Abstract

Building a car dynamics model is the main means to evaluate the steering ability of a
car. This paper describes a method to analyze the U-turn capability of a car using a car
dynamics model built in python. The model can simulate the trajectory of the car and
obtain the corresponding parameters during the car's motion. The basic parameters of
BMW M3 and Chevrolet Cavalier are input into the model, under different initial
angles of U-Turn, the motion state can be obtained through simulation; the slip angle,
tire force, Movement trajectory and steering speed of the two cars under same initial
conditions are analyzed, so as to The U-turn performance of the two models was
compared. The results showed that the U-turn performance of BMW M3 was superior.
Keywords: Vehicle dynamics modelling; Python; BMW M3; Chevrolet Cavalier

1. Introduction
With the development of the society, cars have become the main mean of
transportation in individual’s life. The performance of cars is drawing more and more
attention. The performance of steering system is an important standard for people to
evaluate a car’s performance. Numerous car manufacturers are dedicating in
optimizing and upgrading steering system. The performance of the system directly
affects the handling stability of the car, and it plays an important role in ensuring the
safe operation of the vehicle, reducing traffic accidents and the personal safety of the
driver, and improving the working conditions of the driver. Nowadays, with the
increase of high-speed vehicle and more intensive traffic flow, the ease of
maneuvering is especially important for drivers [1]. The capability of the car to
complete the U-Turn is an important indication of the performance of steering system.
The traditional way for people to test the U-Turn performance of the car is mainly
based on the subjective evaluation of the automobile driver, and the subjective
evaluation is often easily affected by the differences in the senses and experience of
the automobile driver, which will cause some error [2], so the objective tests based on
theoretical derivation and computer simulation become the more accurate ways to
evaluate the capability of a car to complete the U-Turn. Previous studies XXX
To illustrate the dynamic model presented in the paper, the U-Turn performance of
two types of widely used car, which are BMW M3 and Chevrolet Cavalier, are
analyzed and compared. In 2019, BMW's performance model segment BMW M sold
135,829 units. This represents an increase of 32.2 percent compared to the previous
year and is the highest ever recorded. The BMW M has long been a high-performance
car based on a production model and has a solid fan base [3]. Chevrolet Cavalier has
sold 36,000 units, accounting for 20.23% of SAIC Chevrolet's share, in just one year
since its launch in September 2016 [4]. BMW M3 and Chevrolet Cavalier will have a
great number of potential users in the future. The model can help the potential users to
have a better evaluation of these two types of cars. Significance
In this paper, section 2 XXX.
chave o individual’sdrawing capability, somes[1], the morecap
Method

2. 2. Methods
2.1 Building the mechanical model
To analyze the motion of the vehicle, the first thing we need to do is tofirst, we
establish a proper mechanical model. The state of the car car’s state is based
ondefined by three variables: x, which are x, y (car’s center of mass location in the
stationary frame), and χ(car’s orientation). The value of x and y location of the center

of mass in the stationary frame ⃑ ⃑ . χ is the orientation of the car. We use the bicycle
❑❑

model to simplify the vehicle's motionmotion of the car, in which the vehiclecar is
moving in a two-dimensional plane. Also, the two front tires and rear tires of the
vehicle are all assumed to have thea same angle and speed, so as to the two rear tires
so that . In another word, the two front and two reareach set of tires can be described
treated as one tire respectively. In addition, the model is based on the assumption that
the car is a rigid body. There and during the motion, there is neither brakingbreaking
nor accelerating during the motion, so we only take the forces that are perpendicular

to the tire bodies intoin consideration, which are ⃑ and ⃑

Ff Fr .

Figure 1 Caption[52]n(citation)
(Figure 1 sShows the structure of the car and the coordinate system that represent the
motion of vehicle. is the turning angle of the car with respect to inertial or stationary

frame. is the angle of car’s front tire with respect to non-inertial or car-fixed frame. ⃑
❑

is the front tire force, ⃑ is the force exerted by the rear tire.)
❑

2.2 Analysis of the motion

In the non-inertial frame or It is easy for us to express the car-fixed frame, we define
the direction unit vector
⃑ ⃑ and angle δ. By converting ⃑ ⃑ into the form of , we fit these
( u 1 , u 2) u 1∧u 2 χ

parameters into the stationary frame, the result we get is u⃑

cos χ
[ ]
1 = sin χ (eq.1) and

[
⃑ −sin χ
] ⃑
u 2 = cos χ (eq.2). δ is the steering angle of the front tire with respect to u 1 .
These parameters are shown below.

