TP1 - 3 2 0

A Sliding Mode Control Approach to Automatic Car Steering

Jurgen Guldner

Vadim I. Utkin

Jurgen Ackermann

DLR - Institute for Robotics and System Dynamics

D-82230 Wessling, Germany
Abstract

Highway automation is a promising approach to cope with increasing

road traffic and congestions. An important control subtask of an Intelligent VehicIe/Ifaghwoy System is automatic steering for lateral vehicle
control. Due to system uncertainties and the wide range of operating
conditions, state-of-the-artrobust control techniques are required. This
paper introduces two automatic steering controllers for cars driving under highway conditions. The control design is based on sliding mode
control and robust state observation. It is shown that good tracking
of a reference path, delineated either continuously or discretely, can be
achieved with a minimum effort in sensing and without preview of the
road curvature.

1. Introduction

Road traffic has steadily increased during the last decades. Especially metropolitan areas suffer from growing traffic congestions not only during rush
hours. Numerous strategies to improve automotive mass transit have been
under consideration for several years. Some progress has been made by enhancing public transport systems and promoting car pooling (high occupancy
lanes). However, such approaches cannot considerably reduce road traffic
since they restrict the flexibility and mobility of the individual.
Varaiya argues that measures assisting the driver, for example by advanced
route and road informations systems, cannot significantly ameliorate road
traffic and full automation of highway traffic is indispensable for increasing
highway throughput and driving safety [I]. A recent comprehensive systems
study of design, development and deployment of fully automated highway
systems was presented by Bender [Z].A suitable system architecture for an
Intelligent Vehicle/Highway System (IVHS) is the subject of on-going research
e.g. at Ohio State University [3] and in the Californian PATH project [4].
There are a number of well-defined control subtasks which can be addressed a
priori. The two major control tasks for highway automation are longitudinal
control (spacing between cars) and lateral vehicle control (lane keeping).
There are several approaches to lateral vehicle control. Complete autonomy
of the vehicle can be achieved through an intelligent vision system [5] with online generation of the desired path. A perception system replicating a human
driver can sense the upcoming road geometry and, in addition, objects in
front of the vehicle. This would open the possibility of a common sensing
device for lateral and longitudinal vehicle control. Enabling the vehicle t o
see e.g. the lane edge stripping under varying weather and road conditions,
however, challenges present limits of real-time vision systems. The alternative
is an indirect sensing approach with a reference for lateral control built into
the road surface. A more detailed discussion on direct and indirect sensing
can be found e.g. in [6].

lateral displacement from the reference path. The variable under control is
the input of an integrating steering actuator, the actual steering angle also
being unknown. Stability and robustness of the proposed control algorithm
under parametric uncertainty is proved using Lyapunov stability theory.
In Section 4, the automatic steering system is improved by additional feedback
of the vehicle yaw rate measured by a gyroscope. A cascaded controller is
designed and its performance is illustrated in numerical studies of typical
driving maneuvers in Section 5. Special emphasis is placed on eliminating
chattering caused by unmodelled dynamics via observers.
Both controllers enable direct inclusion of specifications l i e actuator constraints and ride quality requirements into the design procedure. The crucial
issue of implementation with a digital computer is discussed in detail. The
discrete control algorithms are implementable both for continuous and for
discrete reference systems without modification. It is concluded that satisfactory performance under uncertainty conditions is achievable without preview
information of the road curvature.
2. Dynamic Model

2.1. M o d e l for Car Steering

The classical single-track model of Riekert-Schunck [14]is used to model the
steering dynamics. It is obtained by lumping the two front wheels into one
wheel in the center line of the car, the same is done with the two rear wheels.
The variables in Figure 1 denote:
velocity vector with magnitude w > 0,
sideslip angle between vehicle centerline and velocity vector at CG,
yaw rate,
front wheel steering angle,
distance of CG from front (rear) axle

J
/3
T

Sf

e,

(e,)

