrnan and Joubert [49].Experiments by
McRuer and Klein [6],Sweatman [ll],Sweatman and Joubert [45]and Forbes
[14]are discussed later.
 HUMAN CONTROL 01: R O A D VtHICLISS 113
Steering Force
Segel [IS] first investigated the effect of steering force gradient on drivers' subjec-
tive judgements in steady state cornering and transient passing manoeuvres. He
found general agreement that

(i) A light force gradient makes it difficult to position the steering wheel precise-
ly.
(ii) Force level affects the precision of passing manoeuvres more than it affects
steady-state cornering.
(iii) Drivers' comments are dependent on the degree to which they are using fixed
Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 17:07 05 February 2015

control or free control, (which depends to a large extent on the type of

driving task).
iv) The damping of the steering system has an important effect on driver opinion.
These experiments used only 3 levels of force gradient (4.7, 17.1 and 30.1 Ibflg)
and were exploratory in nature.
Hoffmann and Joubert [13] found that a change of steering force gradient from
6 to 45 lbflg had no significant effect on accuracy of steering in a tightly constrain-
ed driving task. Forbes [14] investigated the effects of centering force in perfor-
mance of low-speed manoeuvres and found an optimum value of 4.5 Ibf combined
with a steering ratio of 19.4: 1.
It is apparent from the above that very little is known of the effects of steering
force. This is somewhat surprising as it is a variable likely to have an important
effect on driver opinion. This area is worthy of further investigation.

Interaction Between Handling Variables

In each of the experiments so far considered in this section, only one variable at a
time has been changed and its effects on driverlvehicle performance noted. In many
of the experiments, variables other than the one under study have been allowed to
vary in a relatively uncontrolled manner, so that it is difficult to determine which
parameters are most important. Several recent experiments [14, 6 , 11, 451 have
considerably increased the state of knowledge by simultaneously varying a number
of parameters in a controlled manner. Three of these studies have used Response
Surface Methodology (R.S.M.) [14, 11, 451, which appears to be an ideal method
for experiments on automobile control.
Forbes [14] used a R.S.M. design in tests of low-speed manoeuvres in which
there were seven steering systems with five levels of self-centering force and three
levels of overall steering ratio. Subjects made paired comparisons and indicated
preference by means of ratio ratings. A response equation with linear and quadratic
terms was fitted to these ratings and, from this equation, a response surface
 114 E. R. HOFFMANN

showing contours o f constant rating was plotted. (Readers who have not seen the
original paper, which is not generally available, may have seen the response surface
shown in "Scientific American" advertisement of the Ford Motor Co.). The con-
tours obtained were a set o f concentric ellipses. The surface peaked a t a force o f 4.5
Ibf. and at a ratio of 19.4. This was the most highly rated vehicle. The central
region around the maximum rating was relatively flat, but preferences dropped
rapidly for ratios above 2 4 o r below 15 and for forces above 6 Ibf. or below 3 lbf. It
is unfortunate that this work has not received wider attention as it appears t o have
been the first application o f R.S.M. design t o a human factors problem.
Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 17:07 05 February 2015

Sweatman [ l 11 made much more extensive use of the R.S.M. design. He varied,
in a single experiment, response time, stability factor, steering sensitivity, lane
width and vehicle speed. This form of experiment would be prohibitive in a full
factorial design, but is quite economical using R.S.M. Each of the five parameters
had five levels in the experiment, the ranges being,
Steering Sensitivity f (m-I)
GL
9.4 x - 28.6 x l o m 3
Stability Factor K ( ~ e c ~ m -4.2
-~) x - 8.6 x
Yaw Rate Response Time t R (sec) 0.08 - 0.30
Lane Width w (m) 2.3 - 3.5
Vehicle Speed v (km/h) 22.6 - 35.4

Values of the first four variables cover the normal range of operation o f a real
vehicle. (The experiments were carried out in a variable characteristic car). The
speed however was very low because of lack o f a suitable test track. Drivers steered
around a circle of 7 0 m diameter delineated by traffic cones. The R.M.S.value of
the vehicle yaw rate was used as a measure o f the accuracy of control. Driver effort
was measured by R.M.S. values o f steering wheel angle and steering wheel rotation
rate. Regressions for each of these measures were found in terms of the task
1
parameters:= K, t R , W, V. In each case the coefficients of the linear and quadratic
terms of the fitted equations accounted for highly significant proportions of the
total variance. Sweatman transformed the regressions into canonical form, reducing
the model (for each measured quantity) t o the independent effects of five canonical
variables.
From these equations Sweatman determined optimum conditions for minimiza-
tion of the measured quantities and attempted t o relate each of the canonical
variables t o a mode of control. Different optimum values were obtained for each
dependent quantity, and generally the optimum vehicle characteristics were
strongly dependent o n lane width and vehicle speed. A vehicle havingL= 25 x I 0-3
CL
rn-l, K = 2 x lom3~ e c ~ and m - tR
~ = 0.15 sec was closest t o the optimum for this
simple, low speed, steering task.
 H U M A N CONTROL OF: ROAD VEHICLES 115
For the minimization of yaw rate error, the canonical variables showed that a
vehicle with low steering gain requires a short response time whereas a vehicle with
high steering gain requires a longer response time. These performance results are in
agreement with the driver rating result o f [ 6 ] .
Sweatman and Joubert [45] have reported an experiment in which steering
sensitivity and yaw response time were varied in a R.S.M. design. Steering sensitiv-
ity varied from 10.2 x 28.7 x 1 0 - ~ m - ' and response time from 0.108 -0.243
sec. The experiment simulated a passing manoeuvre and heart rate was recorded as a
measure of driver's level o f stress. For the majority of drivers, average heart rate
Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 17:07 05 February 2015

