2014 IEEE 17th International Conference on
Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC)
October 8-11, 2014. Qingdao, China
A Lane Change Warning System Based on V2V Communication
Dang Ruina, Ding Jieyun, Su Bo, Yao Qichang, Tian Yuanmu, Li Keqiang
Abstract—A lane change warning system is proposed, which
gets the surrounding vehicle’ motion states based on V2V
communication. The safe distance between ego-vehicle and rear
vehicle in target lane is analyzed according to the goal of both
collision avoidance and vehicle following safety. Safe distance
between ego-vehicle and front vehicle in target lane is analyzed
to ensure safety in emergency collision avoidance. Safe distances
between ego-vehicle and front and rear vehicles in original lane
are analyzed to realize safe following. Meanwhile, driving style
index is proposed to adapt the warning system to different kinds
of drivers. Simulation results show that the lane change warning
system can make a composite analysis of the collision risk during
the lane-changing, and provide an accurate real-time warning to
assist drivers.
Index Terms—lane change warning, minimum safe distance,
collision warning, V2V communication, driver assist system
I. INTRODUCTION
With the rapid increase of the vehicle population in
modern society, the problem of traffic accident is remarkable
and has caused great economic losses and casualties [1]. The
Driving Assistance System (DAS) can reduce the accident rate
and enhance driving comfort and safety by providing assistant
to drivers timely [2][3]. As a typical kind of driving assistance
system, lane change warning system can help drive be aware
of the potential collision danger between ego-vehicle and
surrounding vehicles and make judgment on lane change
feasibility.
At present, the world's car manufacturers and research
institutions are conducting some researches on lane change
assistant system [4]. Volvo, Ford, Audi carried out lane
changing decision supporting system to detect vehicles in the
blind spot area of ego-vehicle with equipped sensors and send
warning signals to drivers [5]. Nissan carried out lane change
assistant system can make a direct yaw-moment control based
on blind-spot vehicle detection [6]. Claas Rodemerk et al.
considered the relative movement between ego-vehicle and
front vehicle in original lane as well as faster traffic flow in
target lane to make an assessment on risk during lane changing
Manuscript received May 4th, 2014.
Dang Ruina is with China North Vehicle Research Institute, Beijing,
China, 100072. (E-mail: ruinadang@163.com).
Ding Jieyun is with State Key Laboratory of Automotive Safety and
Energy, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China, 100084. (E-mail:
dingjy12@mails.tsinghua.edu.cn).
Su bo is with China North Vehicle Research Institute, Beijing, China,
100072. (E-mail: bosu@noveri.com.cn)
Yao Qichang is with China North Vehicle Research Institute, Beijing,
China, 100072. (E-mail: qchyao201@163.com)
Tian Yuanmu is with China North Vehicle Research Institute, Beijing,
China, 100072. (E-mail:tianyuanmu8@gmail.com)
Li Keqiang is with State Key Laboratory of Automotive Safety and
Energy, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China,100084 (Corresponding author
E-mail: likq@tsinghua.edu.cn)
978-1-4799-6078-1/14/$31.00 ©2014 IEEE 1923
[7]. Jin Lisheng analyzed lane change behavior in highway,
and built a simple and practical safe lane-change distance
model, neglecting lateral movement [8]. PATH project
analyzed extreme conditions when collisions between
ego-vehicle and four surrounding vehicles happen, derived the
initial safe distance at the beginning of the lane changing by
assuming vehicles keep constant speed [9]. A.Kanaris et al.
analyzed the change rule of lateral and longitudinal
acceleration and proposed the minimum safe distance to avoid
collision considering 6 possible braking conditions [10]. All
in all, products of lane change assistant system mainly detect
rear vehicle in target lane. Other research mainly considered
extreme conditions, so the safe distance cannot be used in
common lane change process. In conclusion, more research is
in need to develop a lane change warning system which fully
considers the surrounding vehicles’ motion state and can be
more commonly used in real driving situation.
This paper proposes a lane change warning system
adapted to real driving environment based on V2V
communication. Firstly, framework of lane change warning
system is built and system control logic is designed. Secondly,
safe distances between ego-vehicle and its four surrounding
vehicles are analyzed separately with various design
objectives, the four vehicles are front vehicle and rear vehicle
on the original lane and target lane. For rear vehicle which is
the most dangerous vehicle among the four, the design
objective is to guarantee both collision avoidance and vehicle
following safety. The safe distance between ego-vehicle and
front vehicle in the target lane is designed to escape
emergency collision. The safe distances between ego-vehicle
and the other two vehicles are analyzed to realize safe
following. After analyzing the safe distance, driving style
index is introduced to adapt the warning system to different
kinds of drivers. Finally, two typical lane change conditions
are simulated to test the performance of the proposed warning
system.
II. SYSTEM FRAMEWORK DESIGN
A lane change warning system is designed as shown in
Fig.1. There are four components in the framework structure,
and they are environment detection, minimum safe distance
calculation, judgment of lane change feasibility and HMI.
Environment detection part gets data about the relative
position and relative movement of surrounding vehicles
through V2V communication. Then minimum safe distance
for lane change is calculated based on the environment data
and driving style index for individuals. The following part
makes judgment on whether lane change is feasible by
comparing minimum safe distance and real distance. Then
HMI module sent audial/visual warning to drivers according
to warning signals provided by judgment module.
 Fig.2 shows the control logic of the lane change warning distance, this section assumes that at the beginning of lane
system. If there is collision risk during lane changing process, changing, rear vehicle in the target lane has a faster speed than
warning signal will be given, otherwise, warning signal will be ego-vehicle and during the lane changing process, ego-vehicle
turned off if lane changing is cancelled. keeps a constant speed while rear vehicle in target lane
decelerates by the maximum deceleration. When ego-vehicle
Figure 1. Framework structure of lane change warning system starts to change lane, it will take driver in rear vehicle some
time for reaction to recognize other vehicles; driving intention.
Driving style
index During the reaction time, the vehicle keeps the original
Environment Detection
driving speed and after the reaction time, vehicle decelerates
Relative position/movement of
Critical safe
distance
Judgment of lane
HMI
until it reaches the same speed as ego-vehicle. At this time, the
change feasibility Audial /Visual warning
surrounding vehicles calculation
gap distance between two vehicles is the minimum. This
minimum distance shouldn’t be larger than safe distance.
Fig.3 shows the movement of these two vehicles mentioned
Figure 2. Control logic of lane change warning system above.
Figure 3. Movement of ego-vehicle and rear vehicle in target lane
Start