Figure 1

Then we start to represent the front force ⃑ with respect to δ, ⃑ ⃑.

Ff u 1∧u 2

⃑= ⃑
‖ ‖ ⃑ ⃑
‖ ‖ ⃑ (eq.3)
Ff − Ff sin δ u1+ Ff cos δ u 2

Similarly, we represent ⃑ in the following,

Fr

‖ ‖
⃑= ⃑ ⃑ (eq.4)
Fr ± Fr u 2

By analysis the motion of center of mass, we get,

a G =⃑
MG⃗ ⃑ (eq.5)
Ff + Fr

Wwhere MG and ⃗
a G represents the mass and acceleration of the center of mass.
Then we try to find the relative velocity of the front and back part of the car
separately during the rotation process. Since we assume the car as a rigid body, the
velocity can be represented as,s below.

Front velocity: ⃑ (eq.6)

⃗
v f =⃗
v G +a χ ' u 2

Back velocity: ⃑ (eq.7)

⃗
v r=⃗
v G−b χ ' u 2

whereIn the equation, “a” is represents the distance from the center of mass to the
front end of the car and while “b” represents is the distance from the center of mass to
the back end of the car.
In our model, we assume the cars do their U-Turn in counterclockwise orientation.
Then the force states of tires are shown below

Figure 2 Figure 33
(Figure 2 shows the location and direction of the front tire force with respect to the
location of the center of mass (x, y). Figure 3 shows the location and direction of the
rear tire force with respect to the location of the center of mass (x, y). These two
figures illustrate the torque of the force applied on the center of mass.)

According to the force status, we gain the Equation of motion:

Izχ' ' =
‖ ‖
⃑
‖ ‖
⃑ (eq.8)
a Ff cos δ+ b Fr

In the equation, Iz is the Yaw moment of inertia of the car

2.3 Analysis of the force

To analysis the force of the tire, we first need to examine the motion state of tire.

Figure 4 Figure 5
(Figure 4 shows the analysis of the front tire’s motion state, ❑❑ is the velocity of the
front tire, α is the slip angle of the front tire. Figure 5 shows the analysis of the rear
tire’s motion state, ❑❑ is the velocity of the front tire, α is the slip angle of the rear
tire.)

Figure 4 and Figure 5 show the motion state of the front and rear tire. The “α”
represents the slip angle of the tire, which is the angle between the velocity of tire
and the direction of tire. By using Sine Theorem, we gain the representation of
“α” in both front and rear tire.
 vf · ⃗
The front tire slip angle α =δ −sin −1 ⃗ u 2 (eq.9)
f
‖⃗v f‖

vr ·⃗
The front tire slip angle α =−sin −1 ⃗ u 2 (eq.10)
f
‖⃗v r‖

The we can obtain the magnitude the tire force, we use the force model shown
below.
Tire force F=C*tan(α)*f(λ) (eq.11)

λ {
The value of f( ) is f (λ)= ( 2− λ ) λ if λ ＜1 (eq.12)
1 if λ ≥ 1

The value λ=
| μ∗F N
|
2Ctan (α )
(eq.13)

In the equations, C is the tire stiffness, μ is frictional coefficient between tire and
ground. FN is the vertical force acting on the tire. The following Figure 6 shows the
distribution of vertical force. FNf and FNr represent the vertical force acts on front and
rear tire.
 Figure 6

(Figure 6 shows the analysis of the vertical force on the body of the car, FNf is the

support force at the front tire, FNr is the support force on the rear tire, mg is the

gravitation of the car.)

Since the car is moving on 2-D plane, the summation of both vertical force and
vertical torque should be 0. Then we can get the representation of vertical force.
b
FNf = a+b mg (eq.14)

a
FNr = mg (eq.15)
a+b

2.4 The U-Turn Formula

We use the following formula to indicate δ , which could represent how wheels
are being turned by driver.
 {
0 , if t ＜ t start

δ=
δ0
2 [ (
1 −cos
π (t −t start )
t0 )]
, if t start ≤ t ＜t ＜t start +t 0

δ 0 , if t start +t 0 ≤t ＜ t ＜ t end
δ0
2 [ (
1−cos
π (t end + t 0 −t)
t0 )]
, if t end ≤t ＜t ＜ t end +t 0

0 ,if t end + t 0 ≤ t
(eq.16)
In the equation, t start is the start time of U-Turn, δ 0 indicates the initial turn
magnitude, t 0 and t end are the parameters related to turn duration.