increased as the steering sensitivity decreased and the response time increased.
In both of Sweatmans' experiments the steering forces were unrealistic as there
was n o variation of torque with steering wheel position. It is not known what effect
this lack of "feel" would have had on the experimental data.
The study of McRuer and Klein [6] is especially note-worthy for the way in
which they combined mathematical models of the driver and vehicle, used these t o
make predictions regarding the outcome of experiments and showed how methods
of subjective rating used in the study o f aircraft control may be applied to the
automobile situation. As noted in an earlier section, they defined the dynamics of
the vehicle in terms o f seven parameters and, considering the dominant loop t o be
that of heading, reduced this t o four.
From an analytical investigation of the driver/vehicle model they drew the fol-
lowing conclusions regarding system performance:

(i) Heading dispersion for a variety of lag time constants T,, with a constant
system forcing function will be essentially constant for all vehicle configura-
tion changes (yaw time constant and steering gain) for values of >3
radlsec.
(ii) Lateral position deviation will similarly be held t o essentially constant values
for IT, > 2-3 radlsec.
(iii) For ITr < 2 radlsec, the heading and lateral position deviations will increase.
Experiments in a vehicle simulator showed these conclusions t o be valid. Car
driving experiments showed considerable scatter and hence it was difficult t o be
certain o f the validity o f the conclusions.
A driver also made subjective ratings of simulated vehicles with large ranges of
yaw time constant and yaw rate gain. These results showed a marked preference for
the faster responding vehicles with the preferred overall steering gain increasing as
the vehicles yaw time constant was increased. Only one subject was used in this
experiment, but results agree well with those from previous experiments with iden-
tical vehicle dynamics.
 116 E. R. HOFFMANN

I n other experiments, both in a variable steering car and in production vehicles,

driver ratings were found t o be strong functions of yaw time constant and steering
gain and much weaker functions of damping ratio and undamped yaw natural
frequency. The results of their test program indicated that:

(i) Steady state yaw velocity to steering gain and yaw velocity numerator time
constant, appear t o be the most important vehicle characteristics in terms of
driver rating.
(ii) The yaw velocity numerator time constant, T,, should be less than 0.3 sec.
Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 17:07 05 February 2015

(iii) The range of acceptable steady-state yaw velocity t o steering gain is between
0.20 and 0.40 deglsecjdeg . at 5 0 m.p.h. and depends on the value of T,.
(iv) There are lower bounds on acceptable directional response frequency and
damping ratio. These are about 3 rad/sec and a ratio of 0.5 respectively.

3. LATERAL CONTROL O F MOTORCYCLES

A. MOTORCYCLE DYNAMICS
The first realistic equations of motion for the motorcycle were developed by Sharp
[7] and independently by Weir [54] and by Eaton and Segel [55]. Three physically
significant modes were found, referred t o as the capsize, weave and wobble modes.
Sharp concluded that the fiied control characteristics of the motorcycle are unim-
portant. Straight line stability problems arise from

(i) Excessive low speed instability of the weave mode.

(ii) Excessive instability o f the capsize mode at medium speeds.
(iii) instability or lack of damping of the oscillatory modes at high speed.
Ellis and Hayhoe [56] give equations, and some computer solutions, for a non-
linear four degrees of freedom model. They also report some steady-state and
transient motion experiments which validate their model reasonably well. Watanabe
and Yoshida [57] have also developed a model which agrees well with their own
experimental data, but details of the model are not given. The Sharp model has
been partially validated in the experiments of Eaton [58].

B. RIDER/MOTORCYCLE STUDIES
Weir [54, 591, investigated rider control processes by means of the well developed
principles of manual control as summarized by McRuer and Krendel [37]. On the
basis of these principles Weir determined a number of possible rider feedback loops
(control response to perceptual cues) which satisfy both rider-centered and guid-
 HUMAN CONTROL O F ROAD VEHICLES 117

ance and control requirements. From this purely analytical study he drew the
following conclusions:
(i) The central rider control loop of roll angle t o steer torque is dominated by the
presence of the cycle capsize mode and by the dynamic response properties
and liminations of the rider.
(ii) The high frequency weave and wobble modes are largely beyond the rider's
control capability and these can be investigated by considering the cycle-alone
dynamics.
Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 17:07 05 February 2015

Weir also derived a set of motorcycle qualities which should produce good
handling characteristics. Eaton [58]determined the rider describing function for
the roll angle t o steer torque loop at speeds o f 15 and 3 0 m.p.h., and found that the
experimental results agreed with the crossover model which was used by Weir in his
theoretical analysis.
Hunt [60] discusses the mechanics of putting the motorcycle into a turn. A
more detailed discussion and experimental data are given in [57].A computer
simulation of the riderlcycle system for an evasive manoeuvre also shows good
agreement with data.