For simplicity, control design is based on a linearized model [15]. Extension to

a more detailed nonlinear model is straightforward,since the design procedure
uses nonlinear control theory. The lineaxized dynamics of the sideslip angle
and the yaw rate T are

Different realizations of reference systems supplying the vehicle with lateral

information are possible. A continuous reference guideline using an electric
wire was studied by Daimler-Benz and MAN in Germany for a city-bus [7,8].
A radar reflecting guard rail at the side of the lane was examined at OSU [3,9].
Alternatively, permanent magnets can be used as discrete markers in the road The front (rear) wheel cornering stiflnesses C, (4)are empirically det:rmined
tire parameters entering into the side force equations. a = m / p and J = J / f i
surface [4,6,10]. The goal of control is to track the delineated pathway.
are a viiual mass and a virtual moment of inertia obtained through
A study of vehicle lateral control techniques [ll] suggested that an intelligent normalization by the road adheaion factor p. All car parameters are taken to
reference system for automatic steering should possess anticipatory capability be uncertain within known bounds e.g. m E [m-; m+] or fi E [cr-; cl+]. We
rather than merely having compensatory behavior. In other words, a preview assume that the vehicle velocity v is known, constant (or varying slowly), and
of the road geometry, conveyed to the car and used as feed-forward aides the lower bounded.
control algorithm. In the discrete marker approach pursued in the Californian
PATH project, preview of the roadway curvature is encoded bit-wise in the
permanent magnets [4] and used to specify a desired steering angle [6,12,13].
However, the feed-forward controller depends on knowledge of the plant parameters, which is not available in general and requires an estimation scheme
e.g. for the cornering stiffness of the tires [4].
Due to the wide range of possible operating conditions (vehicle mass and
inertia, road adhesion, etc.), automatic steering is a task for robust control.
Steering actuator saturation and limited state information represent further
challenges to control design. In addition, passenger comfort and safety considerations have to be taken into account.
We present two controllers based on sliding mode control and robust state
observation. The control design in Section 3 uses only measurements of the

I
I
I
I
I

+--c

I
11-

I
I
I

Fig. 1: Single-track model for car steering

The front wheel steering actuator is modeled as an integrator

8f
with constraints l6fl

3. Control with Displacement Measurement

=uj

In this section, we design a nonlinear controller for automatic steering of a car

under the assumption that the lateral displacement a, is the only measured
state in model (6) and that no preview of the road curvature is available.

2 6fo,and Iufl 5 ufo

2.2. Model of the Reference Path

The model (1) is extended to include vehicle heading and lateral position
with respect to the reference path, see Figure 2. The sensor S for measuring
the displacement from the reference path is mounted in the center of the
front bumper at a distance e, from the center of gravity (CG). A linearized
model is derived for small deviations from a stationary curved path. The
road curvature p7.f := l/+ef is the reference input defined positive for left
cornering and negative for right cornering.

The rate of change of

YCG

is obtained from Figure 2 as

The design procedure is based on sliding mode control. The basic idea is to
force the dynamic system to restrict its motion to a manifold called the "sliding manifold" s(2) = 0. This is achieved by directing the system trajectories
towards this manifold "from both sides" using two different controls U+ and
U-, as shown in Figure 3.
The main benefits of sliding mode control are its invariance property and the
ability to decouple high dimensional problems into sub-tasks of lower dimensionality. The interested reader is referred to [l6]for a tutorial introduction
and to [17] for a more detailed discussion of sliding mode control.

A$) = w(P A+),

(3)
where A$ = ll, is the angle between the tangent to the path at z
,
and the centerline of the car. The linearization sin(p+ A$) = p + A$ is valid
due to small angles p and A$. Smce e. << R,,f, the lateral velocity at the
sensor S with respect to the guiding wire, y, is
~ C =
G wsin(p

x = f ( x ,.+)

7s(x) = 0

x = f(z,U-)

= v(p +A$) +tar,

(4)
where 0and r are given by the basic car model (1). The angular displacement
All, is obtained from

Fig. 3: State vectors in the vicinity of the sliding surface

(5)