Environment
Detection vrd vrd ' vh '
Y

Calculation of safe distance Calculation of safe distance vh

Calculation of safe distance
between ego-vehicle and between ego-vehicle and
between ego-vehicle and
rear vehicle in destination front vehicle in
vehicles in original lane
lane destination lane

d safe d safe
dbuffer
Risk exists?
Δd rdh Δdrdh'
Y
Warning
d rd

N N dh
Lane change cancelled?

End As is shown in Fig.3, before lane changing, ego-vehicle

drives at speed vh, and rear vehicle in target lane drives at
speed vrd. Distance between the two vehicles is △drdh, which
III. MINIMUM SAFE DISTANCE ANALYSIS in composed with safe distance dsafe and a buffer distance
dbuffer. When distance reaches the minimum value △drdh’,
Analysis of minimum safe distance is the key technology ego-vehicle has driven for a length of dh. τreaction represents
of lane change warning system, and determines the accuracy for the reaction time of rear vehicle, which is composed of
of warning system’s working. This chapter analyzes the lane reaction time of drivers τ driver and acting time of braking
change process and derives the formula to calculate minimum system τ brake. Rear vehicle in target lane drivers in a
safe distance between ego-vehicle and surrounding vehicles deceleration ardcon and this process takes time tbrake. Equation
from the perspective of collision avoidance and vehicle (1) indicates relationships between parameters:
following safety separately:
△vrdh = vrd - vh
A. The Distance Design with Rear Vehicle in Target Lane △drdh = dsafe + dbuffer
In a lane changing process, the motion of rear vehicle in τreaction =τdriver +τbrake (1)
target lane influences most on driver’s behavior. Rear vehicle dh = vh(τreaction + tbrake )
in target lane needs to adjust its speed to keep a safe distance drd = vrd(τreaction + tbrake) + ardcontbrake2/2
with ego-vehicle. If speed of rear vehicle is comparatively
high or distance is comparatively close, the risk of rear-end In (1), △vrdh represents for the delta difference in speed.
collision is high accordingly. The ideal safe distance should Safe distance dsafe equals to speed of ego-vehicle product a
lead to a safe following distance after lane changing. safe time-headway, as is shown in (2).
Therefore, minimum safe distance before lane changing is dsafe = τrdsafevrd (2)
analyzed both to avoid collision and to keep a safe following
distance. It can be easily seen from Fig.3, in order to make sure the
minimum distance to be larger than safe distance. The final
In a usual lane changing process, drivers tend to keep a distance should satisfy the following requirement.
constant speed or a small acceleration. Rear vehicle in target
lane usually keep a constant speed or a small deceleration to drd < dh + dbuffer (3)
adjust the relative motion state. So, to analyze the safe