4. LONGITUDINAL CONTROL O F AUTOMOBILES

The state of knowledge of longitudinal control of vehicles appears t o be poor

compared with that of lateral control. There have been numerous studies of traffic
flow made, both empirically and with mathematical models, but these studies rarely
consider the dynamics o f the vehicle or the individual driver's response t o changes
in the traffic stream [61,62,63]. These models are generally of the form

expressing the acceleration o f the(n + 1)th vehicle, after a delay time T, t o a relative
velocity between it and the lead vehicle. The coefficient X is in general considered
t o be dependent o n vehicle speed and spacing between vehicles. Steady-state inte-
gration of this equation give mean flow-velocity curves in good agreement with data
for restricted conditions. It has been found however that only under restricted
conditions are drivers described by such equations [64]. It is apparent that a more
detailed analysis is required.
In his 1970 State-of-the-Art "Vehicle Control and Road Holding", Bidwell [65]
gives only two references which consider aspects of longitudinal control by the
driver.
 A. LONGITUDINAL VEHICLE DYNAMICS
Braking
A detailed model for a vehicle braking system with power operation has been
developed by Fisher [66]. This report also reviews other work that has been done in
this area. Saibel and Chiang [67] have developed and validated a dynamic model of
the automobile in braking and acceleration, but this does not include the engine or
brake system dynamics. Modified versions of these models would possibly produce
an adequate vehicle model for use in braking studies.
Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 17:07 05 February 2015

Acceleration
St. John and Glauz [ 6 8 ] have developed simple models for the acceleration capabil-
ity of an automobile in terms of speed, BHP/wt ratio and drag coefficient. Such
equations are adequate for vehicle performance studies, but not for studies of the
driverlvehicle system. In this case equations describing the response of the vehicle
to accelerator force (or displacement) are required. Such equations will be non-
-linear differential equations and must include the engine dynamics as well as those
of the vehicle. To-date, such equations have not been developed. However, an
approximate expression for small velocity changes about a set velocity would be

where Fa is the increment of force applied to the accelerator.

The longitudinal control problem is greatly complicated by the fact that the
driver has three modes of control: Accelerating, braking and coasting (in which
neither the brake nor accelerator is actuated).

Interface Variables
In braking, the variables affecting driver control are likely to be the brake force1
unit deceleration and the corresponding brake pedal deflection. The same variables
would affect the use of the accelerator. In each case the dominant control variable
would be the applied force rather than the deflection, although the deflection may
be important if it is large.
The actual physical layout of the brake relative t o the accelerator is also im-
portant in longitudinal control as this effects the driver's response time as shown by
Konz and Daccarett [69].

B. STUDIES OF DRIVER/VEHICLE BRAKING

Segel and Mortimer 1701 and Mortimer et a1 [71] investigated driverlvehicle perfor-
 HUMAN CONTROL 01: ROAD VI:HICLES 119
mal:cs with variable gain (deceleration/pedal force) and variable displacement
braking systems in a real car. They were able to specify gain ranges for acceptable
braking performance.
To-date, this seems t o be the only experimental work aimed at determining
optiniuni interface values for longitudiiial control, although Konz et a1 [72] carried
out laboratory experiments t o determine pedal angles and forces.
An interesting approach to human control of a fork-lift truck has been made by
Drury and Dawson [73]. It is shown that the time t o travel a given distance and
stop within a given error band is given by an equation similar t o Fitts' equation for
movement times [see Welford, 741. This seems to imply that the driver adapts to his
Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 17:07 05 February 2015

vehicle in such a way that the vehicle becomes a direct mechanical extension of his
perceptual-motor system.

C. PERCEPTUAL STUDIES
Most of the perceptual studies to-date have been concerned with determining the
visual factors affecting the magnitude of the delay time T in equation (4). This is
the time taken by the following driver t o detect, and respond to, a change in
headway or the velocity relative t o the lead vehicle. Much o f the early work has
been reanalysed by Hoffmann [75] and it appears that detection is by means of;

(i) Rate of change of the horizontal visual angle subtended by the lead vehicle at
the eye o f the following driver, provided it exceeds a threshold value of
4 x 10-3 rad/sec.
(ii) Changes in visual angle (or headway) if the angular rate is below threshold.
Mortimer [76] finds, for example, that the headway change for detection is
about 0.1 2 times the initial headway.
Recent work on this problem has been carried out, using improved psycho-
physical methods, by Harvey and Michon [77] and Evans and Rothery [78]. These
data both include the effect of viewing time and suggest that, for subthreshold
angular rates, detection may be b y means of direct perception of relative speed/
headway, which is the inverse o f time t o closure.
It appears necessary for the driver t o be able t o directly scale headway or
distance and relative velocity in order to control the longitudinal motion of his
vehicle in a traffic stream. Much work has been published on the perception of
distance, but little of it can be directly applied t o the roadway environment. Farber
and Silver [79] found that drivers could judge distance t o within 200 ft. in passing
situations. Hoffmann and Macdonald [80] carried out experiments on the road and
found perceived distance varied as physical distance t o the exponent 0.8, up to
distances of 1000 ft; that is, driver's perception o f distance is unlikely to be
veridical.
 120 E. R. HOFFMANN

