See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/328007272

Autonomous Drifting Control in 3D Car Racing Simulator

Conference Paper · September 2018

DOI: 10.1109/IS.2018.8710588

CITATIONS READS
5 1,972

5 authors, including:

Ilya Afanasyev Aidar Gabdullin

Innopolis University Innopolis University
97 PUBLICATIONS   389 CITATIONS    13 PUBLICATIONS   54 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Ruslan Mustafin
Innopolis University
26 PUBLICATIONS   684 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Calibration of the Space Solar Patrol apparatus at the synchrotron source View project

Research and Development of Software Solutions for Static and Dynamic Based Control of Anthropomorphic Bipedal Robots Locomotion View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ilya Afanasyev on 01 October 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Autonomous Drifting Control in 3D Car Racing
Simulator
Igor Zubov Ilya Afanasyev
Center for Technologies Institute of Robotics
in Robotics and Mechatronics Components Innopolis University
Innopolis University Innopolis, Russia
Innopolis, Russia i.afanasyev@innopolis.ru
i.zubov@innopolis.ru
Ruslan Mustafin
Innopolis University
Innopolis, Russia
r.mustafin@innopolis.ru
Abstract—It is known that drifting is a driving technique, when
a car is moving along some direction different from its steering
trajectory, having a slip angle at the rear axle greater then at
the forward axle. Even though it is often used in auto sport, it
is still not applied to everyday life due to safety concerns. On
the other hand, using all car control possibilities can provide
safe driving even in extreme conditions without a crash. This
article is devoted to the investigation and development of a drift
controller and its application in electric car simulation with
studying the problems of autonomous drifting and stabilization
around an equilibrium state. To implement the drift controller,
we used all-wheel drive Roborace Robocar in Speed Dreams car
racing simulator, applying the mechanical bicycle and simplified
nonlinear tire models to define tire parameters, and two state
equilibrium model to compute the equilibrium points. Although
the steering drift controller is rather simple and based on errors
from equilibrium values, to find controller’s gains the model was
linearized, and controller was represented as full-state feedback
that guaranteed its stability.
Keywords—drift controller, two state equilibrium model, tire
model, car racing simulator, Roborace Robocar, Speed Dreams
I. I NTRODUCTION
When considering vehicle dynamics in typical car cornering, there
can be three different steering states: understeering, normal driving
and oversteering. The latter occurs when car is steered more than
expected that can lead to skidding. Usually it happens when the
vehicle side slip angle (SSA) is growing. Let’s remind that the
car SSA (also known as the attitude or drifting angle) is an angle
between vehicle’s actual direction and direction where its center of
gravity is pointing. It is known that tire slip angles are difficult if
not possible for directly measure, that is why indirect methods have
to be applied for their estimation [1], [2]. The information about
SSA is absolutely necessary for advanced vehicle control systems like
braking control, stability control, ADAS (Advanced Driver Assistance
System), devices security actuators and for verification of vehicle
simulators. These systems provide reliable ways to improve vehicle
safety and steering predictability.
Aidar Gabdullin
Center for Technologies
in Robotics and Mechatronics Components
Innopolis University
Innopolis, Russia
a.gabdullin@innopolis.ru
Ilya Shimchik
Innopolis University
Innopolis, Russia
i.shimchik@innopolis.ru
Nowadays, in order to prevent car from skidding most modern
vehicles use the Electronic Stability Control (ESC), which is capable
to detect loss of traction and stabilize the car by applying breaks to
one of the wheels (as shown in Figure 1). While the ESC is designed
for normal driving, it does not utilize all car capabilities. Sometimes
at driving at high speed for more efficient cornering a driver can
apply drift technique, which is characterized by big side slip angle
and counter-steering (when a car is steered opposite the direction of
the turn).
Fig. 1: The scheme of a car stabilization at the moment of
oversteering by Electronic Stability Control (ESC).
c Cour-
tesy of the Association for the Advancement of Automotive
Medicine (AAAM), https://www.aaam.org
In this work we focus on development of a drift controller,
applying the mechanical bicycle and simplified nonlinear tire models
to define tire parameters, and two state equilibrium model to com-
pute the equilibrium points. Then we realized the drift controller
implementation with all-wheel drive Roborace Robocar in Speed
Dreams Simulator, estimating car and tire model parameters, testing
autonomous drifting and stabilization around an equilibrium state.
Although the steering drift controller is sufficiently simple since it
applies the negative feedback to minimize the errors from equilibrium
state, we used the full-state feedback model with linearization to find
controller gains and guarantee its stability.
Our contribution. We propose a method to implement a drift
controller aiming to address stability issues when drifting in car
simulators.
The paper is organized as follows. Section II reviews the state-
of-the-art on drifting control, Section III describes our simulation
framework, Section IV formalizes car and tire models, and in Section
V we identify the models’ parameters. Finally, we implement the
drift controller in Section VI, demonstrating the simulation results in
Section VII, and conclude in Section VIII.
II. R ELATED WORK
Many recent studies consider drifting techniques for car racing to
understand motion control features and possibilities for aggressive
maneuvers towards effective and fully autonomous vehicle driving
[3]–[10]. The paper [3] presented the steady-state drift stabilization
of a Rear-Wheel-Drive (RWD) vehicle around an cornering equilibria,
using coordinated steering and drive torque control. For this goal it
