Motion Cueing Quality Comparison of Driving Simulators using Oracle Motion Cueing

BMW’s new driving simulation center operates multiple motion-base simulators – each with a different kinematic configuration – to serve various experiment use-cases and requirements of simulator users. The selection of a simulator for each experiment should ideally be based on their relative strengths and weaknesses. To support this decision-making process, subjective and objective predictions of motion cueing quality can be used. This paper provides an example comparison of four motion-base driving simulators. The kinematic configurations of the simulators considered differed in the additional presence of a yaw-drive and/or a linear xy-drive. The comparison is made by calculating offline, optimization-based motion cueing with perfect prediction capabilities (the ‘Oracle’) for nine urban drives. A prediction of subjective motion incongruence ratings is made for each simulator. In addition, an error type identification method is used (identifying scaling, missing cue, false cue and false direction cue errors) and evaluated per simulator. As Oracle can fully utilize the available workspace, the employed evaluation methods provide an insight in the fundamental capabilities of each simulator. Both the modelled ratings and the error type analysis show the benefits of adding a xy-drive in urban use-cases: predicted ratings reduce by 19% (i.e., better), while scaling and missing cue errors in the yaw rate are reduced when adding a yaw-drive. The presence of both of these additional motion systems allow for practically one-to-one and therefore error-free motion cueing. The proposed methods provide a straight-forward, yet insightful basis for simulator selection. The presented methods can be extended towards the analysis of multiple motion cueing algorithms and/or other usecases for systematically selecting the best-suited motion cueing method.Control & Simulatio

Quality comparison of motion cueing algorithms for urban driving simulations

When designing driving simulation experiments with motion cueing, it is often necessary to make choices between Motion Cueing Algorithms (MCAs) without being fully able to know how well an MCA will perform during the experiment. Choices between MCAs can therefore be greatly supported by previous measurements or predictions of motion cueing quality. This paper describes a data collection experiment on a nine degree-of-freedom motion-base simulator, in which participants are asked to continuously rate the motion cueing quality during a pre-recorded drive through an urban environment. Three benchmark MCAs are compared: a Model-Predictive Control (MPC) algorithm with infinite prediction horizon, a Classical Washout Algorithm (CWA) tuned for the use-case, and the same algorithm (CWA), but with the tilt-coordination channels turned off. By comparing ratings for the whole scenario, as well as ratings for each maneuver individually, the results show a preference of the presence of tilt-coordination, as well as a preference for the optimization-based MPC algorithm over the CWA condition. The collected data will be used directly for modeling and predicting motion cueing quality for future experiments at BMW, such that the best-suited MCA and parameter setting can be selected before experiments.Control & Simulatio