1924
 Equation (4) can be got combining (1)(2)(3).
(vrd-vh)τreaction/△drdh + 3(vrd - vh)2/(2ardcon△drdh)
+ τrdsafevrd/△drdh<1
Define crdh in (5) as safe distance coefficient between
ego-vehicle and rear vehicle in target lane. If crdh is less than
or equals to 1, it means that lane changing is feasible. If crdh is
larger than 1, it means there is a collision risk between
ego-vehicle and rear vehicle in target lane.
crdh = (vrd-vh)τreaction/△drdh + 3(vrd - vh)2/(2ardcon△drdh)
+ τrdsafevrd/△drdh (5)
The upper analysis is established on the basis of the
assumption that ego-vehicle’s speed is slower than rear
vehicle in target lane. When ego-vehicle’s speed is a little
faster, the rear vehicle may accelerate thus causing risk of
collision. When ego-vehicle’s speed is much faster, there is
only the need to keep a safe following distance, so the
equation to calculate safe distance coefficient is modified as
follows.
If vrd – vk >= -5, crdh = max( (vrd-vh)τreaction/△drdh + 3(vrd -
vh)2/(2ardcon△drdh) + τrdsafevrd/△drdh, τrdsafevrd/△drdh )
If vrd – vk < -5, crdh = τrdsafevrd/△drdh (6)
According to investigation, drivers’ average reaction
time is 1.35s, and acting time of braking system is 0.15s.
Drivers usually keep a time-headway of 1.5s in a steady
vehicle following condition. Because rear vehicle in target
lane influences most on ego-vehicle, the time-headway is
modified to 1.8s accordingly. The maximum deceleration of
common vehicles is about 7.5 m/s2. Acceleration of common
vehicles fluctuates between -1 and 1 m/s2 in usual driving
situations. Considering driving comfort and safety, ardcon is
given the value 2 m/s2. Parameters above are given values as
Table.1 shows.
TABLE I. PARAMETERS OF DRIVERS AND VEHICLES
Name Definition Unit Value
τdriver Drivers’ reaction time s 1.35
τbrake Acting time of barking system s 0.15
τrdsafe Safe time-headway s 1.8
Maximun deceleration of rear vehicle in
ardcon m/s2 2 As is shown in Fig.4, before lane changing, ego-vehicle
target lane
If crdh equals to 1, the initial distance between
ego-vehicle and rear vehicle in target lane is the minimum
safe distance △dmrdh. The distance can be calculated as (7).
If vrd – vk >= -5, △dmrdh = max( (vrd-vh)τreaction + 3(vrd -
vh)2/(2ardcon) + τrdsafevrd,τrdsafevrd)
If vrd – vk < -5, △dmrdh = τrdsafevrd (7)
B. The Distance Design with Other Vehicles
Although other vehicles have less influence on lane
changing process, but lane changing process consists of 5
vehicles and is complicated and dangerous. If drivers pay
too much attention to rear vehicle in target lane, the relative
movement between ego-vehicle and other vehicles might be
neglected by drivers. If lane changing cannot be finished
(4) successfully, drivers would steer back to the original lane,
then if the distance between ego-vehicle and rear vehicle in
original lane is relatively short or if rear vehicle drives at
larger speed than ego-vehicle, there might be risk of rear-end
collision. Therefore, relative movement between
ego-vehicle and other vehicles should also be taken into
analysis of lane changing feasibility. The goal of the analysis
should be avoiding collision timely.
The goal of lane changing is to follow front vehicle in
target lane in a proper distance, so it is important to make
sure ego-vehicle should keep a safe distance with front
vehicle in target lane so as not to lead to a collision. Because
vehicles in original lane have less influence on the lane
changing process than vehicles in target lane, it is