2.5 Using Python for simulation

Python is a powerful software, after Then wewe input previous the kinematics and
dynamics model shown above and the certain initial conditioninto Python, it can
provide us with simulation function to obtain visual data and analyze it, which
brings a lot of convenience. The parameter of the cars that we need to input into
python are shown below.
Parameters of the car
Front wheel Back wheel Mass Yaw moment of inertia
a (m)
BMW M3 a=1.36m b=1.37m mass=1549kg Yaw=2886kg*m2
Chevrolet Cavalier a=0.98m b=1.66m mass=1187kg Yaw=1928kg*m2
Table 1 [63]

Frictional coefficient μ Front tire concerning stiffness Front tire concerning

stiffness
BMW M3 μ=0.9 Cf =194,000N/rad/axle Cr =240,000N/rad/axle
Chevrolet Cavalier μ=0.9 Cf =58,000N/rad/axle Cr =58,000N/rad/axle
Table 2 [74]
According to the data in the Table 1 and Table 2, based on the simulation function of
Python, by input different start angle and start time of the U-Turn, we obtain
simulation of the motion trajectory, slip angle and tire force of both BMW M3 and
Chevrolet Cavalier.
Simulation Process:
3. Results
3.1 Simulation conditions
There are two car models, BMW M3 and Chevrolet Cavalier, involved in the project.
The basic data of the cars are based on Table 1 and Table 2. The cars’ U-turn are
evaluated by the nonlinear formulas mentioned in the method to visualize the cars’
travelling process. 
For the sharp U-turn, the first condition is that the starting angle and start time of the
cars are π/12 radians, 0.1 seconds respectively. While the end time of BMW M3 is
2.89s and that of Chevrolet Cavalier is 3.61s. The first plot of each car is 𝜒(𝑡) of each
the car vs time 𝑡 and the seconsecond plot d of each car is trajectory (𝑥(𝑡), 𝑦(𝑡)) of
each car. The plots are shown below.

Figure 7. BMW M3 nonlinear sharp U-turn

Figure 87. (State the physical meaning of the graph) Ssharp U-turn of BMW M3 and
Chevrolet Cavalier, when starting angle == π/12 radians nonlinear sharp U-turn

The second condition is that the starting angle of both models increases to π/9, and the
other parameters are the same as the first condition. The plots are shown below. 

Figure 8. Ssharp U-turn of BMW M3 and Chevrolet Cavalier, when starting angle=
π/9 radians
Figure 9.  BMW M3 nonlinear sharp U-turn

Figure 10. Chevrolet Cavalier nonlinear sharp U-turn

The third condition is that the initial angle of the models decreases to π/15, and the
other parameters do not change. The plots are shown below. 

Figure 11.  BMW M3 nonlinear sharp U-turn

Figure 12. Chevrolet Cavalier nonlinear sharp U-turn 
Figure 9. sharp U-turn of BMW M3 and Chevrolet Cavalier, r when starting angle=
π/15 radians

3.2 The comparison of front tire force in both cars in U-turn

The front tire front force is an important way to analyze the capability of completing
sharp U-turn. The plots of the cars’ front tire force vs time are based on the analysis of
the motion mentioned in the method. The parameters are the same as the first
simulation condition, which are that the starting angle and start time of the cars are
π/12 radians, 0.1 seconds respectively. While the end time of BMW M3 is 2.89s and
that of Chevrolet Cavalier is 3.61s.
Figure 103.  BMW M3 front tire force vs time in 5s. XXXXX

Figure 114. Chevrolet Cavalier front tire force vs time

3.3 The comparison of slip angle in both type of cars in U-Turn

The slip angle is also a significant feature of evaluating the capability of completing
the sharp U-turn. The figures of slip force vs time are based on the analysis of the
force in the method. The parameters are also the same as the first simulation
condition.

Figure 125.  BMW M3 slip force vs time

Figure 136. Chevrolet Cavalier slip force vs time

Discussion
4. Discussion
4.1 Discussion on the results of Simulation conditions
For the sharp U-turn, the first condition is that the starting angle and start time of the
cars are π/12 radians, 0.1 seconds respectively. The end time of BMW M3 is 4.10s,
the maximum shifting angle 𝜒 of BMW M3 is 119.8187 degrees. The rate of change

of turning angle is ❑ . The end time of the Chevrolet Cavalier is 7.22s, and the
❑

maximum shifting angle χ of the Chevrolet Cavalier 138.7838 degrees. The rate of

change of turning angle is ❑ .