Driver's perception of relative velocity has been reported in [79, 81,82, 83, 84,
85, 86,871.
The data from all these papers have been reanalysed in Hoffmann [88] and the
following conclusions drawn:

(i) Perception of relative velocity appears t o be carried out via the angular veloci-
ty of the vehicle ahead, provided that it is above threshold.
(ii) In many manoeuvres, such as overtaking and passing, the angular velocity is
below threshold.
Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 17:07 05 February 2015

(iii) Even when above threshold, the driver is unable t o distinguish between many
categories of angular velocity.
Hoffmann [88] found, in several experiments, that drivers could readily scale
relative velocity, even with viewing times as short as 0.7 sec. The experiments
suggest that relative velocity with a moving observer is perceived veridically, con-
trary to the results found with a stationary observer [82, 83,881.

D. MODELS OF THE DRIVER IN CAR-FOLLOWING

Unlike lateral control, there is very little work reported on the modelling of drivers
in longitudinal motions. A number of writers [89,90] have considered the driver as
a 'detection-controller', that is, making control responses upon detection of head-
way changes or relative velocity. In all models, the driver's response has been
considered in terms of an acceleration of the vehicle, rather than a control displace-
ment. This has been justified on the basis that control by brake and accelerator is
likely to be discrete, difficult t o model, or even nonexistent. Also, drivers do have
the physiological mechanisms necessary for fine scaling and control of longitudinal
acceleration. However, a complete model must include the interface variables.
Darroch and Rothery [9.L] investigated the use of time-series analysis in car-
following problems. Hoffman [88] has extended this work, using the car-following
simulator at the Highway Safety Research Institute, to determine spectra, describ-
ing functions, information transmission rates and number of categories of lead car
velocity and relative velocity that can be perceived by the following driver. Major
conclusions from this work are;

(i) Bandwidths of drivers control (acceleration) are small compared with lateral
control. Values of 0.1 Hz are typical with dominant frequencies of 0.03 Hz.
These low frequencies are associated with the longitudinal dynamics of the
vehicle and the long delay times for driver perception of headway and
relative velocity changes (Delays of the order of 2 sec.)
(ij) Drivers were able to transmit very little information regarding relative velo-
city.
 HUMAN CONTROL O F ROAD VEHICLES 121

(iii) The data suggest that control actions are made when relative velocity or
headway changes are detected, with very little scaling of the response to the
magnitude of the stimulus input.
(iv) Describing function analysis of the longitudinal motion suggests that the
driver responds with a change in his vehicle velocity to changes in headway at
frequencies less than 0.05 Hz and to changes in relative velocity above 0.05 Hz.
Hanken[ 921 and Rockwell and Snider [89] have reported regression models in
which the following vehicle acceleration is expressed in terms of headway and the
vehicle velocities.
Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 17:07 05 February 2015

E. INTER-VEHICLE COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS

A considerable amount of work has been conducted on devices to improve car-
following ,performance by means of i~itervehiclecommunication systems.
This research deals with improvement of the present system [93,94]; provision
of devices in the following vehicle giving information about the motions of the lead
vehicle [95, 961; provision of speed displays [79, 97, 86, 98, 991 and deceleration
displays [ 100, 101, 102, 1031. A number of these devices produced improvement in
car-following performance and, in the case of the Voevodsky study [lo31 involving
a flashing deceleration display, a significant reduction in the accident rate of San
Fransisco taxicabs. Further experimentation is necessary on these devices.

5. COMBINED LATERAL AND LONGITUDINAL CONTROL

There has been very little work reported on combined lateral and longitudinal
control. Good, Rolls and Joubert [104] conducted an experiment in which drivers
steered unrestricted path turns with speed varying while in the turn. It was found
that they used a constant maximum yaw rate which was independent of speed for
any given deviation angle of turn, provided the lateral acceleration was below 12
ftlsec.2
Bergman [53] investigated braking while cornering to determine the effect on
directional stability. He found that drivers' ratings were correlated with a "norma-
lized understeer angle increment" and that this criterion is a meaningful measure of
the ease of vehicle control. A test procedure has been developed by the Highway
Safety Research Institute [I051 for determining the stability of vehicles in severe
manoeuvres with combined braking and steering. These procedures use control
systems for applying steering and brake movements and hence are more a test of
the vehicle than of the driverlvehicle system.
 122 E. R. HOFFMANN

CONCLUSIONS

1. Highly developed models for the lateral motions of motorcycles and automo-
biles, suitable for use in studies of driver lateral control, are available.
2. Most experimental work to date on lateral control is of an ad-hoc nature. Further
experiments are needed to determine the major parameters affecting driver con-
trol and the interactions between these variables.
3. Longitudinal control of the vehicle is less well understood. A model of the
vehicle, including the interface variables for both braking and acceleration, needs
Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 17:07 05 February 2015

to be developed.
4. Much work has been reported on driver modelling for longitudinal control. Due
to the lack of a full vehicle model, the major part of this work has been confined
to the driver's perceptual processes.
5. Little work has been reported on driver studies with combined lateral and
longitudinal control. This is a field which deserves further investigation.