was applied a cascade control architecture with a Linear Quadratic
Regulator (LQR) and a Backstepping controller. For a Front-Wheel-
Drive (FWD) vehicle configuration in [4] was developed a controller
to stabilize the vehicle with respect to the calculated cornering
equilibria using a vehicle model with driven front wheels and a rear
wheels locked at zero angular rate under application of the handbrake.
In papers [6] and [7] the safety regions for aggressive maneuvers
were investigated and nonlinear MPC (Model predictive control)
was designed and integrated with safety boundary of maneuver. The
authors used a linear quadratic regulator and several optimizations
such as Rapidly-exploring random tree for fast convergence, starting
a motion planning algorithm for such maneuvers online. Some
investigations demonstrated effective use of Nonlinear MPC (NMPC)
approach to race car motion [11]–[13]. The paper [11] proposed
a method for autonomous vehicle guidance using auto-generated
NMPC algorithms tailored for a specific vehicle model dynamics
(which includes wheel dynamics and specially developed tire model)
that allows to decide obstacle avoidance problem in real-time con-
ditions, advancing precise autonomous vehicle control in extreme
conditions. Another research [12] describes autonomous racing of
1:43 scaled RC race car based on mathematical optimization for
staying on the track and avoiding opponents. One of two controllers
used employs a two-level structure, consisting of a path planner and
a NMPC for tracking. The experimental results with Kyosho dnano
cars and controller implementation on Exynos 5410 chip based on the
ARM Cortex A15 microcontroller demonstrated robust RC race car
control in real-time mode. The similar research with a NMPC for real-
time control of autonomous vehicle aiming to achieve a minimum
traveling time was executed in [13]. The authors performed and
compared the autonomous trajectory tracking and the time-optimal
driving formulation both in simulation and in real experiments with
Kyosho dNaNo model race cars, showing the potential for NMPC
controller, although it was noticed that the bicycle model proved
insufficient at high velocities due to slip effects not being modelled.
MPC optimization is also researched in [8] with the development of
a path integral framework, which performs on the fly and combines
best of hierarchical and optimal control paradigms. The paper [14]
applies NMPC for overtaking strategy, which was demonstrated in
Speed Dreams race simulator.
Nevertheless, all these works concerned with aggressive driving
inside safety regions. However, there are some works in which a
controller is derived especially for drifting. One of the solutions
includes PID path tracking controller with drift detection ability and
receding horizon drift controller with a real time path planner, which
can decide optimal time to drift [15]. Another drift controller was
developed in [5], which is able to maintain car in drift equilibria.
Simultaneous stabilization in drift and tracking of drifting trajecto-
ries, which is based on computation of drifting equilibrium points
was presented in [16]. All of these drift controllers are based on
combined slip model. In [17] was proposed a hybrid hierarchical
rally driver model with steering and driving functions for autonomous
vehicle agile maneuvering, using a Proportional controller and motion
planning strategies to achieve a drift control with a gain-scheduled
LQR.
Completely different approaches with AI-based systems are used
to adapt sensors data directly to car control. For example, the recent
paper of NVidia corporation [18] proposed a convolutional neural
networks (CNN) to map raw pixels from a single front-facing camera
to steering commands. Another research [9] utilizes a deep CNN to
predict cost functions from input video to realize online trajectory
optimization with a MPC. The authors of the paper [10] developed
a framework for a robotic car that learns to autonomously drift, or
drive sideways, using a simulation-aided reinforcement learning with
very little data. In [19] a data-based approach for teaching a car to
autonomously drift without requiring any tyre friction information
was presented. This autonomous drift control was reached with an
AI hybrid structure consisted of Feedforward Neural Networks and
MPC.
III. S YSTEM SETUP
The research was provided using Robot Operating System (ROS
Indigo) and Speed Dreams Racing Simulator which is a 3D cross-
platform, open source motorsport simulation and racing game with
several available physics engines [20]. The existing Roborace [21]
mode adds support for UDP server and ROS. The udp-connection
ROS package includes RobotData and RobotCmd messages. The
overall ROS communication graph is shown in Figure 2, where
• identification - scripts for obtaining measurements during
Ramp Steer Maneuver [22], fitting Magic Formula [23] to
these measurements and computing equilibrium points for the
identified model
• drift controller - controller with scripts for computing the
controller coefficients and generating trajectories
Fig. 2: ROS graph with 4 active nodes and 2 topics. Iden-
tification node includes scripts for Ramp Steer Maneuver,
Magic formula fitting and equilibrium points computing. Drift
controller node includes the controller and scripts to compute
coefficients and generate trajectories.
IV. C AR AND TIRE MODELS
The drift is modeled in two steps: first of all a mechanical model of
the car need to be presented and then its motion is described mainly
by forces and slip angles. The next step is to model the tires.
A. Mechanical model
The car is represented as a rigid body in XY world frame and for
simplicity it will be used further. Nevertheless, there are tires’ normal
loads and friction force between tire and ground in Z axis (Figure
3).
The movement of the car can be described by the forces acting on
its wheels. Since the modeling car does not have active chassis, its
model can be further simplified to bicycle model [24] (see Figure 4),
which assumes that the car is symmetric and its left and right parts
are merged into one. The resulting model has only one front and one
rear wheel.