3.1. Continuous-Time Controller Design

The sliding manifold [17] is defined to be

s i ( d ) = Y"

+ ~ I Y '+by,

(7)

where d = wt. The goal of control is to restrict the motion of (6) to the
manifold sl(d) = 0 in (7). In this case, the tracking behavior of the vehicle is
entirely determined by the gains ko and kl. To establish stability of s1 = 0,
we examine the Lyapunov function candidate Vl(d) = $5:. Differentiation of
Vl(d) along the system trajectories yields

V;(d) =

SI

( f i ( P , ~ , A $ , 6 f , p + . f , p ~ =+f )c ~ u ft )

(8)

where = bl + $&. Under normal operating conditions, all states, contribu)

linear functions
ting linearly to fl(.), are bounded. In the sequel, j 2 ( . denote
of the states. Furthermore, we assume that the rate of change of road curvature p:., is piecewise bounded with isolated points of discontinuities, where
pVef changes jumpwise. Using the given uncertainty bounds on the car paraIfl(.)l
can be determined, which is valid
meters, an upper bound (f1)"
almost everywhere. Hence there exists a finite scalar ~0 such substitution of
the control law

>

Fig. 2: Measured displacement fl from the reference path

uf

Combining ( l ) , (2), (4),and (5) yields the extended state space model. As
outlined in the introduction, there exist continuous and discrete reference
systems. For a continuous reference guidelime, it is appropriate to adjust
the sampling interval AT of a discrete controller depending on the vehicle
velocity. Obviously, fast motion requires a higher sampling rate than slow
motion. Sampling data is collected with regard to covered distance rather
than with regard to elapsed time, i.e. Ad = VAT. This method coincides
with the discrete reference method using uniformly spaced markers. The
following control development thus is valid both for a continuous guidelime
and for a discrete reference system. To facilitate the design procedure, the
motion equations are rewritten in terms of d = wt instead of time 1. For
convenience, we will denote "distance" derivatives with "primes". However,
differentiation is understood with respect to d instead o f t in the sequel. The
overall model is

= -ugsign(sl)

(9)

into (8) results in

for some positive scalar

[I.

Substitution of VI(d) = $3: into (10) yields

Vl(4 I -FiK(d)~.
D e h e a positive definite function Vo(d) with

vanishes after a finite driving distance:

6)

&(IT)

is an upper bound for &(d) for d >_ 4 , i.e.

h(d) I

Wd)

Vd E

do.

(15)

Consequently, Vz(d)
0 after finite distance &, which implies si = 0
in (7) Vd 1 do, and convergenceof y to zero as specified by ko and kl.

1870

At locations where ptef changes jumpwise, the above boundedness conditions

are violated and the manifold s1 = 0 is left. Such steps in the reference
curvature occur only a t isolated points, which means that convergence to
si = 0 is guaranteed after each step-change of pref within finite time.
Direct implementation of the control law (9) requires measurement of y, yf
and y. It is assumed that only y is available from the displacement sensor
mounted a t the front end of the car. Numerical differentiation is undesirable
due t o noise considerations and the introduction of parasitic dynamics preventing ideal sliding mode to occur along si = 0 (7). To obtain estimates of
y and y, a robust observer is designed for the system

lo ++I
ro 1 0 0 1

s(n)
A

u(n)

r o i

0 0 1 0
0 0
0 0 0 0

d5

Fig. 4: Chattering in discrete time Systems

1,

where zT = [ y yf y fz(.) cs is given in (8) and ds = (all + $ ~ ~ z l ) b l +

(012
1 +22)b2. Under the assumption that f2(.) is uncertain, but slowly
varying, i.e. f; zz 0, an observer is defined as

+ +

measurement noise. This undesired effect is caused by the control being constant during the sampling interval and eual to either -U, or +U,,, which results
in overshoot, see Figure 4.