practicable to simplify the analysis of this part. Distance
between ego-vehicle and vehicles in original lane only need
to satisfy the demand of keeping safe following distance.
This section would analyze target lane’s front vehicle’s
influence on lane changing feasibility mainly.
In the following condition, safe following distance is
defined to satisfy the demand that, when the front vehicle
brakes in emergency conditions, vehicle following after it
should also brake after reaction time in order to stop safely
without collision. Fig.4 shows the movement of these two
vehicles mentioned above.
Figure 4. Movement of ego-vehicle and front vehicle in target lane
vh ' vld '
vld
vh
Δdldh
Δdldh'
d hreact d hbrake
dh
dld
drives at speed vh, and front vehicle in target lane drives at
speed vld. Distance between the two vehicles is △dldh before
lane changing, and it is △dldh’ after lane changing. During this
process, ego-vehicle has driven for a length of dh and front
vehicle has driven for a length of dld. dh is composed of dhreact
and dhbrake. At the same time, τ reaction represents for the
reaction time of rear vehicle, which is composed of reaction
time of drivers τdriver and acting time of braking system τbrake.
Equation (8) indicates relationships between parameters:
τreaction =τdriver +τbrake
dhreact = vhτreaction
dhbrake = vh2/(2ahmax) (8)
dh = dhreact + dhbrake
1925
 dld = vld2/(2aldmax)
△dldh’ = △dldh + dld - dh
Assume that front vehicle in target lane brake hardly in
deceleration aldmax, it takes some time to brake after reaction.
This reaction timeτreaction is composed of drivers’ reaction
time τdriver and acting time of the braking systemτbrake. After
the reaction time, ego-vehicle decelerates at its maximum
deceleration ahmax until two vehicle both stops.
To avoid rear-end collision of the two vehicles, it is
demanded that △dldh’ is larger than 0. Combining the upper
equations, the following equation should be satisfied.
vhτreaction/△dldh + vh2/(2ahmax△dldh)
– vld2/(2aldmax△dldh) < 1 (9)
Define cldh in (10) as safe distance coefficient between
ego-vehicle and front vehicle in target lane. If cldh is less than
or equals to 1, it means that lane changing is feasible. If crdh is
larger than 1, it means there is a collision risk between
ego-vehicle and front vehicle in target lane.
cldh = vhτreaction/△dldh + vh2/(2ahmax△dldh)
- vld2/(2aldmax△drdh) (10)
If ego-vehicle’s speed is much less than front vehicle’s
speed, safe distance coefficient is negative which means that
there is no collision danger. But in order to keep smooth
traffic flow and real traffic condition. cldh is modified as (11).
cldh = max(vhτreaction/△dldh + vh2/(2ahmax△dldh)
- vld2/(2aldmax△dldh), vhτldsafe/△dldh) (11)
Parameters in the upper analysis process refer to Table.1.
Assume all the vehicles have similar braking performance,
and the max deceleration is given the value 7.5 m/s2.
When cldh equals to 1, value of the initial distance
between ego-vehicle and front vehicle in target lane is
minimum safe distance △ dmldh. The distance can be
calculated as (12).
△dmldh = max(vhτreaction + vh2/(2ahmax) - vld2/(2aldmax)
, vhτldsafe) (12)
Front and rear vehicles in original lane have relatively
less influence on lane changing process. To make sure that
lane changing process is feasible, the only requirements
need to be satisfied is distances is larger than safe following
distances. The minimum safe distances △dmloh, △dmroh can
be calculated as (13) and (14).
