Four Wheel Steering (4WS) on a Formula Student Racing Car

IPG: CarMaker with formula student racing car model

Author (Allwright, Joshua)

Swinburne University of Technology
Contact details:
Email: joshuaallwright@gmail.com

ABSTRACT
Formula Student is a student-based competition between
competing universities worldwide where students design,
fabricate and race a small open wheel racing car. This
challenging task leads to innovations to gain a completive
edge. 4WS vehicles have higher lateral acceleration
capability, which is an advantage for the formula student
competition. The aim of this research is to quantify the
advantages of 4WS on a formula student racing car. This has
been completed by simulating two different 4WS controllers
(Vehicle Speed Function and Improved Yaw Dynamics
With Feed-Forward Control). The two 4WS controllers were
simulated in IPG: CarMaker. Results show a formula
student racing car in the skid-pan event can expect
approximately 1.30% to 1.36% reduction in lap times when

completing a loop of the track (left turn or right turn).

Results show a formula student racing car in the auto-cross
and endurance event can expect 0.43% to 0.57% reduction
in lap times for an 800m track. Within the simulation of the
endurance event, a reduction of 6.6 to 8.8 seconds was seen
by the 4WS models when comparing the total time taken by
the Front Wheel Steering (FWS) model. This difference is
enough to move a team ahead more than one position when
looking at 2014 Formula Student Germany endurance track
times. This presents 4WS on a formula student car is
advantageous. There are limitations on the findings. Driver
effort has been found to increase as larger rear wheel
movement is used. Results have only been established
within a simulated environment.

Vol 1, No 1 (2015)

1. INTRODUCTION

2.1 Improvement Of Vehicle Dynamics

Improving vehicle dynamics is an endless pursuit that is

actively seen within racing. The student-based formula
student competition is an example of this. It is a challenging
task where innovations are constantly being developed to
gain a competitive edge. Advancements in integrated
control systems for vehicle dynamics has led to the
development of electric formula student racing cars with
two wheel drive and four wheel drive systems that take
advantage of influencing lateral forces [1]. When designing
a race car for the formula student competition, it is
important to understand the significance of each design
parameter [2]. The formula student competition event is
made up of tracks with many tight corners, and best lap
times are achieved by maximizing the longitudinal and
lateral acceleration. Maximizing lateral acceleration will
result in faster times around the track due to higher average
velocities maintained during corning. Increase of the lateral
acceleration capability is achieved by reducing the lateral
load transfer [3]. 4WS can reduce the amount of lateral load
transfer in a turn, when compared to FWS vehicle [4]. Thus
a 4WS vehicle can turn with higher velocities compared to
FWS and stay within a controlled range. The advantages of
4WS have been established on commercial size vehicles [5].
From the literature; 4WS enhances performances [6],
improves agility [5], provides better handling [7, 8, 9, 10,
11], improves comfort [7, 11], creates easier
manoeuvrability [10, 11, 12], improves stability [7, 9, 11]
and reduces driver effort [9]. It is unknown whether 4WS is
a worthwhile pursuit in this context.

Vehicle behaviour during a turn can be broken down into

transient and steady state response. During the transition
from driving straight to turning, the steady state responses
between FWS and 4WS are the same. However, the
transient response between going straight and reaching
steady state turning is different among FWS and 4WS (see
Figure 1 and Figure 2).

The aim of this report is to see if 4WS is applicable to a

formula student racing car and whether it provides a
competitive advantage. This will provide future formula
student teams with information regarding the advantages of
using 4WS. Beyond this report, findings will further
contribute to the knowledge of benefits and effects of 4WS.

DRIVERS STEERING

SLIP ANGLE AT FRONT TIRES

LATERAL FORCE ON FRONT

TIRES

ROTATION
AROUND C.G
(YAW RESPONSE)

START OF TURNING AROUND

VEHICLE C.G

VEHICLE SIDE-SLIP ANGLE

SLIP ANGLE AT REAR TIRES

LATERAL FORCE ON REAR TIRES

REVOLUTION
(LATERAL
ACCELERATION
RESPONSE)

CENTRIPETAL FORCE BY FRONT

& REAR TIRES RESULTING IN
VEHICLE TURN

Figure 1: Transient response of FWS vehicle to steering

input [13]
DRIVERS STEERING

Two 4WS controllers have been selected from the studied

4WS controllers to run through a range simulation. Data
analysis from the results will provide a conclusion regarding
4WS in Formula Student.

SLIP ANGLE AT FRONT TIRES

SLIP ANGLE AT REAR TIRES

LATERAL FORCE ON FRONT

TIRES

LATERAL FORCE ON REAR

TIRES

2. LITERATURE REVIEW
Four areas of research were selected to fulfil the aim of this
investigation. Improvement Of Vehicle Dynamics covers the
theory behind 4WS and the established enhancements.
Design Approaches presents the concepts that 4WS systems
are designed around. Control Methods present a range of
different control methods and their controllers that achieve
4WS. 4WS Systems present the mechanical systems used to
steer the rear wheels in relation to control methods.
Together, these four topics will present the warrants and
knowledge to further investigate 4WS on a formula student
racing car.

REVOLUTION
CENTRIPETAL FORCE BY FRONT & REAR TIRES RESULTING IN
VEHICLE TURN

Figure 2: Transient response of 4WS vehicle to steering

input [13]
In Figure 1, two phases of lateral force are generated before
turning starts. The first lateral force is made by the front
wheels, which start the rotation around the centre of gravity,
and generates a yaw motion. The side-slip angle then builds
up creating the second lateral forces on the rear wheels,
which then starts turning the vehicle in the desired direction.
Sano et al. [13] expressed that there is a delay between the
two lateral force generations and with higher vehicle speeds

SAE-A Vehicle Technology Engineer Journal (VTE-J)

Copyright The Society of Automotive Engineers-Australasia (SAE-A)

Vol 1, No 1 (2015)
this delay becomes larger due to greater side-slip angles.
Figure 2 shows the ideal case of 4WS. There is no delay in
generation of cornering forces between front and back, no
rotation around the centre of gravity and no side-slip angles.
Centripetal forces start the vehicle turning in a shorter time
compared to FWS.

used by the 4WS controller [9]. The reference model is

compared with incoming signals which then evaluate the
correct rear wheels angles to keep the car as close as
possible to the ideal behaviour and prevent undesired
behaviour.