REFERENCES

1. SEGEL, L., Theoretical Prediction and Experimental Substantiation of the Response of the
Automobile to Steering Control. Proc. Auto. Div. Insrn. Mech. Eng. 1956-57, No. 7.
2. WEIR, D. H., SHORTWELL, C. P. and JOHNSON, W. A., Dynamics of the Automobile
Related to Driver Control. Systems Technology Inc. Tech. Report No. 157-1, July
1966. Also SAE Paper No. 680194.
3. NORDEEN, D. L., Vehicle Directional Control Equations for an Inclined Roll Axis. General
Motors Proving Ground, Report No. A-2165, July 1969.
4. OKADA, T. TAKIGUCHI, T., NISHIOKA, M. and UTSUNOMUJA, G., Evaluation of
Vehicle Handling and Stability by Computer Simulation at the First Stage of Vehicle
Planning. S. A.E. Paper No. 730525.
5. WHITCOMB, D. W. and MILLIKEN W. F. et al., Research in Automobile Stability and
Control and in Tyre Performance. Proc. Insrn. o f Mechanical Engineers, Auto. Div.,
NO. 7, 287-426, 1956-7.
6. McRUER, D. T. and KLEIN, R. H., Automobile Controllability - DriverIVehicle Response
for Steering Control. Systems Technology Inc. Report No. 104Cb1-I. November 1974.
7. SHARP, R. S. The Stability and Control of Motorcycles. Journ. Mechanical Eng. Science. 13
(5), 316-329, 1971:
8. ARNBERG, P. W. and TYDEN, T., Stability and Manoeuvrability Performance of Different
T y ~ e sof Bicycles. National Swedish Road and Traffic Research Institute. Report No.
4 5 k , 1974. -
9. BUNDORF, R. T., The Use of a Variable Stability Vehicle in Handling Research. Detroit:
General Motors Research Lab. Report GMR-455, 1965.
10. HOFFMANN, E. R., A Study of Automobile Control. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Mel-
bourne, 1968.
11. SWEATMAN, P. F., The Design of a Variable Characteristic Vehicle and Its Use in Driver
Control Studies. Ph.D. Thesis. University of Melbourne, 1973.
12. SEGEL, L., On the Lateral Stability and Coritrol of the Automobile as Influenced by the
Dynamics of the Steering System. Trans. A.S.M.E., Journ, o f Engineering for In-
dustry, Paper No. 65-WA/MD2, 1965.
 HUMAN CONTROL OF ROAD VEHICLES 123
13. HOFFMANN, E. R. and JOUBERT P. N., The Effects of Changes in Some Vehicle Handling
Variables on Driver Steering Performance. Human Factors, 8 (3), 245-263, 1966.
14. FORBES, L. M., Untitled Ford Motor Company Report. (On Optimum steering forces and
steering ratios for parking manoeuvres) 1967.
15. SEGEL, L., An Investigation of Automobile Handling as Implemented by a Variable
Steering Automobile. Human Factors. 6 (4), 333-341, 1964.
16. HOFFMANN, E. R., Human Factors of Automobile Steering Control. S.A.E. (Australasia).
National Convention, Paper 5, 1969.
17. GIBSON, J.J., The Perception of the Visual World. Houghton-Mifflin, 1950.
18. JOHNSTON, I. R., WHITE, G. R. and CUMMING, R. W., The Role of Optical Expansion
Patterns in Locomotor Control. American Journ. o f Psychology, 86 (2), 31 1-324,
1973.
19. GORDON, D. A., Perceptual Basis of Vehicular Guidance. Public Roads, 34 (3), 53-68,
Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 17:07 05 February 2015

