This paper describes a dynamic trajectory planning method for lane-changing maneuver of connected and automated vehicles (CAVs). The proposed dynamic lane-changing trajectory planning (DLTP) model adopts vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) communication to generate an automated lane-changing maneuver with avoiding potential collisions and rollovers during the lane-changing process. The novelty of this method is that the DLTP model combines a detailed velocity planning strategy and considers more complete driving environment information. Besides, a lane-changing safety monitoring algorithm and a lane-changing starting-point determination algorithm are presented to guarantee the lane-changing safety, efficiency and stability of automated vehicles. Moreover, a trajectory-tracking controller based on model predictive control (MPC) is introduced to make the automated vehicle travel along the reference trajectory. The field traffic data from NGSIM are selected as the target dataset to simulate a real-world lane-changing driving environment. The simulations are performed in CarSim-Simulink platform and the experimental results show that the proposed method is effective for lane-changing maneuver.
BevlyDCaoXGordonM, et al. Lane change and merge maneuvers for connected and automated vehicles: a survey. IEEE Trans Intell Veh2016; 1: 105–120.
2.
JiXLiuYHeX, et al. Interactive control paradigm-based robust lateral stability controller design for autonomous automobile path tracking with uncertain disturbance: a dynamic game approach. IEEE Trans Veh Technol2018; 67: 6906–6920.
3.
BonnefonJ-FShariffARahwanI.The social dilemma of autonomous vehicles. Science2016; 352: 1573–1576.
4.
RamezaniMYeE.Lane density optimisation of automated vehicles for highway congestion control. Transportmetrica B-Transp Dyn2019; 7: 1096–1116.
5.
LevinMWBoylesSD.A multiclass cell transmission model for shared human and autonomous vehicle roads. Transp Res Part C: Emerg Technol2016; 62: 103–116.
6.
PetitJShladoverSE.Potential cyberattacks on automated vehicles. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst2015; 16: 546–556.
7.
LengZMinorMA.Curvature-based ground vehicle control of trailer path following considering sideslip and limited steering actuation. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst2017; 18: 332–348.
8.
MalikopoulosAAHongSParkBB, et al. Optimal control for speed harmonization of automated vehicles. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst2019; 20: 2405–2417.
9.
HouYEdaraPSunC.Situation assessment and decision making for lane change assistance using ensemble learning methods. Expert Syst Appl2015; 42: 3875–3882.
10.
ZhaoDLamHPengH, et al. Accelerated evaluation of automated vehicles safety in lane-change scenarios based on importance sampling techniques. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst2017; 18: 595–607.
11.
KimJKimJJangG-J, et al. Fast learning method for convolutional neural networks using extreme learning machine and its application to lane detection. Neural Networks2017; 87: 109–121.
12.
YangKGulerSIMenendezM.Isolated intersection control for various levels of vehicle technology: conventional, connected, and automated vehicles. Transp Res Part C: Emerg Technol2016; 72: 109–129.
13.
ZhengHZhouJShaoQ, et al. Investigation of a longitudinal and lateral lane-changing motion planning model for intelligent vehicles in dynamical driving environments. IEEE Access2019; 7: 44783–44802.
14.
HobertLFestagALlatserI, et al. Enhancements of v2x communication in support of cooperative autonomous driving. IEEE Commun Mag2015; 53: 64–70.
15.
AnHJungJ-I.Design of a cooperative lane change protocol for a connected and automated vehicle based on an estimation of the communication delay. Sensors2018; 18(10): 3499.
16.
ChoiJVaVGonzalez-PrelcicN, et al. Millimeter-wave vehicular communication to support massive automotive sensing. IEEE Commun Mag2016; 54: 160–167.
17.
LiZElefteriadouLRankaS.Signal control optimization for automated vehicles at isolated signalized intersections. Transp Res Part C: Emerg Technol2014; 49: 1–18.
18.
LiangXGulerSIGayahVV.Joint optimization of signal phasing and timing and vehicle speed guidance in a connected and autonomous vehicle environment. Transp Res Rec2019; 2673: 70–83.
19.