2.1.1 Lap Time Improvements

There is little available literature published on 4WS with
regards to the improvement on racing cars however there
has been literature on the improvement on lap times. In
1993, Benetton Formula 1 team added a hydraulically
operated rear steering rack to their Cosworth-powered B193
to test the improvements before the FIA banned driver aids
in 1994. Michael Schumacher and Riccardo Patrese tested
this racing car and concluded that it added nothing in terms
of lap times. No quantification of improvements was made
[14]. However, the 2014 Porsche 911 turbo has claimed that
active rear- axle steering (4WS) has played a significant role
in the improvement of lap times at the Nrburgring in
Germany [15]. No quantification was made to express how
much active rear-axle steering improved lap times. Further
research is required to quantify the benefit of 4WS with
regards to reduced lap times.

TC-2
TC-1
Figure 3: Rear Wheels Steered Out Of Phase [5]

2.2 Design Approach

Researchers have proposed a range of different strategies to
control the rear wheels with relation to normal input of front
wheel angle. Siahkalroudi and Naraghi [16] grouped these
strategies into three categories: zero side-slip, zero yaw rate
and reference model.

TC-1
TC-2
Figure 4: Rear Wheels Steered In Phase [5]

2.2.1 Zero Side-Slip

This strategy aims to not allow the vehicle to side sideways
during a turn. Turning the rear wheels out of phase of the
front wheels can achieve zero side-slip (see Figure 3). This
can reduce lateral motion, reduces the delay phase in lateral
acceleration which occurs in FWS [13] and improve
manoeuvrability by reducing the Turning Circle (TC) [13,
17, 18]. The negative side to this strategy is the increased
yaw-rate, which makes this strategy unsuitable at high
speeds.

2.2.2 Zero Yaw Rate

This strategy aims to reduce the rotational motion around
centre of gravity and increase the lateral motion; this is more
suitable for high speeds [16]. This strategy works in
opposition to a zero side-slip strategy. Turning the rear
wheels in phase of the front wheels can achieve zero yawrate (see Figure 4).

2.2.3 Reference Model

This strategy aims to mathematically model the ideal
behaviour of the car to create a reference model which is

These design approaches are combined to create control

methods. Sylvain [9] concluded in his thesis that a design
approach with more than one strategy is better for overall
control, recommending the use of yaw rate and derivative of
the lateral velocity strategy. A combined design approach
has been used by many researchers [4,5,6,7,19,20,21,22]
with results proving an improvement in stability over a
single strategy method.

2.3 Control Methods

This section will look into the range of control methods used
to achieve 4WS. The control methods can be split into openloop and closed-loop controllers. Researchers have shown
significant improvement with the use of closed-loop
controllers [9, 21, 23, 24]; however, there is also evidence
that open-loop controllers can perform just as well [20]. The
main difference between the two methods is in open loop,
the rear wheel angles are moved by a function of the driver
inputs. In closed-loop, feedback from the controller output is
sent back to stabilize parameters and is added or subtract to
the driver inputs. Another control method reviewed is
independent rear wheel steering. Each rear wheel angle is
picked and steered independently of each other.

SAE-A Vehicle Technology Engineer Journal (VTE-J)

Copyright The Society of Automotive Engineers-Australasia (SAE-A)

Vol 1, No 1 (2015)

2.3.1 Open Loop Controllers

Two well-known open-loop controllers developed for 4WS
are; Vehicle Speed Function Based and Steering Angle
Function Based [13]. However, these two controllers are
limited around 0.6g in lateral acceleration before coming
unstable [25]. Formula student racing cars will operate
under large lateral forces; these two methods might not be
suitable, further research is required to determine whether
these type controllers are suitable.

inputs of the front steering angle and forward vehicle

velocity to a given rear wheels angle. The controller is
designed to output the same signal as a zero yaw rate
strategy controller, without the need of a yaw rate sensor.
Besselink et al [20] summarised from previous work that a
very accurate yaw rate signal should be available when
applying zero yaw rate strategy. The use of a transfer
function might be a viable and robust solution without the
need of very accurate signals; however further research
needs to be conducted.

2.3.1.1 Vehicle Speed Function

S1 Input

Sano et al. [13] developed an open loop algorithm to keep

the side-slip angle to zero at slow speeds and zero yaw at
high speeds, see Figure 5. This controller was used by
Honda and in 1987 was the first 4WS system to be
integrated into mass production vehicles [26]. At low
speeds, the rear wheels are turned out of phase to the front
wheels, which reduces wheel base length and improve
manoeuvrability. At high speeds, the rear wheels are turned
in phase of the front wheels which increases the effective
wheel base and improves stability. Whether this open-loop
algorithm is suitable for a small wheel base racing car
requires further research.
2 Ma
S2 -b+V Cr L
ks= =
S1 a+V 2 Mb
Cf L

Figure 5a: Algorithm presenting the relationship between

front and rear steering angle [13] where;
ks: ratio of rear wheel angle over front
S1, S2: front/rear wheel angle (rad)
a, b: distance from front/rear axle to c.g (m)
M: vehicle mass (kg) L: Wheel Base (m)
Cr, Cf : front/rear cornering stiffness (N/rad)

Speed vs K(ratio)
1

ks

0.5
0
20

40

60

80

100

120

-1
-1.5

Vehicle

S2

Figure 6: Improved Yaw Dynamics With Feed-Forward

control [20] where;
V :vehicle speed (m/s)
S1, S2: front/rear wheel angle (rad)
K: 0.7
1: 0.5
2 : 0.1

2.3.2 Closed Loop Controllers

Closed-loop controllers have been strongly recommended as
the primary 4WS control method. Fahimi [8] produced a
summary of the research on closed-loop methods which
showed a range of approaches. Fahimi [8] concluded from
this summary that each method was tested with longitudinal
speed of the vehicle be kept constant. This approach is
limited as the increasing or decreasing of speed will affect
yaw and lateral motion. A more suitable simulation should
take into account longitudinal dynamics, lateral dynamics
and yaw motion.