A remedy is utilization of the equivalent control method for discrete sliding

mode systems [19]. The key idea is t o exactly nullify the sliding variable s,
i.e. to design the control ~ ( nsuch
) that s ( n + l ) 3 0. If the control constraint
prevents reaching s = 0 in one step, maximum control action is applied to
reduce the distance to the sliding manifold. Convergence is guaranteed within
a finite number of steps j and s(n) 5 0 V n 2 j , see Figure 5.

n
.. ._

where hats denote estimates (constant for parameters like cs and d s ) and
bars denote estimation errors, e.g. g = y - 8. The gains 0 << el1 <<
< e13 << e14 determine the desired observer poles, and should be chosen
a t least one order of magnitude faster than the dynamics of fz(.) for good
observation. The observation error decays according to

.... ,,._

. . .

-U0

Fig. 5: Chattering-free motion using equivalent control method

Given the observer dynamics

i(n 1) = A:ba12(n)-k Bibs,Uf(n) L;g(n),

(21)
the control uf(n) is designed to reach &(n 1)= K l i ( n 1) = 0 identically
in equation (19). Solving (21) for the control yields
Provided the observer dynamics are sufficientlyfast in comparison to the plant
dynamics, small errors (18) are achieved even for j i 0. According to singular perturbation theory and the motion separation principle, the observation
errors are of vi =O(&) order for a = 1, ...,4.

+.

.eq(n)

= -[KI B~a,,l-[Ki(A~b,,i(n)

+ LIB(n)l,

The estimates for I,y, y replace the true values in (7) and (9)

K1 =

$1

= Kli,

ut

= -uOsign(&),

[ ko

ki

1 0

1,

(19)

and provide sliding mode within the observer system (17) with the actual
states z in (16) being close to the estimate i in (17)as determined by the
dynamics of the observer error (18).

It is worth noting two direct consequences of (17)-(19):

Direct implementation of the control (9) with (7) would cause high &equency oscillations in the system even for pure feedback of the derivatives y and y. This problem is referred to as chattering in sliding
mode literature and is attributed to unmodeled dynamics like parasitics
in sensors and actuators neglected in the linearized model (6). The observer loop (17) with control (19) is free of unmodeled dynamics, which
allows ideal sliding mode to occur, leading to chattering-free motion in
the real system (16), see e.g. [18].
The observer (17) has the structure of a Kalman filter. An appropriate
choice of gains e,, i = 1, ...,4 results in noise filtering. A trade-off
is required between the need for high gains el, for good uncertainty
suppression and low gains el, for good filtering.

4. Control Design with Yaw Rate Feedback

In this section we discuss incorporation of yaw rate measurement into the

control design. Yaw rate feedback enables design of a cascaded controller,
reducing the order of the highest derivative in (7), thus increasing robustness
and decreasing noise susceptibility of the automatic steering system.

4.1. Continuous-Time Cascaded Control Design

It is important to note that control design in this section does not require
measurement of the car velocity if the controller is designed in time domain
rather than with regard to the driven distance d. Obviously, this is only
possible for a continuous guideline. However, for the sake of a uniform presentation, the controller is designed in d-domain for a known vehicle speed
v > 0.Transformation t o time-domain is straight forward.
The design procedure follows the ideas of control using regular form, see
chap. 6 in [17]. The inner loop of the cascaded control system comprises the
output dynamics (4)

= @+A@+$.

3.2. Discrete-Time Controller Design

Micro-computer realization requires redesign of the continuous control algorithm in a discrete form of similar structure. The linear observer equations
(17) are transformed using the standard formulas

(23)

The yaw rate T is considered as a fictitious control input to (23) and a

desired yaw rate Td is defined assunling r could be controlled directly. The
control input uf is used to nullify the error e, = r - Td between the actual,
measured yaw rate and the desired yaw rate defined as
rd

-E (h()+ by))

(24)

with state-bounded f3 = @+A$. Observer design assumes slow varying fs(.),

where Ad is the sampliig interval, e.g. the distance between discrete markers.
Immediate implementation of the control law (19) inevitably leads to chattering a t the sampling rate, even in the absence of unmodeled dynamics and

