Unmanned Systems Technology 001 | UAV Factory Penguin C | Real-time operating systems | Hirth S1218 two-stroke twin | Base stations | ASV C-Enduro | Composites | Datacomms

74 November 2014 | Unmanned Systems Technology PS | The driverless racecar N eeding the support of the automotive industry for its very survival, motorsport has embraced fuel efficiency, hybrids and this year electric racecars (writes Ian Bamsey). But what about that other major concern of the industry these days, the driverless car? If the governing bodies were to open Formula One, Le Mans or IndyCar racing to unmanned versions next year, what are the chances that one of the top teams would field a car quicker than its human-driven counterpart? Nick Wirth knows a thing or two about unmanned technology, having in the past created robots as well as Formula One, Le Mans and Indy cars. He reckons there is “an outside chance that a driverless car would be quicker in qualifying at Indianapolis”. Trevor Knowles is an IndyCar veteran engineer. He remarks, “A driverless car has several advantages over a driver. The first is reaction time. A human can apply steering inputs at about 3 Hz, while a robotised system could respond at 100 Hz, so inputs could be quicker and more precise, so the car wouldn’t spend so much time sliding around when it’s on the limit. “Where it would miss out though is knowing exactly where the car is on the track. GPS systems with a base station can be accurate to a couple of centimetres, while a driver can do better. Other sensors on the car, such as Lidar, can improve the accuracy but won’t be as inventive as a top driver in finding the fastest line around the track. “So does the ‘driver’ become the programmer – the one who tells the robot what the best line is, how much slip is acceptable, which bumps and dips to avoid and which to ride over?” A Formula One technical director remarks, “Based purely on experience with closed-loop lap simulation results, there is significant evidence to suggest that a virtual ‘driver model’ can cope with a significantly more ‘unstable’ car compared to reality. The big question is, could this theoretical increase be converted into reality? “Control system recognition and response is the key factor here. I think there is enough evidence to suggest that, in theory, a digital controller could function at a higher bandwidth compared to a human being. If this can be achieved then the digital controller should outperform its human counterpart.” Mike Lancaster is the brains behind Life Racing, one of the top suppliers of control electronics to professional motorsport. He says, “The human driver is a complex creature endowed with a vast array of subtle feedback systems and controlled ultimately by the most sophisticated parallel processing system that as far as we know exists anywhere. Despite this, the organic brain is very slow, not only to process information in real time but sluggish in machine terms to react appropriately. “Lined up against the organic computer is a vastly faster albeit single-minded ‘brain’ that knows nothing at all beyond following sequential instructions. Assuming the driverless car was able to drive around each corner alone and unimpeded, and with sufficient and no doubt considerable time to adapt to circumstances, in the end it would be faster than any human in my opinion.” Now, here’s a thing “ ” Does the driver become the programmer – the one who tells the robot which bumps to avoid, which to ride over?