2.3.2.1 Direct Yaw-moment control

Figure 5b: graph of algorithm seen in 5a

-0.5 0

V
K(1 2 )s
Hs2,s1 (s)=
(1 +1)(2 +1)

Wang and Li [22] added a yaw-moment control to the

Vehicle Speed Function; see Figure 7 (see Figure 5a for Ks
function). The aim of this controller is to keep 4WS benefits
but also keep yaw rate to the maximum level that would be
seen in a FWS vehicle to preserve driver feeling and
handling. The results of this method showed a significant
improvement in stability. However no quantification was
made.

speed vs K(ratio)
Speed (Km/h)

S1 Input

2.3.1.2 Improved Yaw Dynamics With FeedForward Control

Besselink et al [20] developed a closed-loop, see Figure 6.
However, due to the velocity of the vehicle being considered
external to the steering subsystem, controllers that use the
forward vehicle velocity as an input are classified and
analysed as open-loop controllers. This controller maps the
SAE-A Vehicle Technology Engineer Journal (VTE-J)
Copyright The Society of Automotive Engineers-Australasia (SAE-A)

S2

ks
Proportional
Feed-forward
Controller Gain

M1

Actual
Vehicle
Model

+
+

M2
Feed-forward
Compensation
Controller Kff

Mff

Mfb

Feed-back
Controller Kfb

Vol 1, No 1 (2015)
Figure 7: Structure of the integrated optimal control logic
[22] where;
S1, S2: front/rear wheel angle (rad)
: side-slip angle (rad)
: yaw rate (rad/s)
M: momentum (Ns)

2.3.2.2 Yaw-moment Control vs. Derivative of

Lateral Velocity

showed this method did not give better handling

performance in comparison to the standard 4WS model, but
it did offer better power utilisation. The theoretical
consumption of power is strongly decreased in comparison
with the standard 4WS system. Reduction of power
consumption is critical for both electric and petrol formula
student teams. This type of controller has been used by the
car manufacture Porsche on the 2014 911 models [15] and
2014-2015 918 Spyder [28].

In the thesis of Sylvain [9], 4WS was investigated via a

comparison to an Active FWS system on a commercial size
vehicle. The thesis investigated the improvements in
stability and handling. The two controllers used were yawrate control (Figure 8) and derivative of the lateral velocity
control (Figure 9). Quantification was made through a
comparison of yaw rate, lateral acceleration, roll angle and
side-slip angle. The results showed that no strategy was
better but both showed improvement.
V

S1 Input

Reference

Error

Figure 10b: Both

Wheel Turning

Vehicle

_
Reference
Model

Figure 10a: Individual

Wheel Turning

S2

Controller

Actuator

V Input

Figure 8: Yaw-Moment Controller Structure [9] where:

V : vehicle speed (m/s)
S1, S2: front/rear wheel angle (rad)
: yaw rate (rad/s)

2.4 4WS Systems

The control method is only half of the design, the system
used to move the rear wheels in relation to the controller are
equally important. In this section, a review of the 4WS
systems and the related parameters is provided.

2.4.1 Hydraulic actuators

S1 Input

Derivative
of the Lateral
Velocity

S2

Error

+
0
Constant

Vehicle

_
Controller

Actuator

V Input

Figure 9: Derivative of the Lateral Velocity Controller

Structure [9] where:
V : vehicle speed (m/s)
S1, S2: front/rear wheel angle (rad)

2.3.3 Four Wheel Independent Steering

Hydraulic actuators have been used to steer the rear wheels

since 1985 [29]. This system uses constant power to keep
the pressure in hydraulic systems. As constant power
consumption would not be suitable for any formula student
racing car, further research is required to see the amount of
power a 4WS system needs in the context of a formula
student racing car.

2.4.2 Electromechanical Actuators

The use of electromechanical actuators is the current state of
the art with 4WS. These systems use less power than
hydraulic systems [5] and the removal of hydraulic fluid
reduces the weight of the vehicle. Porsche has introduced
independent actuators in its 2014 911 models and 20142015 918 Spyder. These actuators add a total of 7kg to the
vehicle. The low power consumption of electromechanical
actuators makes them ideal for application in a formula
student racing car.

Sang-Ho, Un-Koo, Sung-Kyu & Chang-Soo [27] described

a controller that steers the rear wheels independently from
each other. They claimed that cornering force at the outer
wheel is higher than the cornering force at the inner wheel
and therefore it is not appropriate to steer each rear wheel
2.4.3 Actuator Parameters
with the same magnitudes. Independent control of both
wheels can enable the toe angle to be optimized. Depending
Counteracting the delays in actuators are critical to
on the manoeuvre, the rear wheels can move selectively or
delivering the advantages of 4WS. Sylvain [9] integrated an
simultaneously, see Figure 10a and 10b. Their results
SAE-A Vehicle Technology Engineer Journal (VTE-J)
5
Copyright The Society of Automotive Engineers-Australasia (SAE-A)

Vol 1, No 1 (2015)
actuator model in to his controllers to simulate the delays
and limits that could occur, see Figure 11. A first order lag
is used to represent the signal lag that occurs and saturation
is added to the actuator model to limit the rear steering
angle. Yamanaka, Taneda, and Tanizaki [30] claim a
movement of 2 of the rear wheels would be sufficient for
4WS system. Whether an estimate from track/wheelbase
ratio can be used to determine the required movement will
need further investigation. The movement needed for a
formula student racing car is unknown.

systems where the rear wheels are steered together. Fourth,

for an accurate control model, the parameters of an actuator
should be considered into the control method and integrated
into simulations. Finally when picking actuator limits, the
CV joints must be taken into consideration as efficiency is
reduced with greater angles used as well as the added
displaced of angles from suspension motion during
cornering.