1971

where 0 << e21 <( e22 are the observer gains and @ = y - Q is the exponentially
stable observation error. The observer poles should be at least one order of
magnitude faster than the dynamics of f3. As outlined previously, observer
(25) introduces advantageous ( K h a n - ) noise filtering into the system.
Large deviations 8, lead to high Td, undesirable from a point of view of passenger comfort. Utilization of a saturation function,

Remarks
The functions f;(.), i = 1 , 2...5 are not needed explicitly in the control
development. Thus the above controllers are independent of the model
as long as the f; are bounded, allowing all car parameters in (6) to be
uncertain. However, bounds on uncertain parameters are vital for the
stability analysis. Design based on a nonlinear model instead of (6)
would lead to similar results since the controller only depends on the
triple-integrator structure of the plant (6).

It is important to maintain the hierarchy of time scales resulting from

where X limits the feedback of 6 and the ratio determines the gain at the
origin p = 0, allows direct inclusion of ride quality considerations.
To obtain satisfactory behavior of the overall system, the actual input U! has
to be designed to provide the desired yaw rate. The control objective is to
drive the error e, = 7 - Td to zero. The sliding manifold is defined as
SZ = ke, +e:,
(27)
where gain k > 0 determines the rate of decay of e, once the motion has
been restricted to s2 = 0. Approach to the manifold s2 = 0 and subsequent
stability is established using the Lyapunow function candidate h ( d ) = $3;.
Differentiation along (27) yields

where j 4 is an unknown bounded function of the states, i.e.

Hence there exists a finite value uo such that

(.fd),,,=

If4(.)l.

uf = -uosign(sz)

(29)

the tripleintegrator structure when determining the gains of the control

loops: The outermost loop in g has to be kept "slower" than the middle
loop in p, r, and A$, whereas the innermost loop in 61 can be made
arbitrarily fast, being constrained only by actuator limitations. The
asymptotic observers, on the other hand, should have time constants
at least one order of magnitude higher than the respective closed loop.
The strict mathematical derivation in the previous sections neglected
physical limitations of the actuator. In reality, steering angle and steering angle rate are bounded. Such constraints require to determine the
control parameters in inverse order, starting from the innermost loop
and then following the hierarchy described above.

It was stated in [20] that high-gain feedback is not suitable for lateral
motion control of a vehicle. At first sight, sliding mode control implements infinitely high gains, a t least in the continuous-time versions of
the control algorithms. However, sliding mode control is only used to
restrict the motion of the plant to the respective sliding manifold despite
system uncertainty. Thereafter the plant behavior is entirely determined by the parameters K1 in (19), and K2 and X/E in (31), allowing
incorporation of ride quality considerations into the design procedure.

implies convergence of s2 to zero after finite time in the framework of (IO).

The sliding variable s2 in (27) depends on r, r', r d , and rb. While T; can
be calculated, T' has to be estimated by a third-order observer of the same
structure as in (17):

i'

=
=

klUf+[; IF=

0 1 0

0 0 0, I

(30)
S+[
+ B o b * r U f + L3P1
and gs = (aiiazi + aizazz)h + (oizazi + a & ) b . 6 =

&bast

where Ci = T, C2 = T',
fs(.) is assumed to be slow compared to the observer dynamics determined
by 0 << &s << e32 << t a l . Similarly to before, ideal sliding mode occurs in the
observer-loop system and guarantees chattering-free motion.
4.2. Discrete-Time Cascaded Control Design

Using the equivalent control method for discrete systems, the continuoustime cascaded controller designed in the previous section takes the following
discrete-time form:
P(n+1)
f3(n+1)

=
=

In this section, we simulate the car 280 SEL of Daimler-Benz [15,21]in various
typical driving maneuvers. A discrete marker reference system is used, but
similar results can be obtained for a continuous reference.

