Page 41 - Read Online

Page 268 Sun et al. Intell Robot 2023;3(3):257-73 I http://dx.doi.org/10.20517/ir.2023.17

5HVSQVH ZLWKRXW (7& .

5HVSQVH ZLWK 66 (7& .

5HVSQVH ZLWK 6WDWLF (7& .

<DZ UDWH U W

W V
Figure 7. Comparisons of yaw rate response.

Table 2. Performance comparisons
0 with period trans- 1 with static ETC 2 with SS-ETC
mission
2.7420 × 10 3 5.6193 × 10 3 3.6061 × 10 3

5HOHDVH LQWHUYDOV ZLWK WLPH WULJJHUHG VFKHPH

W V

5HOHDVH LQWHUYDOV ZLWK 66 (7&

W V

5HOHDVH LQWHUYDOV ZLWK VWDWLF (7&

W V

Figure 8. Release interval comparisons.

Table 3. Transmission comparisons

Time- Static ETC SS-ETC
triggered scheme scheme
scheme
Transmission Average Transmission Average Transmission Average
times period times period times period
1500 0.1 133 1.0955 179 0.8346

ETC scheme, and SS-ETC scheme.

Based on Figure 8, the transmission times and average periods are given below. From Figure 8 and Table 3,