A novel motion cueing algorithm integrated multi-sensory system

Abstract

Motion cueing algorithms are used to produce a motion which feels as realistic as possible while remaining in the limited workspace of driving simulators. Several optimal motion cueing algorithms were developed to improve both the exploitation of the workspace of a driving simulator and the realistic of the simulated motion. In the dynamics model of the optimal motion cueing algorithms, several kinds of motion-sensory systems are integrated to optimize the simulated motion sensation. However, most previous works have just focused on the visual and vestibular system. The mathematical model of the proprioceptive system, that also senses the non-visual motion, has rarely been concerned. In this paper, a novel optimal motion cueing algorithm, which integrates model of the proprioceptive system, is developed to reduce the false cues from muscle spindle of head/neck system sensing lateral tilted angle. The optimal motion cueing algorithm has a significant effect on the pilot's perception when the tilted angle is rather large. An example of the simulation of a roller coaster running along a planar S-curve trajectory with only lateral acceleration is investigated with current motion cueing algorithms and optimal motion cueing algorithm. Several objective criteria were introduced to evaluate the simulated perception of all investigated motion cueing algorithms. The results demonstrate that optimal motion cueing algorithm is better than current motion cueing algorithms in most criteria and also sub-criteria.

Keywords

Motion cueing algorithm KUKA Robocoaster proprioceptive system multi-sensory system optimal algorithm

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Aykent B, Paillot D, Merienne F, et al. A LQR washout algorithm for a driving simulator equipped with a hexapod platform: the relationship of neuromuscular dynamics with the sensed illness rating. In: CONFERE, 5–6 July 2012, Venice, Italy.

Bruenger-Koch M. Motion parameter tuning and evaluation for the DLR automotive simulator. In: Paper presented at the proceedings of the 3rd driving simulation conference, North America, Orlando, FL, November 2005.

Dehouck T, Mulder M and Van Paassen M. The effects of simulator motion filter settings on pilot manual control behaviour. In: AIAA modeling and simulation technologies conference and exhibit, 2006.

Koekebakker SH. Model based control of a flight simulator motion system. PhD Thesis, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands, 2001.

Lone M and Cooke A. Review of pilot modelling techniques. In: The 48th AIAA aerospace sciences meeting including the new horizons forum and aerospace exposition, 2010.

Borah

Young

Curry

. Optimal estimator model for human spatial orientation. Ann NY Acad Sci 1988; 545: 51–73.

Nehaoua

Mohellebi

Amouri

, et al. Design and control of a small-clearance driving simulator. IEEE Trans Veh Technol 2008; 57: 736–746.

Parrish

Dieudonne

Martin

Jr . Coordinated adaptive washout for motion simulators. J Aircraft 1975; 12: 44–50.

Reid L and Nahon M. Flight simulation motion-base drive algorithms: part 1 – developing and testing the equations. Toronto: Institute for Aerospace Studies, Toronto University, 1985.

10.

Schweig S and Kammers H. Bewegungssteuerung eines RoboCoaster Kuka Roboters zur Ride Simulation mit Hilfe von Washout Filtern. Project report. Duisburg: University of Duisburg-Essen, 2011.

11.

Nahon

Reid

. Simulator motion-drive algorithms – a designer's perspective. J Guid Control Dyn 1990; 13: 356–362. .

12.

Sivan

Ish-Shalom

Huang

J-K

. An optimal control approach to the design of moving flight simulators. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybernet 1982; 12: 818–827.

13.

Telban RJ and Cardullo F. Motion cueing algorithm development: human-centered linear and nonlinear approaches. NASA technical report. Hampton, VA: NASA Langley Research Center, 2005.

14.

Zywiol HJ Jr and Romano R. Motion drive algorithms and simulator design to study motion effects on infantry soldiers. In: DSC North America 2003, Dearborn, MI, 2003.

15.

Kecskeméthy A and Tändl M. Physiologisch optimierte interfaces für die hochdynamische bewegungsgenerierung in physikalischen simulatorsystemen. Technical report. Duisburg: Lab of Mechanics und Robotics, University of Duisburg-Essen, 2009.

16.

Pham DA, Röttgermann S, Flores FG, et al. Optimal motion cueing algorithm selection and parameter tuning for sickness-free robocoaster ride simulations. In: Corves B, Lovasz EC and Hüsing M (eds) Mechanisms, Transmissions and Applications. Vol. 31. Berlin: Springer, 2015, pp.127–135.

17.

Pouliot

Gosselin

Nahon

. Motion simulation capabilities of three-degree-of-freedom flight simulators. J Aircraft 1998; 35: 9–17.

18.

Pham DA. A study on state-of-the-art motion cueing algorithms applied to planar motion with pure lateral acceleration – comparison, auto-tuning and subjective evaluation on a KUKA robocoaster serial ride simulator. Duisburg: University of Duisburg-Essen, 2017.

19.

Asadi

Lim

Mohammadi

, et al. A genetic algorithm–based nonlinear scaling method for optimal motion cueing algorithm in driving simulator. Proc IMechE, Part I: J Systems and Control Engineering 2018; 232: 1025–1038.

20.

Asadi

Mohamed

Rahim Zadeh

, et al. Optimisation of nonlinear motion cueing algorithm based on genetic algorithm. Veh Syst Dyn 2015; 53: 526–545.

21.

Mohammadi

Asadi

Mohamed

, et al. Multiobjective and interactive genetic algorithms for weight tuning of a model predictive control-based motion cueing algorithm. IEEE Trans Cybernet 2018; 49: 3471–3481. .

22.

Shao H, Guan L, Wang J, et al. An optimal force cueing algorithm for dynamic seat. In: 2009 IEEE international conference on control and automation, 2009.

23.

Gum DR. Modeling of the human force and motion-sensing mechanisms. Tech. Rep. AFHRL-TR-72-54. Dayton, OH: Air Force Human Resour. Lab., 1973.

24.

Fischer M. Motion-cueing-algorithmen für eine realitätsnahe Bewegungssimulation. Braunschweig: Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt e.V, 2009.

25.

Kwakernaak

Sivan

. Linear optimal control systems, New York: Wiley, 1972.

26.

Grant

Blommer

Artz

, et al. Analysing classes of motion drive algorithms based on paired comparison techniques. Veh Syst Dyn 2009; 47: 1075–1093.

27.

Feenstra PJ, Wentink M, Correia Grácio B, et al. Effect of simulator motion space on realism in the Desdemona simulator. In: Proc., 8th driving simulator conference, DSC Europe, Monaco, 2009.

28.

Grant

Haycock

. Effect of jerk and acceleration on the perception of motion strength. J Aircraft 2008; 45: 1190–1197.

29.

Soyka F, Teufel H, Beykirch K, et al. Does jerk have to be considered in linear motion simulation? In: AIAA modeling and simulation technologies conference, 2009.

30.

Fang Z and Kemeny A. Motion cueing algorithms for a real-time automobile driving simulator. In: Proceedings of the driving simulation conference, Paris, France, 2012, pp.159–174. Paris: Arts et Metiers Paristech.

31.

Stratulat

Roussarie

Vercher

, et al. Does tilt/translation ratio affect perception of deceleration in driving simulators?. J Vestibular Res 2011; 21: 1–13.

A novel motion cueing algorithm integrated multi-sensory system–Vestibular and proprioceptive system

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References