3. RESEARCH QUESTION
The literature demonstrates there are enhancements with
4WS but there is a knowledge gap for these enhancements
on a formula student racing car. It is inconclusive whether
4WS is beneficial in the context of Formula Student. The
research question becomes:

Figure 11: Actuator Transfer Function

Is it advantageous to use a 4WS system on a formula student

racing car?

2.4.4 CV Limits
Constant Velocity (CV) joints are commonly used in
formula student racing cars to deliver the torque of the
motor to the wheels. Jan-Welm Biermann [31] investigated
CV joint efficiency. As shown in Figure 12 below, as the
angle of the CV joint moves away from zero its efficiency
drops. The angles limits chosen for 4WS will need to take
efficiency reductions into consideration.

CV Joint effciency
100
Efficiency (%)

99.5
99
98.5
98
97.5
97
0

6
9
12
Bending angle (degree)

Figure 12: Efficiency of CV joint at a given angle

2.5 Literature Closing Comments

15

4. METHODOLOGY
To determine the possible benefits of 4WS on a formula
student racing car, controllers need to be developed and
tested. The first objective, developing controllers, is reliant
on literature. The literature does not identify the best control
method; however, all methods have offered improvements.
Open-loop controllers can be implemented with
less development compared to closed-loop controllers. The
found open-loop controllers will only require common
signals that are available in a formula student racing car;
front steering angle and vehicle forward velocity.
Consequently open-loop controllers have been used to
determine if 4WS is advantageous.
To quantify the advantages of 4WS, the controllers need to
be tested. With the current level of knowledge, physical
testing would be too early with high expense. Building a
virtual model is a cost effective way of evaluating the
controllers and finding any issues which are not currently
known. Safety is an important aspect and robust controllers
are required. Therefore, the two open-loops controllers were
developed in a MATLAB/Simulink model and then
simulated with the software IPG: CarMaker. Wang and Li
[22] showed two degree of freedom simulators are only
acuate when the vehicle is in a non-emergency state (lateral
acceleration is less than 0.4g). Greater degrees of freedom
are therefore needed to simulate a racing environment. IPG:
CarMaker has been picked as the simulator due to many
degrees of freedom in the models used. In IPG: CarMaker
the skid-pan, Auto-cross and endurance events was
simulated.

There are several important observations and conclusions to

be made. First, the effect of 4WS can improve vehicle
dynamics, however there is no research regarding whether
this improvement applies to a formula student racing car.
The quantifications used for an evaluation are based around
Second, as a result of the knowledge gap with 4WS and
the lap times recorded from a conventional FWS formula
Formula Student, there has been no research done on control
student racing car completing the skid-pan, auto-cross and
methods in the context of a formula student racing car.
endurance event. Besides lap times, other parameters have
Existing data and results are inconclusive due to other
been monitored including: lateral acceleration, yaw rate and
commercial enhancements. Pure quantification of 4WS is
front steering angles to analyse whether lateral acceleration
not identifiable. Third, the advantages in independent rear
limits can be extended and at what costs to driver effort.
wheel steering are in power consumption over other 4WS
SAE-A Vehicle Technology Engineer Journal (VTE-J)
6
Copyright The Society of Automotive Engineers-Australasia (SAE-A)

Vol 1, No 1 (2015)

4.2.2 Controller 2: Improved Yaw Dynamics

With Feed-Forward Control

4.1 IPG CarMaker

IPG: CarMaker is an advanced vehicle dynamics
simulatior. A realistic model of a vehicle is simulated with
all sub-components. The steering system, tires, braking
system, drive train and aerodynamics are fully integrated in
one multi-body model. All of this is also connected into a
simulink model to allow the testing of new controllers. This
flexible model is then complimented by three-dimensional
road models and a robust fully parameterized driver model
(IPG: Racing Driver) allowing the tests of developing
controllers under relatively realistic conditions. A realistic
model of a formula student racing car will be used which
IPG: CarMaker has provided, basic car setup can be seen
in section 4.1.1. This model has a standard setup of a
formula student racing car and the only change will be 7kg
added to the rear to simulate the weight actuators as found in
section 2.4.2. In justifying the advantageous of 4WS, the
4WS model must be able overcome the extra weight and
still be quicker.
No actuators

With 2x 3.5kg actuators

Mass: 332.9 kg
Wheelbase: 1.6 m
Front Track: 1.2 m
Rear Track: 1.15m
Front axle distance from
C.G: 0.814 m
Rear axle distance from
C.G: 0.79 m

Mass: 339.9 kg
Wheelbase: 1.6 m
Front Track: 1.2 m
Rear Track: 1.15m
Front axle distance from
C.G: 0.83 m
Rear axle distance from
C.G: 0.77 m

4.1.1 Vehicle Parameters

4.2 4WS Controllers

Besselink et al. [20] designed a controller that only requires

the front steer angle and vehicle forward velocity. As stated
in the literature this controller could be a robust solution
because it does not rely upon very accurate signals such as
yaw rate. Figure 15 shows the Simulink model created for
use with IPG:CarMaker including actuator lag and
moment limits.