△dmloh = vhτlosafe (13)
△dmroh = vhτrosafe (14)
τlosafe and τ rosafe represented for safe time-headway
between ego-vehicle and front and rear vehicle in original
lane separately. They are given values according to
experience.
C. Comprehensive Analysis on Lane Changing Feasibility
The former two sections analyzed on lane changing
feasibility separately according surrounding vehicles’
1926
motion state. Studies show that in order to make sure that
lane changing is feasible: all the safe distance coefficient
needs to be less than 1, which means the real distance
between vehicles should be larger than minimum safe
distance. Equation (15) shows how to calculate the minimum
safe distance.
△dmrdh = max( (vrd-vh)τreaction + 3(vrd - vh)2/(2ardcon)
+ τrdsafevrd,τrdsafevrd) (If vrd – vk >= -5)
△dmrdh =τrdsafevrd (If vrd – vk < -5)
△dmldh = max(vhτreaction + vh2/(2ahmax) （15）
- vld2/(2aldmax), vhτldsafe)
△dmloh = vhτlosafe
△dmroh = vhτrosafe
Because drivers of different driving style have different
decision on safe distance for lane changing. Aggressive
drivers can change lane in shorter distance, while
conservative drivers need longer distance for lane changing.
Therefore, driving style index cstyle is introduced and (16)
shows the modification method of minimum safe distance.
The value of cstyle is set by the driver. If the value is greater
than 1, it means that the driver is conservative, while a value
lesser than 1 means that the driver is aggressive.
△dcrdh = max(cstyle (vrd-vh)τreaction + 3 cstyle (vrd - vh)2/(2ardcon)
+ cstyleτrdsafevrd, cstyleτrdsafevrd) (If vrd – vk >= -5)
△dmrdh = cstyleτrdsafevrd (If vrd – vk < -5)
△dcldh = max(cstyle vhτreaction + cstyle vh2/(2ahmax) （16）
- cstyle vld2/(2aldmax), cstyle vhτldsafe)
△dcloh = cstyle vhτlosafe
△dcroh = cstyle vhτrosafe
In (16), △dcrdh, △dcldh, △dcloh, △dcroh represent for
minimum safe distance between ego-vehicle and rear vehicle
in target lane, front vehicle in target lane, front vehicle in
original lane, rear vehicle in original lane considering.
If distances between ego-vehicle and surrounding
vehicles in real lane changing process are all bigger than
minimum safe distances calculated as (16) shows, lane
changing is regarded as feasible.
IV. SIMULATION RESULTS
Two simulated lane change conditions are introduced to
test on system warning function designed by this paper. All
simulation work is done based on Simulink. The simulated
lane change conditions satisfy the following assumptions:
traffic flow in original lane is slower than in target lane.
When ego-vehicle lights the turning signal, rear vehicle in
target lane will decelerate after some reaction time until
speed becomes to be equal to or less than speed of
ego-vehicle. Ego-vehicle keeps a constant speed or
accelerates a little. Other surrounding vehicles’ motion state
keeps unchanged.
In condition 1, it is assumed that the initial speed of
ego-vehicle, front and rear vehicles in original lane is
60km/h, and speed of vehicles in target lane is 70km/h. The
initial distances between ego-vehicle and surrounding
vehicles are all 20m. Traffic flow in target lane is faster than
original lane, so the condition is proper for lane changing. the lane changing warning is cancelled. During this process,
Fig.5 shows the simulation result in this condition. the minimum safe distance of rear vehicle in target lane is
always larger than other vehicles, corresponding to the high
Figure 5. Simulation result in condition 1 level of its dangerous characteristics.