5.1. Reference Driving Maneuvers

All simulations were performed with the linear vehicle model (6) taking into
account actuator saturation. Four typical driving maneuvers are used to evaluate the performance of the automatic steering system, see Figure 7
llansition from manual to automatic steering. The car is assumed to
drive in a distance of y = 0.30m parallel to the guideline when the
control is activated.
Driving through a 60" curve with step changes in R,.f. The curve radius
is chosen as
= 9=

9.

Driving through a 60" curve with linear curvature transition to and f"
the curve radius Ref=
=
Lane change with nominal lateral acceleration of 0.29.

y.

The simulations are performed with a velocity of IJ = 30m/s = 67.5mph and

maximal parameter values, e.g. maximal virtual mass fi+.Due to the design
in distance domain d rather than time domain t , similar results are obtained
for different velocities. For control design, average parameter values were
The distance between
assumed, e.g. a virtual mass of %,,vevage =
the markers of the discrete reference trajectory is chosen to be 0.3m R 1ft,
which is equivalent to a sampling time of T = 10ms.

Cd(n) =
S(n+l)

5. Numerical Studies

v.

&(n) =
=

We require the displacement from the guideline not to exceed 0.2m during
transient and 0.05 m in steady state, and the lateral acceleration not to exceed
during curve riding by more than f O . l g 1201.
the nominal value a =

--

A block diagram of the controller structure is shown in Figure 6.

steering
Controller

%e:

Controller to determine
desired yaw rate

--

5.2. Simulation Results

For the sake of brevity, we confine the simulation to the discrete version of
the cascaded controller designed in Section 4. Compared to the version in
Section 3, the effects of measurement noise are decreased and incorporation
of ride quality considerations into the control design is further facilitated, since
a desired vehicle yaw rate can be specified. For the simulations in Figure 8, the
following parameters were chosen: X = and E = 0.15 in (26), k = 0.0286
in (27), and poles pobsl = -2.5 for the observer (25) and Phi = -4 for (30).
The available robustness can be used e.g. to increase the spacing of the
reference markers. Figure 9 depicts the performance of the controller (31)
with A = & and c = 0.2 in (26), k = 0.02 in (27), P,,bal = -1 (25) and
po).3 = -2.5 (30) for the transition from manual to automatic steering. The
velocity and the marker spacing were doubled, i.e. v = 60 [m s-l] = 135 [mph]

and Ad = 0.6 [m] = 2 [ft]. Gaussian noise contents of U, = 0.002 [rads-) for
the yaw rate measurement and uv = (0.002 [m]+O.Ollpl) for the displacement
measurement were assumed. Satisfactory performance is achieved, including
small lateral acceleration. Additional studies, not shown here, for guste of
sidewind, missing markers, and sudden change of road conditions (change of
p ) resulted in no significant tracking errors. The critical effect turned out to
be measurement noise.

RefLaxnc4p.th

6. Conclusions

This paper introduced two nonlinear control algorithms for automatic steering
of cars, an important control subtask of Intelligent Vehicle/Highway Systems.
Computer implementation and discretization of the control algorithms was
discussed in detail. Direct inclusion of ride quality considerations into the
control design was possible. Despite a high degree of system uncertainty, minimal efforts in state measurement and no road curvature preview, satisfactory
performance was achieved by utilizing sliding mode control methodology and
robust state observation.

xlO-3 R e f m c e Curvature

References
[I]
P. Varaiya, Smart cam on smart roads: Problems of control, IEEE buns.
on Automatic Control, vol. 38, pp. 195-207, 1993.
121
J. G. Bender, An overview of systems studies of automated highway systems, IEEE Rum. on Vehicular Technology,vol. 40,no. 1,pp. 82-99, 1991.
[3] R.E. Fenton and R. J. Mayhan, UAutomatedhighway studies at the Ohio
State University - An overview, IEEE Trans. on Vehicular Technology, vol. 40,
no. 1, pp. 100-113, 1991.
[4] S. E.Shladover et al., Automatic vehicle control developments in the PATH
Program, IEEE 7 h m s . on Vehicular Technology, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 114-130, 1991.
[5] E. Dickmanns and T. Christians, Relative 3D state estimation for autonmous visual guidance of road vehicles, Intelligent Autonomous Systems, vol. 2,