Figure 15: CarMaker Improved Yaw Dynamics with FeedForward Control

4.3 Sensitivity Analysis

A sensitivity analysis was used to optimise parameters
influencing the controllers. In the skid-pan event, lateral
acceleration is expected to increase and lap times reduced
with the use of 4WS controllers. Control parameters were
manually tuned via observations from simulations results
until satisfactory values were found.

4.4 Skid-Pan Track Test

The track model is based on the skid-pan layout [32]. Figure
16 below is a birds eye view of the skid-pan track. Two
right loops and two left loops have to be completed to finish
the event.

From the literature review the two open-loop controllers,

Vehicle Speed Function and Improved Yaw Dynamics with
Feed-Forward Control are picked as a starting point to
evaluate 4WS on a formula student racing car.

4.2.1 Controller 1: Vehicle Speed Function

Sano et al.[13] developed an open-loop controller to keep
the side-slip angle to zero. Only the front steering angle and
vehicle forward velocity are needed. Figure 14 shows the
Simulink model created for the use with IPG:CarMaker
including actuator lag and moment limits.

Figure 16: Birds eyes view of Skid-Pan modelled in IPG:

CarMaker
Figure 14: CarMaker Vehicle Speed Function

SAE-A Vehicle Technology Engineer Journal (VTE-J)

Copyright The Society of Automotive Engineers-Australasia (SAE-A)

Vol 1, No 1 (2015)

4.5 Auto-Cross And Endurance

Table 1: % of improvement in lap times with Vehicle Speed

Function (VSF)

These two events will be based around a simulation of the

2006 Formula Student Germany auto-cross and endurance
track. The model of the track is provided by IPG: CarMaker,
see Figure 17. This track is approximately 800 meters long
which is the required length stated by the competition rules
[32]. For the sake of this investigation, both events will run
on the same track and in the same direction. Due to the
simulated environment, it is not required to run a full
endurance event to produce the total race times. Single lap
times will be taken from the auto-cross event and multiplied
by 27.5 to estimate the time it will take to complete the
endurance event (27.5 x 0.800 km =22 km).

Loop
direction/
No.
Right 1

FWS (s)

4WS - VSF

% of improvement

4.913

4.819

1.91

Right 2
5.326
5.257
Left 1
5.218
5.109
Left 2
5.229
5.161
Average % of improvement

1.30
2.09
1.30
1.30

Table 2: % of improvement in lap times with Improved

Yaw Dynamics with Feed-Forward control (IYD)
Loop
direction/
No.
Right 1

FWS
(s)

4WS - IYD

% of
improvement

4.913

4.723

3.87

Right 2

5.326

5.249

1.45

Left 1

5.218

5.116

1.95

Left 2

5.229

5.163

1.26

Average % of improvement

1.36

5.2 Auto-Cross Simulation

Figure 17: Birds eyes view of 2006 Formula student AutoCross/Endurance modelled in IPG: CarMaker

5. RESULTS
In this section, the results of skid-pan, auto-cross and
endurance simulations will be shown. The major focus has
been the investigation around the skid-pan event in
developing the controllers. The skid-pan track geometry
presented large and fast corning situations which are ideal to
record maximum lateral acceleration as well as a quick test
due to the length of the track. Different integrations of
controller models could be tested quickly and compare with
the FWS model.

The auto-cross event results can be seen in Table 3. Each

model completed one lap which was equal to a distance of
approximately 800 meters. Results show a formula student
racing car can expect improvements of approximately
0.43% to 0.57% reduction in lap times within the simulated
track. In the case of this simulation, that is a reduction of
0.24 seconds with Vehicle Speed Function and 0.32 seconds
with Improved Yaw Dynamics With Feed-Forward Control.
Table 3: % of improvement in lap times around 800m
Auto-Cross track

Model
FWS
4WS VSF
4WS IYD

5.1 Skid-Pan Simulation

Lap times of the event are recorded in Table 1 and 2. During
simulation, IPG: Racing Driver is cutting the corner in the
right turn 1 and left turn 1 in all three controller models. If
this did occur in a formula student competition, penalty
points would be given due to the shorter distance travelled.
Therefore quantification is based on right turn 2 and left turn
2 as no corner cutting was present. An average has been
taken to quantify the improvement. Results show a formula
student racing car can benefit from the 4WS controllers by
approximately 1.30% to 1.36%.

Lap
time
(s)
55.71
55.47
55.39

% of
improvement
over FWS
0.43
0.57

Time
reduction
(s)
0.24
0.32

5.3 Endurance Simulation

The endurance event results can be seen in Table 4. Results
show a formula student racing car can expect 0.43% to
0.57% off one lap in the endurance event. In the case of this
simulation, that is a reduction of 6.6 seconds with Vehicle
Speed Function and 8.8 seconds with Improved Yaw
Dynamics With Feed-Forward Control.

SAE-A Vehicle Technology Engineer Journal (VTE-J)

Copyright The Society of Automotive Engineers-Australasia (SAE-A)

Vol 1, No 1 (2015)
Table 4: % of improvement in lap times around 22km
endurance track

FWS

Single
Lap
time
(s)
55.71

Endurance
event
complete
time (s)
1532.025

4WS VSF

55.47

1525.425

6.6

4WS IYD

55.39

1523.225

8.8

Model

Time
reduction
(s)
-

6. ANALYSIS & DISCUSSION

To explain why lap times are faster, we can look at the

lateral acceleration. In Figures 18, we see the lateral
acceleration recorded from the skid-pan event. In that figure
we can determine that the controllers 1 and 2 are producing
larger lateral acceleration displacements over the FWS
model at different times. The increased lateral acceleration
increases in the transient state response during turning.
Greater velocity can be carried into the corner which in turn
creates the larger lateral acceleration as the vehicle changes
its trajectory. Once the trajectory path is constant, the
vehicle falls into a steady state turn and lateral acceleration
displacements are the same as the FWS model. This
observation from the lateral acceleration results is close to
what was found in the literature on 4WS (section 2.1).