Fig. 4: The bicycle model for simplified car modeling.

c
Courtesy of Alexander Liniger [15]
.

There exist several slip models: no slip, lateral and combined slip.
No slip model is out of interest since it does not represent the drift.
Combined slip is a model where longitudinal slip affects the vy and φ̇
and is more complicated to model. Thus, only the lateral slip model
will be considered further.
a) Tire slip angle:
Fig. 3: Tire forces during a car motion.
c Courtesy of Joao The tire slip angle is an angle between wheel velocity and wheel
P. C. Goncalves & Jorge A.C. Ambrosio. heading (Figure 3) and is given by:

φ̇lr − vy
The model states are defined in terms of longitudinal velocity (vx ), αr = arctan( ) (4)
ω r rr
lateral velocity (vy ) and yaw rate (φ̇) at the center of gravity (CG)
in a body fixed frame. The equations of motion can be derived using φ̇lf + vy
Newton’s law and force and balance: αf = − arctan( )+δ (5)
vx
1 for rear and forward wheel.
v˙x = (Frx − Ff y sin δ + mvy φ̇) (1)
m These slip angles will be used then as a parameter to calculate the
1 forces acting on the wheels.
v˙y = (Fry − Ff x cos δ − mvx φ̇) (2) b) Magic Formula:
m The Magic Formula is a data-driven empirical tire friction law and
1 has wide application in tire modeling. The simplified form of Magic
φ̈ = (Ff y lf cos δ − Fry lr ) (3)
Iz Formula [15] which represents shape of tire friction curve is:
B. Tire model
Fiy = D sin(C arctan(Bαi )) with i = r, f (6)
The major contribution to modeling the car motion is made by
forces that are generated by tires. The knowledge of magnitude, where B, C and D are fitting constants.
direction and, what is more important, limits of the tire forces gives • B is stiffness factor
the understanding how to control the car. Tire forces are generated • D is peak factor
inside the contact patch and consist from friction in that patch and • C is shape factors
slipping of the tire. This simplification leads to easier identification of tires parameters
The tire modeling can be divided in several ways. Firstly, based on and still represents behavior of tires properly.
time behavior there exist two types of models: dynamic and steady The most interesting part is the peak friction, which shows
state. Since dynamic model is complex to identify, in this work only maximal force that can be transmitted. After that peak tire loses
steady state models will be discussed. Another way to divide is how traction with the surface.
the model is derived: empirically or theoretically. The simple and c) Lateral slip model:
widely used models are [23], [25]–[28]. All of the models depend on
The lateral slip model assumes that vy and φ̇ are not affected by
tire slip angle and represent usual shape of tire friction curves. This
spinning of the wheel. Thus, the rear slip angle can be simplified to:
shape shows exactly where a car loses traction with the surface and
begins skidding, which is the essence of drift. φ̇lr − vy
Since the drift is characterized by big slip angles of the tires, slip αr = arctan( ) (7)
model of the tires will be derived. Due to simplicity and sufficient vx
accuracy the Pacejka Magic Formula is used. and tire forces are:

Fry = Dr sin(Cr arctan(Br αr )) (8)
Ff y = Df sin(Cf arctan(Br αf )) (9)
The problem of the model is that it does not assume longitudinal
slip of the tire, which always takes place in the moment of drifting.
C. Summary
The car is modeled using mechanical bicycle model and equations
of motion are derived. Car tires are modeled using simplified Magic
Formula nonlinear tire friction law with lateral slip.
V. M ODEL PARAMETER IDENTIFICATION
A. Car
The used model is a Roborace car [21] (Figure 7) with electric
motor with 4WD (four-wheel drive). Since the aim of this work is
drift, the car’s drive was changed to RWD (rear-wheel drive). For the
identification the custom track was created with wide borders to allow
identification maneuvers. Since the interest of this work is drift, spool
(or locked) differential was used, which transmits the same power to
both wheels and is the most preferable option.
The yaw inertia of the car is given by:
1 0.9984, the pick of the curve is too sloping, therefore fitting with
Iz =m(w2 + h2 ) (10)
12
where m is mass, w is width and h is the length of the car.
can obstruct Magic Formula fitting. On the other hand, at higher
speed the car begins to spin early at small steering angle, what is
not in the interest of experiment since key factor is maximal forces
that can be transmitted. The data was additionally filtered by cutting
measurements till the moment where forces begin decreasing after
pick is reached, which was 0.1 rad for rear and 0.24 rad for forward
wheels.
Magic Formula fitting problem can be formulated as:
min (F − f (α, β))2 (14)
β
where F is lateral forces, α is slip angle and β incorporates B, C
and D, which are parameters of the equation. However, the equation
is non-linear and in order to solve non-linear least squares problem,
the special LevenbergMarquardt algorithm is used, which is typical
for least squares curve fitting.
The Magic Formula was fitted on the experimental dataset in
MATLAB Curve Fitting Toolbox and then ported to Python using
scipy.optimize package. The initial guess for the shape of the curve
is difficult to make, however, the D parameter represents the pick of
the curve and based on the experimental data was set to 6000. The
goodness of fit measured by R-square is 0.9989 (Figure 5). The fit
for forward wheels was a bit problematic: though the R-square was
fixed D parameter to 6100 while resulted in the R-square of 0.9982.
The identified Magic Formula parameters are given in Table II.

TABLE I: Robocar parameters

Parameter Meaning Value
Iz yaw inertia, kg · m2 878.7241
m mass, kg 1000
lf distance from GC to front axle, m 1.2865
lr distance from GC to rear axle, m 1.2865

B. Steady state tires parameters identification

The tire parameters are identified with ramp steer maneuver [22].
The point of this maneuver is to slowly change the steering angle
such that it does not affects the dynamics of the car until the car
begins to spin. The required condition of the experiment is constant
forward velocity which is maintained by PID controller.
a) Ramp steer maneuver:
The rate of steering 0.5 degrees/sec was chosen for the experiment.
Since the maneuver assumes that car dynamics is not affected, the
following conditions are satisfied:

v˙x = 0, v˙y = 0, φ̈ = 0 (11) Fig. 5: Fitted Magic Formula for rear wheels on experimentally
and using equations 2 and 3 with these conditions, the acting forces measured forces with R-square 0.9989
can be represented as a function of velocities:

mvx φ̇lf TABLE II: Magic Formula parameters for rear and front
Fry = (12)
lr + lf wheels
mvx φ̇lr Parameter Front wheels Rear wheels
Ff y = (13) B 2.5 56.08
(lr + lf ) cos δ
C 2.402 0.0314
D 6100 130900
According to chosen Pacejka Magic Formula with lateral slip
model the tire forces are represented as a function of a slip angle:
Fry = f (α) and Ff y = f (α). Thus, during the experiment the slip It is sufficient to obtain the tire parameters which represents the
angles are calculated using equations 7 and 5 and lateral forces using Roborace Robocar tires on a given surface.
equations 12 and 13.
The forward velocities should be carefully chosen in order not VI. D RIFT CONTROLLER
to obtain ambiguous data. Experiment was held with forward speed Controlling the car while drifting is a hard task, even for profes-
of 13.5, 13.7, 13.8, 13.9, 14, 14.2 and 14.4 m/s. At lower speed sional drivers, though to control the car, they are trying to hold the
the forces near zero were measured with opposite slip angle, what car in some unchanging state or more precisely, in equilibrium state.
A. Equilibrium model
In this work it is considered two state equilibrium model which is
described in [29]. The equilibrium points of the model can be found
by assuming accelerations are zero, which are defined by equations 1,
2 and 3. These points can be found for constant longitudinal velocity
vx and steering angle δ. Therefore, the system of equations is given
by:

1
v˙y = (Fry − Ff x cos δ − mvx ) = 0, (15a)
m
1
φ̈ = (Ff y lf cos δ − Fry lr ) = 0, (15b)
Iz
Fry = Dr sin(Cr arctan(Br αr )), (15c)
Ff y = Df sin(Cf arctan(Br αf )), (15d)
φ̇lr − vy
αr = arctan( ), (15e)
vx
φ̇lf + vy
αf = − arctan( ) + δ, (15f)
vx
vx = const, (15g) (a) for the lateral velocity
δ = const (15h)

The considered model has rear wheel drive and forward wheels
rolling freely, thus the term Ff x can be neglected. The system is
non-linear and can be solved only numerically for different constant
vx and δ. For calculation Marquardt-Levenberg solver was used.
Firstly, initial guess with zero values for φ̇ and vy was used at which
equilibrium points only in normal driving region were found. Then,
different values were selected in order to get the general concept of
drift regions. After that, generated initial guesses close to solution
was used. Moreover, the major influence on finding solution without
outliers was produced by using scaling factor for wanted variables
and setting it to [10, 27] for φ̇ and vy respectively. The calculated
equilibrium results over steering angle δ for the constant longitudinal
velocity of vx = 14 from two state equilibrium model can be seen
in Figures 6a and 6b.
As it can be seen there are two regions: normal driving and drift,
which arises at oversteering. In normal driving region lateral velocity
is near zero and yaw rate depends linearly on steering angle. However,
drift region is characterized by big lateral velocity and the yaw rate (b) for the yaw rate
is opposite to the steering angle, what is named counter-steering.
Fig. 6: The calculated equilibria over steering angle δ for
Since the lateral velocity is big in that region, the slip angles given
in equations 7 and 5 are high and mainly describe the drift. the constant longitudinal velocity of vx = 14 from two state
equilibrium model
B. Equilibrium drift controller
The main problem of the drift controller is to maintain vx , vy ,
φ̇ and δ in equilibrium state using only 2 inputs: acceleration and
steering. Derived steering controller is a proportional to equilibrium
steering angle controller which uses two-state model and is based on
error in lateral velocity (vy ) and in yaw rate (φ̇):

∆δ = −Kvy ∆vy − Kφ̇ ∆φ̇ (16)

where Kvy and Kφ̇ are full-state feedback poles [30] [5]. Since
the controller uses two-state models and does not include longitudinal
dynamics, the acceleration input G is simply given by:

G = −Kvx ∆vx (17)

Fig. 7: The car during drift with steering drift controller in
The feedback gains Kvy and Kφ̇ are obtained by representing Speed Dreams, https://youtu.be/db17WIbkxsE
controller by state-space equation as in [30]. Thus, all necessary
parameters are represented in table III.