1966.
20. BIGGS, N. L., Directional Guidance of Motor Vehicles - A Preliminary Survey and Ana-
lysis. Ergonomics, 9 (3), 193-202, 1966.
21. GORDON, D. A., Experimental Isolation of Drivers Visual Input. Public Rmds, 33 (12),
266-273, 1966.
22. RUTLEY, K. S. and MACE D. G. W., A Preliminary Investigation Into the Frequency of
Driver Motor Actions and Eye Movements. Road Research Laboratory Report
LR162, 1968.
23. ROCKWELL, T. H., Eye Movement Analysis of Visual Information Acquisition in Driving:
An Overview. 6th Conference, Australian Road Research Board, Paper No. 948,
1962.
24. MOURANT, R. R. and ROCKWELL, T. H., Mapping Eye-Movement Patterns to the Visual
Scene in Driving: An Exploratory Study. Human Factors, 12 (I), 81-88, 1970.
25. McLEAN, J. R. and HOFFMANN, E. R., Analysis of Drivers' Control Movements. Human
Factors, I3 (5), 407-418, 1971.
26. McLEAN, J. R. and HOFFMANN, E. R., The Effects of Lane Width on Driver Steering
Control and Performance. 6th Conference, Australian Road Research Board, Paper
No. 881, 1972.
27. McLEAN, J. R. and HOFFMANN, E. R., The Effects of Restricted Preview on Driver
Steering Control and Performance. Human Factors, 15 (4), 421-430, 1973.
28. McLEAN, J. R. and HOFFMANN, E. R., Steering Reversals as a Measure of Driver Perfor-
mance and Steering Task Difficulty. Human Factors, In Press, 1975.
29. HOFFMANN, E. R., Preliminary Experiments on Effect of Changes in Vehicle Characteris-
tics on Steering Control Movements. Unpublished.
30. McRUER, D. T. and WEIR, D. H., Theory of Manual Vehicular Control. Ergonomics, 12
(4),.599-633, 1969.
31. WEIR, D. H. and McRUER, D. T., Measurement and Interpretation of Driver Steering Be-
haviour and Performance. S.A.E. Automotive Engineering Congress and Exposition,
Detroit, Paper No. 730098, 1973.
32. WEIR, D. H., Closed-Loop Directional C o ~ ~ t r oofl Automobiles. I.E.E.E. 8th Annual
Symposium on Human Factors in Electronics, Paper No. 62, 1967.
33. WEIR, D. H. and WOJCIK, C. K., Simulator Studies of the Drivers' Dynamic Response in
Steering Control Tasks. Highnay Research Record, No. 364, 1-15, 1971.
34. WEIR, D. H. and McRUER, D. T., A Theory for Driver Steering Control of Motor Vehicles.
Highway Research Record, No. 247, 7-28, 1968.
35. WEIR, D. H. and McRUER, D. T., Conceptualization of Overtaking and Passing on Two-
Lane Rtiral Roads. Systems Technology Inc. Tech. Report No. 1-193, 1967.
36. SHAW, E. Y. N., Mathematical Modelling of Driver Steering Control. Ph.D. Thesis, Univer-
sity of Melbourne, 1973.
37. McRUER, D. T. and KRENDEL, E. S., Mathematical Models of Human Pilot Behaviour.
N.A.T.O. ACARDograph No. 188, 1974.
38. KONDO, M. and AJIMINE, A., Drivers Sight Point and Dynamics of the Driver-Vehicle-
System Related to it. S.A.E. Paper No. 680104.
 124 E. R. HOFFMANN

39. YOSHIMOTO, K., Simulation of Man-Automobile Systems by the Driver's Steering Model
with Predictability. Bulletin of J.S.M. E., I 2 (51), 495-500, 1969.
40. CROSSMAN, E. R. F. W. and SZOSTAK, H., Man-Machine Models for Car Steering.
N.A.S.A.-SP-192, 171-195, 1968.
41. ROLAND, R. D. and SHERIDAN, T. B., A Normative Model for Control of Vehicle
Trajectory in an Emergency Manoeuvre. Paper presented a t Annual Meeting of the
Highway Research Board, Jan. 1966.
42. ROLAND, R. D. and SHERIDAN, T. B., Simulation Study of the Driver's Control of
Sudden Changes in Previewed Path. Mass. Inst. Tech., Department of Mcch. Eng.
Report DSR 74920-1, 1967.
43. WIERWILLE, W. W., GACNE, G. A. and KNIGHT, J. R., An Experimental Study of
Human Operator Models and Closed-Loop Analysis Methods for High-Speed A u t o m e
bile Driving. I. E.E.E. nuns. HFE-8 (3), 187-201, 1967.
Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 17:07 05 February 2015