In this section, the results from the simulation will be

examined. The 4WS on a formula student racing car will be
discussed in relation to the research question and literature.
The two controllers will be evaluated and furthermore the
problems during the implementation and testing of the
controllers.

Lateral Acceleration
Lateral Acceleration (m/s^2)

-10

6.1 4WS On A Formula Student Racing

Car
Two 4WS open-loop controllers have been considered to
investigate the advantageous of 4WS systems on a formula
student racing car. The literature review showed 4WS can
enhance a number of vehicle characteristics, but did not
apply the findings to a small wheel-based vehicle. The
results do show it is advantageous to use a 4WS system on a
formula student racing car within the simulated
environment. With 7kg added to the model, lap times are
still faster. The quantified amount of improvement seen in
this research is not large, but formula student competitions
record lap times down to 0.001 of a second. The results of
lap times in endurance are where the strongest benefits are
shown. 0.43% to 0.57% off lap times is small, however
applying this to the time taken by a FWS model; a drop of
6.6 to 8.8 seconds is seen. That is possibly enough to jump
ahead more than one position, as shown in Table 5.
Table 5: 2014 Formula Student Germany endurance track
times
CAR
1
4
2
49
17
30
80
60
55
108
7
12
28
131

University
Corvallis OSU
Gteborg Chalmers
Stuttgart U
Erlangen U
Pomona CSU
Prague CTU
Coburg UAS
Weingarten UAS
Geien UAS THM
Karlsruhe UAS
Seattle U Washington
Thessaloniki U
Kassel U
Regensburg UAS

Time (s)
1301.74
1412.41
1412.80
1414.27
1414.37
1416.42
1428.25
1431.68
1445.13
1454.66
1463,34
1470.40
1482.49
1487.11

10

-11
-12
-13
-14
FWS
4WS - VSF
4WS - IYD

-15
-16

Time (s)

Figure 18: Lateral Acceleration around Skid-Pan event in

the first corner
Beside lateral acceleration and lap times, it is important to
analyse the effects on handling behaviour. To measure
handling behaviour, yaw rate and driver steering angle were
recorded. Decreased yaw rate will reduce driver effort in
counter steering. Decreased driver steering angle will also
reduce driver effort. From the results, only one of these
important variables is aided by 4WS. Figure 19 on the next
page shows the yaw rate is reduced, but the driver steering
angle is increased as shown in Figure 20. This is due to a
few factors. One being the limits set on the rear wheel
actuators. It is not common for the rear wheels to be steered
greater then 3. With the angle kept low, it can reduce the
required steering angle input by the driver. In this research
paper, the limits of the actuator have been set to a maximum
of 8, which has required larger driver efforts. The
advantage found with larger rear wheel angles was reduced
lap times. However, power steering systems and/or changing
rack ratios might be needed in 4WS to make it more
advantageous. However, the formula student competition
rules ban power steering systems. Drivers of formula student
racings cars might need higher levels of fitness to
experience 4WS benefits and keep within the rules.

SAE-A Vehicle Technology Engineer Journal (VTE-J)

Copyright The Society of Automotive Engineers-Australasia (SAE-A)

Vol 1, No 1 (2015)

Yaw Rate - Skid Pan

0.2

Yaw Rate (rad/s)

0
-0.2

FWS
4WS - VSF
4WS - IYD

-0.4
-0.6
-0.8
-1
-1.2

controller though, is it was more capable of reducing lap

times then controller 1. This is a result of being able to pull
larger lateral acceleration, see Figure 18. Conversely there
are some undesirable effects. In Figure 18, the lateral
acceleration throughout the skid-pan event shows the lateral
acceleration dropping. This is the result of the controller and
not loss of traction. As the rear wheels turn from out of
phase to in phase with the front wheels it creates a
disturbance in the lateral acceleration. This effect is
undesirable if stability is compromised, and further research
is required to understand the full effects it will have before
being a potential control method.

6.4 Problems With Implementation Of

Controllers And Simulation

-1.4
Time (s)

Figure 20: Driver steering angle around Skid-Pan event

The first problem to overcome was developing the

controllers to aid the performance of the FWS formula
model. A sensitivity analysis was used to achieve the
desired performance out of the chosen controllers. Second
was the driver model and corner cutting. For the skid-pan
event, it is important that no corner is ever cut. The setup of
the driver models ability to never cut corners could be set;
however, much slower lap times were seen over all as a
result. A percentage of cornering cutting was set which
resulted in first corner being cut in the skid-pan event but
the rest of the event was driven at a faster pace. The
controllers could be tested at the maximum speeds and
present their lateral acceleration limits. The results were
only quantified on laps that did not cut corners to maintain
relevancies of the findings back to formula student;
however, the other laps were not ignored. These other laps
still present relevant data proving the advantages of 4WS. If
these lap times were counted, greater reductions may have
been found.

6.2 Controller 1: Vehicle Speed Function

7. SUMMARY

The results show this controller has the potential to reduce

lap times on the skid-pan event by 1.3% and reduce lap
times on auto-cross by 0.43%. Increased benefits are seen in
high speed turns which are shown in the skid-pan event.
Auto-cross event results arent the strongest for 4WS;
however, this could be a result of the driver model. IPG:
Racing Driver could not stay on the track in some corners
when the parameters of maximum lateral and longitudinal
acceleration were set too high. Therefore lower limits of
maximum lateral and longitudinal acceleration were set to
prevent the driver model going off track in some corners.
This created a slower pace around the track but was still able
to present the advantages of 4WS.