(a) Fig.5(b) shows the changing rule of TTC and THW

during lane changing. As is shown in the figure, when the
lane changing warning is on, THW between ego-vehicle and
rear vehicle in target lane is less than 1s, which cannot meet
the demand of driving safety. When lane changing warning
Warning

1 1:ON
0:OFF is off, THW is larger than 1s, and all TTC is larger than 10s,
0 driving safety can be satisfied to avoid collision and to
0 1 2 3 4 5
Time [s]
follow leading vehicle safely.
40 In condition 2, it is assumed that the initial speed of
△ drdh
30 ego-vehicle, front and rear vehicle in original lane is 60 km/h,
△ d [m]

△ drd(safe)
△ dldh speed of front vehicle in target lane is 70km/h and speed of
20
△ dld(safe)
rear vehicle in target lane is 65 km/h. The initial distances
10 between ego-vehicle and vehicles in original lane are all
0 1 2 3 4 5
Time [s]
20m, initial distance between ego-vehicle and front vehicle
22 in target lane is 10m and distance between ego-vehicle and
△ droh
rear vehicle in target lane is 25m. Traffic flow in target lane
20
△ d [m]

△ dro(safe)
is faster than original lane, so the condition is proper for lane
△ dloh
18 changing. Fig.6 shows the simulation result in this condition.
△ dlo(safe)
16
0 1 2 3 4 5
Fig.6(a) shows the lane changing process and the
Time [s] system’s performance. In the preliminary stage in the lane
80 changing process, because front vehicle in target lane drives
v rd
at a high speed and a short distance with ego-vehicle, the real
Speed [km/h]

v ld
70 distance is shorter than minimum safe distance triggering
v ro
warning function of the assistant system. Because speed of
60 v lo
target lane is higher and distance is becoming larger, the
vh
50
distance satisfies the requirement of minimum safe distance
0 1 2 3 4 5 at about 2.5s and lane change warning is cancelled.
Time [s]
Fig.6(b) shows the changing rule of TTC and THW
during lane changing. As is shown in the figure, when the
(b) lane changing warning is on, THW between ego-vehicle and
2 front vehicle in target lane is less than 1s, which cannot meet
THWrdh the demand of driving safety. When lane changing warning
THW [s]

THWldh is off, THW is larger than 1s, and all TTC is larger than 10s,
1
THWroh driving safety can be satisfied to avoid collision and to
THWloh follow leading vehicle safely.
0
0 1 2 3 4 5
Figure 6. Simulation result in condition 2
Time [s]
TTCrdh (a)
10
TTC [s]

TTCldh
TTCroh
Warning

1 1:ON
5 TTCloh
0:OFF
0 1 2 3 4 5 0
0 1 2 3 4 5
Time [s]
Time [s]
30
△ drdh
△ d [m]

△ drd(safe)
Fig.5(a) shows the lane changing process and the 20
△ dldh
system’s performance. In the preliminary stage in the lane △ dld(safe)
changing process, because rear vehicle in target lane drives 10
0 1 2 3 4 5
at a high speed and a short distance with ego-vehicle, the real Time [s]
distance is shorter than minimum safe distance triggering 25
△ droh
warning function of the assistant system. With the
△ d [m]