(a) for the yaw rate
(b) for the lateral velocity
(c) for the steering angle
Fig. 8: Parameter changes during the simulation of drift
compared to the computed equilibrium value
TABLE III: Steering controller parameters
Parameter Value
vxeq 14
vyeq -7.461843
φ̇eq 0.450844
δ eq -0.153149
Kvx 1.3
Kvy -0.11
Kdotφ 0.7
Fig. 9: Errors of the controller during drift for vx , vy in m/s
and for φ̇ in rad/s
VII. R ESULTS
Steering controller was successfully implemented and tested for
the left drift maneuver at 14 m/s in Speed Dreams Simulator (Figure
7). The measurements during drift can be seen in Figures 8a, 8b and
8c. In first seconds of experiment there was applied a destabilization
maneuver such as maximum steering angle and sharp increase of the
acceleration in order to obtain enough lateral velocity to turn on the
controller.
Though the controller maintains drift equilibrium, computed equi-
librium values for the model are not reached, especially in lateral
velocity (Figure 8b). This mismatch is caused by using only lateral
slip model for rear wheels in section IV, while longitudinal slip is
playing big role in the rear wheels slip and, consequently, computed
equilibrium points of the model are wrong.
Controller errors during drift can be seen in Figure 9, where errors
of yaw rate and longitudinal velocity are sufficiently small.
VIII. C ONCLUSION
In this work we present the steering drift controller for Robocar,
which is able to drift and stabilize a simulated electrical car model
around an equilibrium state. To find equilibrium points of the model,
firstly the mechanical bicycle model was presented with three states
and then simplified nonlinear tire model with lateral slip were
identified. Equilibrium points were found assuming that for two state
equilibrium model, we have zero lateral and yaw accelerations and
constant values for longitudinal velocity and steering angle. The
steering drift controller is rather simple and based on the errors from
equilibrium values. However, to find controller proportional gains the
model was linearized, and controller was represented as Full-state
feedback that guaranteed its stability.
 Finally, even though the considered tires model in this work does [18] M. Bojarski, D. Del Testa, D. Dworakowski, B. Firner, B. Flepp,
not include combined slip, controller successfully stabilized the car P. Goyal, L. D. Jackel, M. Monfort, U. Muller, J. Zhang, et al., “End
around drift equilibrium and produced expected results. to end learning for self-driving cars,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1604.07316,
In our future plans to implement the developed drifting controller 2016.
[19] M. Acosta and S. Kanarachos, “Teaching a vehicle to autonomously
for a small size autonomous vehicle developed at the Innopolis
drift: A data-based approach using neural networks,” Knowledge-Based
University by modernization of Traxxas 7407 RC Car Model [31]– Systems, vol. 153, pp. 12–28, 2018.
[33]. [20] “Speed dreams simulator.” http://speed-dreams.org/.
[21] “Roborace robocar.” http://roborace.com/.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS [22] W. Bergman and C. Beauregard, “Transient tire properties,” tech. rep.,
SAE Technical Paper, 1974.
This research has been supported by the Russian Ministry of [23] H. B. Pacejka and E. Bakker, “The magic formula tyre model,” Vehicle
Education and Science within the Federal Target Program grant system dynamics, vol. 21, no. S1, pp. 1–18, 1992.
(research grant ID RFMEFI60917X0100). [24] S. Taheri, An investigation and design of slip control braking systems
integrated with four wheel steering. PhD thesis, Clemson University,
R EFERENCES 1990.
[25] M. Burckhardt, “Abs und asr, sicherheitsrelevantes, radschlupf-regel
[1] J. S. Chawla, “Estimation of side slip in vehicles,” 2006. system. lecture scriptum,” University of Braunschweig, Braunschweig,
[2] D. Chindamo, B. Lenzo, and M. Gadola, “On the vehicle sideslip angle Germany, 1987.
estimation: A literature review of methods, models, and innovations,” [26] M. Burckhardt, “Fahrwerktechnik: radschlupf-regelsysteme,” Vogel-
Applied Sciences, vol. 8, no. 3, p. 355, 2018. Verlag, Germany, vol. 1, p. 16, 1993.
[3] E. Velenis, D. Katzourakis, E. Frazzoli, P. Tsiotras, and R. Happee, [27] U. Kiencke and A. Daiß, “Observation of lateral vehicle dynamics,”