The results suggest it is advantageous to use a 4WS system

on a formula student racing car. The research question has
been answered; however, the optimum control method will
require further research. In this research, two approaches to
controlling a 4WS system have been investigated as a
starting point. The two open-loop controllers have shown
advantages and can reduce lap times. Though, driver effort
needs to be kept within suitable ranges to avoid the need of
aided front wheel steering systems. Furthermore the rear
steering angle limits needs to be taken into consideration, as
a large steering angle will lead to increased driver effort;
however, faster lap times are the result. This trade off must
be consider during the application of 4WS in Formula
Student.

Figure 19: Yaw Rate around Skid-Pan event in the first

corner

Driver steering angle (deg)

Driver Steering Angle - Skid Pan

150
100
50
0
-50

0.1

0.2
FWS
4WS - VSF
4WS - IYD

-100
-150

Time (s)

6.3 Controller 2: Improved Yaw

Dynamics With Feed-Forward Control

8. FUTURE WORK

The results show this controller has the potential to reduce

lap times on the skid-pan event by 1.36% and reduce lap
times on auto-cross by 0.57%. The same driving problems
occurred as discussed in 6.2. What is different with this

This research project was just the start in developing 4WS

systems for formula student racing car. It is now clear
further research efforts should be spent on this topic.
Literature shows closed-loop systems with references

SAE-A Vehicle Technology Engineer Journal (VTE-J)

Copyright The Society of Automotive Engineers-Australasia (SAE-A)

10

Vol 1, No 1 (2015)
models of desired trajectories are better than open-loop
controllers; however, they are more complex to implement.
Open-loop controllers have shown an improvement and
therefore validate the next stage to develop closed-loop
controllers. The use of closed-loop controllers will add the
benefit of stability to the controller. Safety is an important
aspect and robust controllers are required.
Another area requiring attention is the 4WS system that
would be used. 7kg was used as the weight of the system in
this investigation and was picked due to the findings in the
literature. A formula student racing car is significantly
lighter than a Porsche 911 and so the weight of the system
could be reduced. The amount of force needed to move the
rear wheels will reduce the mechanical design specifications
and weight loss of the system should be expected. 5kg
system could be used in the next round of simulations.
Development of a rear wheel system that meets the
constraints of formula student rules as well as the
requirements demanded by the controllers is an open
research question that requires further investigation.
In further work with simulations of the next generation of
4WS controllers, the introduction of slalom tests should be
added. Slalom are common in formula student tracks and as
well as being good test of vehicle agility.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

Acknowledgements
The author would like to gratefully acknowledge the
following for their support.

11.

Professor Geoffrey Brooks for his support assisting with

controller development and guidance.
IPG: CarMaker for supplying their software and IPG:
CarMaker Service Team for their assistance and their
continual support with IPG: CarMaker.

REFERENCES
1.

2.

3.
4.

Gan, Y. H., Xiong, L., Feng, Y., & Martinez, F. (2013).

A Torque Vectoring Control System for
Maneuverability Improvement of 4WD EV. Applied
Mechanics and Materials, 347, 899-903.
Simon, W., Geoff, P., & Matthew, K. (Producer).
(2011, 24/05/2014). Towards All-Electric FSAE Race
Cars. World Congress on Engineering. Retrieved from
http://www.iaeng.org/publication/WCE2011/WCE2011
_pp2546-2549.pdf
Smith, C., Tune to win (Fallbrook, Aero Publishers
Inc, 1978), 36-37, ISBN 0-87938-071-3.
Kazemi, M., & Shirazi, K. H. (2012). Handling
enhancement of a sliding-mode control assisted fourwheel steer vehicle. Proceedings of the Institution of
Mechanical Engineers Part D-Journal of Automobile
Engineering, 226(D2), 234-246. doi:
10.1177/0954407011416552

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

SAE-A Vehicle Technology Engineer Journal (VTE-J)

Copyright The Society of Automotive Engineers-Australasia (SAE-A)

Lunkeit, D., & Weichert, J., New Chassis Systems Performance-oriented realization of a rear wheel
steering system for the Porsche 911 Turbo,
chassis.tech pluse at 4th International Munich Chassis
Symposium 2013, 13-14 June 2013.
Song, J. (2012). Integrated control of brake pressure
and rear-wheel steering to improve lateral stability with
fuzzy logic. International Journal of Automotive
Technology, 13(4), 563-570. doi: 10.1007/s12239-0120054-z
Amdouni, I., Jeddi, N., & El Amraoui, L. (2013).
Optimal control approach developed to Four-Wheel
Active Steering Vehicle, IEEE, 1-6, doi:
10.1109/ICMSAO.2013.6552547
Fahimi, F. (2013). Full drive-by-wire dynamic control
for four-wheel-steer all-wheel-drive vehicles. Vehicle
System Dynamics, 51(3), 360-376.
Sylvain, T. (2007). Active Steering for Vechile Stability
Control. (Master of Science), Cranfield university, UK.
Retrieved from http://eprints2.insastrasbourg.fr/718/1/Rapport_Tardy_MIQ_2007.pdf
Yaniv, O. (1997). Robustness to Speed of 4WS
Vehicles for Yaw and Lateral Dynamics. International
Journal of Vehicle Mechanics and Mobility, 27(4), 221234. doi: 10.1080/00423119708969329.
Yin, G.-D., Chen, N., Wang, J.-X., & Wu, L.-Y. (2011).
A Study on mu-Synthesis Control for Four-Wheel
Steering System to Enhance Vehicle Lateral Stability.
Journal of Dynamic Systems Measurement and ControlTransactions of the Asme, 133(1). doi:
10.1115/1.4002707
Canale, M., & Fagiano, L. (2010). Comparing rear
wheel steering and rear active differential approaches to
vehicle yaw control. Vehicle System Dynamics, 48(5),
529-546. doi: 10.1080/00423110902919055
Sano, S., Furukawa, Y., and Shiraishi, S., "Four Wheel
Steering System with Rear Wheel Steer Angle
Controlled as a Function of Steering Wheel Angle,"
SAE Technical Paper 860625, 1986,
doi:10.4271/860625.
F1Fanatic, Bannd! Four wheel steering,
http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2007/03/22/banned-fourwheel-steering , accessed June, 2014.
Porsche, The new Porsche 911 Turbo and 911 Turbo
S,
http://press.porsche.com/vehicles/2014/PM_911_Turbo
_Coupe_USA.pdf, accessed June, 2014
Siahkalroudi, V. and Naraghi, M., "Model Reference
Tracking Control of A 4WS Vehicle Using Single and
Dual Steering Strategies," SAE Technical Paper 200201-1590, 2002, doi:10.4271/2002-01-1590.
Qi, Y., Chen, N., & Li, P., Direct yaw-moment control
on four-wheel steering vehicles, Dongnan Daxue
11