△ dro(safe)
decelerating of rear vehicle in target lane and accelerating of 20
△ dloh
ego-vehicle, minimum safe distance becomes smaller. At △ dlo(safe)
about 4.3s, the real distance satisfies the safe limitation and 15
0 1 2 3 4 5
Time [s]
v rd
1927 70
Speed [km/h]

v ld
v ro
60
v lo
vh
 △ drdh

△ d [m]
△ drd(safe)
20
△ dldh
△ dld(safe)
10
0 1 2 3 4 5
Time [s] Transactions on Control Systems Technology, 2011, vol.19, no.3,
25 pp.556-566.
△ droh [2] Dezhao Zhang, Keqiang Li, Jianqiang Wang. A curving ACC system
with coordination control of longitudinal car-following and lateral
△ d [m]
△ dro(safe)
20 stability. Vehicle System Dynamics, 2012, vol.50, no.7, pp.
△ dloh
1085-1102.
△ dlo(safe)
15 [3] Dang Ruina, He Chaozhe, Zhang Qiang, Li Keqiang, Li Yusheng. ACC
0 1 2 3 4 5 of electric vehicles with coordination control of fuel economy and
Time [s] tracking safety. Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV), 2012 IEEE,
v rd pp.240-245.
70 [4] Meng Lu, Kees Wevers, Rob Van Der Heijden. Technical Feasibility of
Speed [km/h]

v ld
Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) for Road Traffic Safety.
v ro
Transportation Planning and Technology, 2005, vol. 28, no.5, pp.
60
v lo 167-187.
vh [5] A Shaout, D Colella, S Awad. Advanced Driver Assistance
50 Systems-Past,Present and Future. Computer Engineering Conference
0 1 2 3 4 5
(ICENCO), 2011 Seventh International. pp,72-82
Time [s]
[6] Hayakawa, Y., Sato, K., and Kobayashi, M., A Blind Spot Assistance
System Based on Direct Yaw-Moment Control, SAE Technical Paper
(b) 2011-01-0202.
[7] Rodemerk, C.; Habenicht, S.; Weitzel, A.; Winner, H.; Schmitt, T..
2
THWrdh Development of a general minimumity criterion for the risk estimation
of driving situations and its application to a maneuver-based lane
THW [s]

1.5 THWldh
change assistance system. Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV), 2012
THWroh
1 IEEE, pp.264-269.
THWloh
[8] Lisheng Jin, Wenping Fang. Research on safety lane change model of
0.5
0 1 2 3 4 5 driver assistant system on highway. Intelligent Vehicles Symposium,
Time [s] 2009 IEEE, pp.1051-1056.
12
[9] H.Jula, E.Kosmatopoulos, P. Ioannou. Collision avoidance analysis for
TTCrdh lane changing and merging. IEEE Transactions on Vehicular
10
Technology, 2000, vol.49, no.6, pp.2295-2308.
TTC [s]

TTCldh
8 [10] Alexander Kanaris. E.Kosmatopoulos, P. Ioannou. Strategies and
TTCroh
6 spacing requirements for lane changing and merging in automated
TTCloh
4 highway systems. IEEE transactions on vehicular technology,2001,
0 1 2 3 4 5 vol.50,no.6, pp.1568-1581.
Time [s]

V. CONCLUSION
This paper proposes a lane change warning system based
on V2V communication which can be used for the real road
driving. Simulation model is built to test the performance of
the system. Two meaningful conclusions are got as below:
(1) The lane change warning system can coordinate both
lane change safety and driving comfort to realize effective
warning. The lane change warning system can make a
comprehensive analysis of the collision risk between the
changing-lane vehicle and its four surrounding vehicles.
Furthermore, driving style index is introduced to modify the
warning timing to satisfy various drivers.
(2) The analysis method of the minimum safe distance can
precisely estimate the initial distance needed to safely
complete lane change process. To make the minimum safe
distance more practical and specific, minimum safe distance
of rear vehicle in target lane is analyzed according to the goal
of both collision avoidance and vehicle following safety, the
counterpart of front vehicle in target lane is analyzed to avoid
emergency collision and counterparts of vehicles in original
lane are analyzed to ensure vehicle following safety.

REFERENCES
[1] Shengbo Li, Keqiang Li, Rajamani, R., Jianqiang Wang. Model
Predictive Multi-Objective Vehicular Adaptive Cruise Control. IEEE

1928