❑

If the starting angle increases to π/9 radians, and starting time does not change which
is 0.1 second respectively. The end time of BMW M3 is 4.07s, the maximum shifting

angle 𝜒 of BMW M3 is 124.6492 degrees. The rate of change of turning angle is ❑

❑

.The end time of the Chevrolet Cavalier is 7.20s, the maximum shifting angle 𝜒 of the

Chevrolet Cavalier 141.1953 degrees. The rate of change of turning angle is ❑ .

❑

If   the starting angle and start time of the cars are π/15 radians, 0.1 seconds
respectively. The end time of BMW M3 is 4.15s, the maximum shifting angle of

BMW M3 114.3033 degrees. The rate of change of turning angle is ❑ . The end time
❑

of the Chevrolet Cavalier is 7.20, the maximum shifting angle χ of the Chevrolet

Cavalier 141.1953 degrees. The rate of change of turning angle is ❑ .

❑

According to the examples, at different initial conditions, the value of BMW M3 is

greater than value of Chevrolet Cavalier, BMW M3 spends around 4.10 seconds
when the starting angle changes from π/15 to π/9 doing a sharp U-turn from 114.3033
to 124.6492 degrees of the non-linear model. Chevrolet Cavalier spends about 7.20s
doing a sharp U-turn to about 140 degrees of nonlinear model. In terms of the graphs,
the slope of the chi(t) in BMW is larger than that in Chevrolet Cavalier, which means
the angle 𝜒 experiences a quicker change of the BMW M3. Also, in each case, the
distance in y before and after the turn of the BMW car is shorter than that of the
Chevrolet Cavalier, which means the BMW M3 can finish the U-turn in a shorter
travelling distance. So, BMW M3 has a stronger ability of completing U-turn. 
What can you learn after analyzing these data? How parameters can affect the final
outcome?

4.2 Discussion on the comparison of front tire force in both cars in U-turn
During the U-turn in which the starting time and starting angle are 0.1 seconds and
π/12, according to the graph, the front tire force of BMW M3 is around 6540
Newtons, while that of Chevrolet Cavalier is about 5780 Newtons.

Under the same condition, the largest slip angle of BMW M3 is 0.194 radians,
whereas the slip angle of Chevrolet Cavalier reaches the top of 0.229 rad. 

In terms of the results, the BMW M3 can induce a larger front tire force which is
about  6540 N than the Chevrolet Cavalier with around 5780N. Also, BMW M3
causes less slipping during the U-turn as the largest slip angle is 0.194 rad smaller
than that of Chevrolet Cavalier (0.229 rad). Larger front tire force and smaller slip
angle could help cars to finish the turn more quickly with less distance which means it
is more able to finish U-turn. 

4.3 Conclusion
All in all, the BMW M3 spends less time and takes a shorter distance than the
Chevrolet Cavalier to finish a U-turn. During the U-turn, BMW M3 has a larger front
tire force and smaller slip angle than Chevrolet Cavalier. As a result of these
advantages, the BMW M3 has a better capability of finishing U-turn than the
Chevrolet Cavalier. 

5. Conclusion
In conclusion, computer simulation become is an accurate way to evaluate the
capability of a car to complete the U-Turn. Methods including building the
mechanical model of the car, analysis of the motion, analysis of the force, U-turn
formular and Python for simulation are used to analyze the capability. Two car
models, BMW M3 and Chevrolet Cavalier are built to get the results including graphs
and data to analyze general theories. According to the results, the car that spend less
and takes shorter distance to finish a U-turn has a better capability of finishing U-turn
which is BMW M3 in the condition. In addition, the car has a larger front tire force
and smaller slip angle has more advantages to finish a U-turn which is also BMW M3
in the situation.
1. Limits, assumptions.
2. Future work.

Reference
[1] [1]. Wang Xiaogang. Introduction to the principle of automobile steering system
and troubleshooting [J]. Heilongjiang Science and Technology
Information,2012(08):41.

[2]. Bowei. Liu, “Automotive low-speed steering return test and evaluation”, School
of Mechatronics and Vehicle Engineering, Chongqing Jiaotong University,
2021,(03),62-64 DOI:10.19475/j.cnki.issn1674-957x.2021.03.027

[3]. Wang Zhanqiang. Ultimate performance - BMW's sixth generation M3/M4[J].

World Car,2020(11):10-19.

[4]. SAIC-GM Chevrolet Cavalier [J]. Product Reliability Report,2017(01):52-53.

[52][63][74] E. Darve. ST8501. Class Lecture, Topic: “Computational dynamics:
modeling the dynamics of a car.” School of Mathematical and Computational
Engineering, Stanford University, [Online] Jul. 9th , 2021.