44. LINCKE, W., RICHTER, B. and SCHMIDT, R., Simulation and Mcasuremcnt of Driver
Vehicle Handling Performance. S.A.E. Paper No. 730489.
45. SWEATMAN, P. F. and JOUBERT, P. N., Vehicle Steering and Driver Strcss in a Simulated
Passing Manoeuvre. 7th Conference, Australian Road Rcsearch Board. Paper No.
A103, 1974.
46. HOFFMANN, E. R. and JOUBERT, P. N., Just Noticeable Diffcrenccs in Some Vehicle
Handling Variables. Human Factors, 1 0 (3), 263-272, 1968.
47. HILDEBRANDT, T. J. and POSKOCIL, A. R., Objective Testing in Handling Rcsearch.
S. A. E. Papcr No. 68001 5.
48. HALES, F. D. and JURKAT, M. P., Drivcr Behaviour in Controlling a Driving Simulator
With Varying Stability. Boc. Jnstn. Mechanical Engineers, Vol. 183, Pt. 3H, 82-90,
1 969.
49. SWEATMAN, P. and JOUBERT, P. N., Detection of Changes in Automobile Steering
Scnsitivity. Humatt Factors, 1 6 ( I ) , 29-36, 1974.
50. HAYNES, A. L., MIKA, H. S. and FORBES, 1,. M., Simulation Techniques in Automotive
Human Factors Research. National Confercncc on Driving Simulation, 1961.
51. SHOEMAKI':R, N. E. DELL'AMICO, I:. and CHWALEK, R. J., A Pilot Experiment on
Driver Task Performance with I2ixcd and Variable Ratio Steering. S.A.1;. Paper No.
670508.
52. FORBES, L. M., A Human Factors ISvaluation of Stecring Gear Ratios for the 196X Ford.
Ford Motor Co. Report M-795-622, 1962.
53. BERCMAN, W., Measurement and Subjectivc Evaluation of Vehicle Handling. S.A.E. Paper
No. 730492.
54. WEIR, D. H., Motorcycle Handling Dynamics and Rider Control and the Effcct of Design
Configuration on Response and Performance. Ph. D. Thesis, University of California,
Los Angeles, 1972.
55. EATON, D. J. and SECEL, L., Lateral Dynamics of the Uncontrolled Motorcycle. S.A.E.
Paper No. 73021.
56. ELLIS, J. R. and HAYHOE, G. F., The Stcady State and Transient Handling Characteristics
of a Motorcycle. S.A.E. Paper No. 73019.
57. WATANABE, Y. and YOSHIDA, K., Motorcycle Handling Performance for Obstacle
Avoidance. S.A.E. Paper No. 73033.
58. EATON, D. J., An Experimental Study of the Motorcycle Roll Stabilization Task. Highway
Safety Rescarcl~Institute, University of Michigan, April, 1973.
59. WEIR, D. H., A Manual Control View of Motorcycle Handling. S.A.E. Papcr No. 73018.
60. HUNT, H. H., Motorcycle Handling- and Collision Avoidance: Anatomy of a Turn. S.A.E.
Paper No. 73032.
61. HERMAN. R. and POTTS. R. B.. Sinde Lane Traffic Theorv and E x ~ e r i m c n t Proceedinns . -
u r pnhe or^ i f ~ r i f f i Flow.
of ~ ~ m ~ o s i on c Elsevier, ~ m s t e r d a m ;1961.
62. ROTHERY, R., SILVER, R. and HERMAN, R., Analysis of Experiments on Single-Lane
Bus Flow. Operations Research, 12 ( 6 ) , 91 3-933, 1965.
 HUMAN CONTROL O F ROAD VEHICLES 125
63. DUCKSTEIN, L., UNWIN, E. A. and BOYD, E. T., Variable Perception Time in Car-Fol-
lowing and its Effect on Model Stability. I.E.E.E. Trans on Man-Machine Systems.
Vol. MMS-I 1(3), 149-156, 1970.
64. PERCHONOK, K. and SEGUIN, E. L., Vehicle Following Behaviour: A Field Study,. Divi-
sion of Highway Studies, lnstitute for Research, State College, Pennsylvania, Report
No. 5, 1964.
65. BIDWELL, J. B., Vchicle Control and Road Holding. S.A.B. Paper No. 700366.
66. I:ISHER, D. K., Thc Dynamic Characteristics of Vehicle Braking Systems. Ph.D. Thesis,
University of Michigan, 1970.
67. SAIBEL, E. A. and CHIANC, S. L., Dynamics of an Automobile in Braking and Accelera-
tion. Developmet~ts in Mechanics. Vol. 6 , Proceedings of the 12th Midwestern
Mechanics Conference.
68. St. JOHN, A. D. and GLAUZ, W. D., Vehicle Handling, Acceleration and Speed Mainte-
nance. Midwest Rcsearch Institute, Project 3225-E, Final report, June 1969.
Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 17:07 05 February 2015

69. KONZ, S. and DACCARETT, J., Control for Automotive Brakes. Highway Research
Record, No. 195, 1967.
70. SEGEL, L. and MORTIMER, R. G., Driver Braking Performance as a Function of Pedal-
Force and Pedal-Displacement Levels. S.A.E. Paper No. 700364.
71. MORTIMER, R. G., SEGEL, L., DUGOFF, H., CAMPBELL, J. D., JORGENSON, C. M.
and MURPHY, R. W., Brake Force Requirement Study: Driver-Vehicle Braking Per-
formance as a Function of Brake System Design Variables. Highway Safety Research
Institute, Report No. Hu F-69, 1970.
72. KONZ, S., WADHERA, N., SATHAYE, S. and CHAWLA, S., Human Factors Considera-
tions for a Combined Brake-Accelerator Pedal. Ergonomics, 14 (2), 279-292, 1971.
73. DRURY, C. G. and DAWSON, P., Human Factors Limitations in Fork-Lift Truck Perfor-
mance. Ergonomics, 1 7 (4), 447-456, 1974.
74. WELFORD, A. T., Fundamentals o f Skill, Methuen and Co. 1968.
75. HOFFMANN, E. R., Detection of Vehicle Velocity Changes in Car-Following. Proceedings
Fourth Conference. Australian Road Research Board, 4 (I), 821-837, 1968.
76. MORTIMER, R. G., Automotive Rear Lighting and Signalling Research. Highway Safety
Research Institute. Report No. Hu F-5, 1970.
77. HARVEY, L. 0. and MICHON, J. A., The Perception of Manoeuvres of Moving Vehicles:
Effects of Viewing Distance and Angular Separation. Institute for Perception TNO,
Soesterberg, The Netherlands. Report No. 1971-C6.
78. EVANS, L. and ROTHERY, R., Detection of the Sign of Relative Motion When Following
a Vehicle. Hurnc;n Factors, 16 (2), 161-173, 1974.
79. FARBER, E. and SILVER, C. A., Conceptualization of Overtaking and Passing on
T w e L a n e Rural Roads Vol. 11. The Franklin lnstitute Research Laboratories, Report
1-193-11, Dec. 1967.
80. HOFFMANN, E. R. and MACDONALD, W. A., Scaling Perceived Distance in a Roadway
Environment. Dept. Mechanical Engineering, University of Melbourne, Unpublished,
1975.
81. OLSON, P. L., WACHSLER, R. A. and BAUER, H. J., Driver Judgements of Relative Car
Velocity. Journ. o f Applied Psychology, 45 (3), 161-164, 1961.
82. HAKKINEN, S., Estimation of Distance and Velocity in Traffic Situations. Institute of
Occupational Health, Helsinki, Report No. 3, May 1963.
83. SEMB, G., Scaling Automobile Speed. Perception and Psychophysics, 5 (2), 97-101, 1969.
84. JANSSEN, W. H., MICHON, J. A. and BUIST, M., The Perception of Moving Vehicles:
Direct Scaling of Translatory Velocity, Angular Distance and Angular Velocity of
Lights. lnstitute for Perception RVO-TNO, Report No. IZF 1971-C18.
85. BJORKMAN, M., An Exploratory Study of Predictive Judgements in a Traffic Situation.
Scandinavian Journ. Psychology, 4. 65-76, 1963.
86. JOLLIFFE, C. J., GRAF, C. and ALDEN, D., An Evaluation of a Rear-Mounted Vehicle
Speed Indicator. Highway Research Record, No. 366, 130-1 32, 1971.
87. SALVATORE, S., The Ability of Elementary and Secondary School Children t o Sense
Oncoming Car Velocity. Highwny Research Record, No. 436, 19-28, 1972.
 126 E. R. HOFFMANN