TangJLiuFZhangW, et al. Lane-changes prediction based on adaptive fuzzy neural network. Expert Syst Appl2018; 91: 452–463.
20.
CaoHSongXZhaoS, et al. An optimal model-based trajectory following architecture synthesising the lateral adaptive preview strategy and longitudinal velocity planning for highly automated vehicle. Veh Syst Dyn2017; 55: 1143–1188.
21.
ChuKLeeMSunwooM.Local path planning for off-oad autonomous driving with avoidance of static obstacles. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst2012; 13: 1599–1616.
22.
ChenCHeYBuC, et al. Quartic bezier curve based trajectory generation for autonomous vehicles with curvature and velocity constraints. In: 2014 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation. 2014, pp.6108–6113. IEEE.
23.
ZhangHYangS.Smooth path and velocity planning under 3D path constraints for car-like vehicles. Rob Auton Syst2018; 107: 87–99.
24.
LuoYXiangYCaoK, et al. A dynamic automated lane change maneuver based on vehicle-to-vehicle communication. Transp Res Part C: Emerg2016; 62: 87–102.
25.
YangDZhengSWenC, et al. A dynamic lane-changing trajectory planning model for automated vehicles. Transp Res Part C: Emerg Technol2018; 95: 228–247.
26.
JiangHShiKCaiJ, et al. Trajectory planning and optimisation method for intelligent vehicle lane changing emergently. IET Intell Transp Syst2018; 12(10): 1336–1344.
27.
DingYZhuangWWangL, et al. Safe and optimal lane-change path planning for automated driving. Proc IMechE, Part D: J Automobile Engineering2020: 0954407020913735.
28.
WangYWeiCLiuE, et al. Lane-changing trajectory planning method for automated vehicles under various road line-types. IET Intell Transp Syst2020; 2(1): 14–23.
29.
ZhouBWangYYuG, et al. A lane-change trajectory model from drivers’ vision view. Transp Res Part C: Emerg2017; 85: 609–627.
30.
GunawanFE.Two-vehicle dynamics of the car-following models on realistic driving condition. J Transp Syst Eng Inf Technol2012; 12: 67–75.
31.
ChenLQinDXuX, et al. A path and velocity planning method for lane changing collision avoidance of intelligent vehicle based on cubic 3-D Bezier curve. Adv Eng Softw2019; 132: 65–73.
32.
CoifmanBLiL.A critical evaluation of the Next Generation Simulation (NGSIM) vehicle trajectory dataset. Transp Res Part B-Methodol2017; 105: 362–377.
33.
WangXJiangRLiL, et al. Capturing car-following behaviors by deep learning. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst2018; 19: 910–920.
34.
SchubertRSchulzeKWanielikG.Situation assessment for automatic lane-change maneuvers. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst2010; 11: 607–616.
35.
YangDZhuLRanB, et al. Modeling and analysis of the lane-changing execution in longitudinal direction. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst2016; 17(10): 2984–2992.
36.
RossMPatelDWenzelT.Vehicle design and the physics of traffic safety. Phys Today2006; 59(1): 49.
37.
GarcíaCEPrettDMMorariM.Model predictive control: theory and practice—a survey. Automatica1989; 25: 335–348.
38.
MayneDQRawlingsJBRaoCV, et al. Constrained model predictive control: stability and optimality. Automatica2000; 36: 789–814.
39.
RaffoGVGomesGKNormey-RicoJE, et al. A predictive controller for autonomous vehicle path tracking. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst2009; 10: 92–102.
40.
JiJKhajepourAMelekWW, et al. Path planning and tracking for vehicle collision avoidance based on model predictive control with multiconstraints. IEEE Trans Veh Technol2017; 66: 952–964.
41.
RasekhipourYKhajepourAChenS-K, et al. A potential field-based model predictive path-planning controller for autonomous road vehicles. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst2017; 18: 1255–1267.
42.
RajamaniR.Vehicle dynamics and control. Springer Science & Business Media, 2006.
43.
ZhangSDengWZhaoQ, et al. Dynamic trajectory planning for vehicle autonomous driving. In: IEEE international conference on systems, man, and cybernetics, 2013, pp.4161–4166. IEEE.