Vol 1, No 1 (2015)

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

Xuebao (Ziran Kexue Ban)/Journal of Southeast

University (Natural Science Edition), 34(4), 451-454,
ISSN:10010505, CODEN: DDXZB, 2004.
Takiguchi, T., Yasuda, N., Furutani, S., Kanazawa, H.
et al., "Improvement of Vehicle Dynamics by VehicleSpeed-Sensing Four-Wheel Steering System," SAE
Technical Paper 860624, 1986, doi:10.4271/860624.
Akar, M., & Kalkkuhl, J. C. (2008). Lateral dynamics
emulation via a four-wheel steering vehicle. Vehicle
System Dynamics, 46(9), 803-829. doi:
10.1080/00423110701632925
Besselink, I., Veldhuizen, T., & Nijmeijer, H.,
Improving yaw dynamics by feedforward rear wheel
steering, Intelligent Vehicles Symposium IEEE, 246250, 2008, doi: 10.1109/IVS.2008.4621314
Kreutz, M., Horn, M., & Zehetner, J. (2009). Improving
vehicle dynamics by active rear wheel steering systems.
Vehicle System Dynamics, 47(12), 1551-1564. doi:
10.1080/00423110802691507
Wang, S. Li, H., Integrated rear wheel steering angle
and yaw moment optimal control of four-wheel-steering
vehicle, Control and Decision Conference, IEEE,
2490-2493, 2010, doi: 10.1109/CCDC.2010.5498790.
Fahimi, F. (2013). Full drive-by-wire dynamic control
for four-wheel-steer all-wheel-drive vehicles. Vehicle
System Dynamics, 51(3), 360-376.
Symposium, I. (1992). The dynamics of vehicles on
roads and on tracks : proceedings of 12th IAVSD
Symposium held in Lyon, France, August 26-30, 1991.
Amsterdam: Amsterdam : Swets & Zeitlinger.
Morgando, A., Velardocchia, M., Danesin, D., & Rossi,
E. (2005). An Innovative Control Logic for a Four
Wheel Steer Vehicle-Part 1: Analysis and Design.
Power, 2013, 04-08.
Furukawa, Y., Yuhara, N., Sano, S., Takeda, H., and
Matsushita, Y., A Review of Four-Wheel-Steering
Studies from the Viewpoint of Vehicle Dynamics
Control, Vehicle System Dynamics, Vol. 18, No.1-3,
1989, 151-186, doi: 10.1080/00423118908968917
Sang-Ho, L., Un-Koo, L., Sung-Kyu, H., & Chang-Soo,
H. (1999). Four-wheel independent steering (4WIS)
system for vehicle handling improvement by active rear
toe control. Jsme International Journal Series CMechanical Systems Machine Elements and
Manufacturing, 42(4), 947-956.

28. Porsche. (2013). Porsche 918 Spyder [Press release].

Retrieved from
http://press.porsche.com/vehicles/2015/2015_918_Spyd
er_Press_Information_and_Tech_Specs_Final.pdf
29. Irie, N. and Kuroki, J., "4WS Technology and the
Prospects for Improvement of Vehicle Dynamics," SAE
Technical Paper 901167, 1990, doi:10.4271/901167.
30. Yamanaka, T., Taneda, A., & Tanizaki, S. (1998).
Development of the actuator for ARS system. Ref
98AE004, ISATA-Automotive Electronics and New
Products, Dsseldorf, Germany.
31. Biermann, J., "Measurement System for CV Joint
Efficiency," SAE Technical Paper 1999-01-0936, 1999,
doi:10.4271/1999-01-0936.
32. SAE-INTERNATIONAL. (2014). 2014 Formula SAE
Rules. Retrieved 19/05/2014, from
http://students.sae.org/cds/formulaseries/rules/2014_fsa
e_rules.pdf

PUBLISHED REVIEWS
David G N Clark, MEng(Mech) CPEng(Ret) MIEAust
Senior Lecturer (Retired) Mechanical Engineering,
Swinburne University of Technology
This paper outlines simulations that show some minor
potential improvement in lap times of Formula Student
racing cars when four wheel steering is applied, compared to
front wheel steering. It is considered worthwhile to design
and build a four wheel steered Formula Student racer and
confirm that it performs better in all applications of skidpan, auto-cross and endurance events. The controllers for
the four wheel steering system will need to be carefully
implemented.
Clint Steele
Swinburne University of Technology
The most striking outcome of this paper is the revelation of
the compromise between the use of 4WS and the extra
driver effort required. This is unlikely to be of practical
consequence to industry due to the option of power, but it
does raise an area of research that is of academic value the
development of an ergonomically viable control system that
provides 4WS benefit without power assistance.

SAE-A Vehicle Technology Engineer Journal (VTE-J)

Copyright The Society of Automotive Engineers-Australasia (SAE-A)

12