88. HOFFMANN, E. R., Perception of Relative Velocity With Application to Traffic Flow
Studies. Highway Safety Research Institute, 1975 (To be published).
89. ROCKWELL, T. H, and SNIDKR, J. N., Investigations of Driver Sensory Capability and its
Effect on the Driving Task. Ohio State University. Dept, of Industrial Eng. Project
RF 2091. Final Report, 1969.
90. TODOSIEV, E. P. and BARBOSA, L. C., A Proposed Model for the Driver-Vehicle System.
Daffic Engineering, March, 1964.
91. DARROCH, J. N. and ROTHIiKY, R. W.,Car Following and Spectral Analysis. Traffic
Flow and Dansportation. Roc. I:ifth International Symposium on the Theory of
Traffic Plow and Transportation, 47-56, 197 1.
92. HANKIZN, A. F., A Method and a Model for the Analysis and Description of Car-Following
Performance. Ohio State University, Engineering Experimental Station, Rcport EES
202-B-2, June 1965.
Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 17:07 05 February 2015

93. FINCH, D. M., Automotive Signalling and Lighting. S.A.E. Paper No. 700385.
94. OWEN, L. C., The Controversy Over Rear Lighting and Signalling on Motor Vehicles. S.A.E.
Paper No. 700387.
95. GANTZER, D. J, and ROCKWELL, T. H., The Effect of Discrete Hcadway and Relative
Velocity Information on Car-Following Performance. Ergonomics, 1968, 11 ( I ) , 1-12.
96. FENTON, R. E, and MONTARO, W. B., ,in Intervehicular Spacing Display for Improved
Car-1:ollowing Performance. I.E.E. E. Trans. MMS-9, 2, 29-35, 1966.
97. RElLLY, R. E. and CAMERON, B. J., Overtaking and Passing Under Adverse Visibility
Conditions Vol. 3. The Franklin Institute Research bboratories, Report 1-218,
(PB184 9 5 3 , 1969.
98. NICKERSON, R. S., BARON, S. COLLINS, A. M. and CROTHERS, C. C., Invcstigation of
Some of the Problems of Vehicle Rear Lighting. Bolt, Baranek and Newman, Report
1586, 1968.
99. ROCKWELL, T. H. and TREITERER, J., Sensing and Communication Between Vehicles.
National Cooperative Research Program, Report 5 1, 1968.
100. MORTIMER, R. C., Thc Value of an Accelerator Release Signal. Human Factors. 13 (S),
481-486, 1971.
101. RUTLEY, K. S. and MACE, D. G. W., An Evaluation of a Brakelight Display Which Indica-
tes the Severity of Braking, Road Research Laboratory, Report LR 287, 1969.
102. VOEVODSKY, J., Inferences From Visual Pcrception and Reaction Time t o Requisites for
a Collision-Preventing Cyberlite Stop Lamp. Proceedings, National Academy of
Sciences, 5 7 ( 3 ) , 688-695, 1967.
103. VOEVODSKY, J., llvaluation of a Deceleration Warning Light for Reducing Rear-End
Automobile Collisions. Journ. o f Applied Ps.ychology, 5 9 (3). 270-273, 1974.
104. GOOD, M. C., ROLLS, K. J , and JOUBERT, P. N., Driver-Vehicle Behaviour in Free-Path
Turns. Dansportation Research, 3, 43-68, 1969.
105. ERVIN, R. D., FANCHLR, P. S., SECEL, L., Refinement and Application of Open-Loop
Limit-Manoeuvre Response Methods. S.A.E. Paper No. 730491.