xlO-3 Reference Curvature

Fig. 7: Reference paths for curve driving and lane change

o.3 Transition to Automatic Stcain

0.2

1989.
[6] W. Zhang and R. E. Parsons, An intelligent roadway reference system for
vehicle lateral guidance/control, in Proc. American Control Con/., (San Diego, CA,
USA), pp. 281-286, 1990.
[7] W. Darenberg, Automatische Spurfiihrung von Kraftfahrzeugen (in German), Automobil-Industrie, pp. 155-159, 1987.
[8]
J. Ackermann, W. Sienel, and R. Steinhauser, Robust automatic steering
of a bus, in Proc. Second European Control Conference, vol. 3, (Groningen, The
Netherlands), pp. 1534-1539, 1993.
[9] R.J. Mayhan and R.A. Bishsl, A two-frequencyradar for vehicle automatic
control, IEEE %anS. on Vehicular Technology, vol. 31,no. 1, 1982.
[lo] A. R.Johnston, T. Assefi, and J. Y. Lai, Automated vehicle guidance using
discrete markers, IEEE Runs. on Vehicular Technology, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 95-105,
1979.
Ill] R.Parsons and W.-B. Zhang, Program on advanced technology for the highway - lateral guidance system requirements definition, in Pruc. ASCE Int. Conf.

0.1

-0.01

so

100

150

200 [ml

-0.02

100

200

MoIml

xlO-3 Smooth Curvature Chan e

-0.02

on Appl. of Advanced Tech. in 7hnsportation Engineering, (San Diego, CA, USA),

pp. 257-280, 1989.
1121 H. Peng and M. Tomizuka, Previewcontrol for vehicle lateral guidance in highway automation, in Proc. American Contml Conf., (Boston, MA, USA), pp. 2621-

Fig. 8: Performance of cascaded controller

2627, 1991.
[13] M. Tomizuka and J. K. Hedrick, Automated vehicle control for IVHS systems, in Pmc. IFAC World Congress, (Sydney, Australia), 1993.
(141 P. Riekert and T. Schunck, Zur Fahrmechanik des gummibereiften Kraftfahrzeugs (in German), Ingenieur Archiu, vol. 11, pp. 210-224, 1940.
[l5] J. Ackermann, A. Bartlett, D. Kaesbauer, W. Sienel, and R. Steinhawer,
Robust contml: Analysis and design of linear control systems with uncertain physical
pammeters. London: Springer, 1993.
[IS] R.A. DeCarlo, S. H. Zak,and G. P. Matthews, Variable structure control of
nonlinear multivariable systems: A tutorial, Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 76, no.
. 3, pp. 212-232, 1988.
[17] V. I. Utkin, Sliding Modes in Control and Optimization. Berlin, Germany:
Springer-Verlag, 1992.
[l8] A. G. Bondarev, S. A. Bondarev, N. E. Kostyleva, and V. I. Utkin, Sliding modes in systems with asymptotic state observers, Automation and Remote
Control, vol. 46,no. 6 (P.l), pp. 679-684, 1985.
[19] V.I. Utkin, Slidingmode control in discrete-time and difference systems, in
Variable structure and Lyapunou Control (A. S.I. Zinober, ed.),pp. 83-103, London,
UK: Springer-Verlag, 1993.

La-

0.4 I

-0.1o

0.2

[20] H. Peng and M. Tomizuka, Vehicle lateral control for highway automation,
in Pruc. American Control Con/.., (San Diego, CA, USA), pp. 788-794, 1990.
[21] W. Darenberg, Automatisehe Spnfihrung von Kraftfahrzeugen (in Ger.man), Presentation at Arbeitskis Rohuste Regelung, Interlaken, Switzerland,

50

100

I50

Displacement

200

250

300

350

Lateral Acceleration in P

Fig. 9: Controller performance under noisy measurements

1985.

1973

I
4OO[ml