“Steady-state drifting stabilization of rwd vehicles,” Control Engineering Control Engineering Practice, vol. 5, no. 8, pp. 1145–1150, 1997.
Practice, vol. 19, no. 11, pp. 1363–1376, 2011. [28] H. Pacejka, Tire and vehicle dynamics. Elsevier, 2005.
[4] E. Velenis, “Fwd vehicle drifting control: The handbrake-cornering [29] J. Edelmann and M. Plöchl, “Handling characteristics and stability of the
technique,” in Decision and Control and European Control Conference steady-state powerslide motion of an automobile,” Regular and Chaotic
(CDC-ECC), 2011 50th IEEE Conference on, pp. 3258–3263, IEEE, Dynamics, vol. 14, no. 6, pp. 682–692, 2009.
2011. [30] C. Voser, R. Y. Hindiyeh, and J. C. Gerdes, “Analysis and control of
[5] R. Y. Hindiyeh, Dynamics and control of drifting in automobiles. PhD high sideslip manoeuvres,” Vehicle System Dynamics, vol. 48, no. S1,
thesis, PhD Thesis, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA, pp. 317–336, 2010.
2013. [31] I. Shimchik, A. Sagitov, I. Afanasyev, F. Matsuno, and E. Magid,
[6] A. Arab, K. Yu, J. Yi, and Y. Liu, “Motion control of autonomous “Golf cart prototype development and navigation simulation using ros
aggressive vehicle maneuvers,” in Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics and gazebo,” in MATEC Web of Conferences, vol. 75, p. 09005, EDP
(AIM), 2016 IEEE International Conference on, pp. 1663–1668, IEEE, Sciences, 2016.
2016. [32] T. S. Sheikh and I. Afanasyev, “Stereo vision-based optimal path
[7] A. Arab, K. Yu, J. Yi, and D. Song, “Motion planning for aggressive au- planning with stochastic maps for mobile robot navigation,” in Int.
tonomous vehicle maneuvers,” in Automation Science and Engineering Conference on Intelligent Autonomous Systems (IAS), 2018.
(CASE), 2016 IEEE International Conference on, pp. 221–226, IEEE, [33] M. Filipenko and I. Afanasyev, “Comparison of various slam systems
2016. formobile robot in an indoor environment,” in International Conference
[8] G. Williams, P. Drews, B. Goldfain, J. M. Rehg, and E. A. Theodorou, on Intelligent Systems, IEEE, 2018.
“Aggressive driving with model predictive path integral control,” in
Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 2016 IEEE International Conference
on, pp. 1433–1440, IEEE, 2016.
[9] P. Drews, G. Williams, B. Goldfain, E. A. Theodorou, and J. M. Rehg,
“Aggressive deep driving: Model predictive control with a cnn cost
model,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1707.05303, 2017.
[10] M. Cutler and J. P. How, “Autonomous drifting using simulation-aided
reinforcement learning,” in Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 2016 IEEE
International Conference on, pp. 5442–5448, IEEE, 2016.
[11] J. V. Frasch, A. Gray, M. Zanon, H. J. Ferreau, S. Sager, F. Borrelli,
and M. Diehl, “An auto-generated nonlinear mpc algorithm for real-time
obstacle avoidance of ground vehicles,” in Control Conference (ECC),
2013 European, pp. 4136–4141, IEEE, 2013.
[12] A. Liniger, A. Domahidi, and M. Morari, “Optimization-based au-
tonomous racing of 1: 43 scale rc cars,” Optimal Control Applications
and Methods, vol. 36, no. 5, pp. 628–647, 2015.
[13] R. Verschueren, S. De Bruyne, M. Zanon, J. V. Frasch, and M. Diehl,
“Towards time-optimal race car driving using nonlinear mpc in real-
time,” in Decision and Control (CDC), 2014 IEEE 53rd Annual Con-
ference on, pp. 2505–2510, IEEE, 2014.
[14] A. Buyval, A. Gabdulin, R. Mustafin, and I. Shimchik, “Deriving over-
taking strategy from nonlinear model predictive control for a race car,”
in Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), 2017 IEEE/RSJ International
Conference on, pp. 2623–2628, IEEE, 2017.
[15] A. Liniger, “Autonomous drift control,” Master’s thesis, MA thesis. ETH
Zürich, 2012 (cit. on pp. 17, 24), 2012.
[16] J. Y. Goh and J. C. Gerdes, “Simultaneous stabilization and tracking of
basic automobile drifting trajectories,” in Intelligent Vehicles Symposium
(IV), 2016 IEEE, pp. 597–602, IEEE, 2016.
[17] M. Acosta, S. Kanarachos, and M. Fitzpatrick, “A hybrid hierarchical
rally driver model for autonomous vehicle agile maneuvering in loose
surfaces,” in Proceedings of the International Conference on Informatics
in Control, Automation and Robotics (ICINCO), Madrid, Spain, pp. 26–
28, 2017.

View publication stats