## 3 Results  
This section provides the study results in three distinct parts. Firstly, the impact of three different drivers' steering inputs on the vehicle's response to crosswind disturbances is detailed. Subsequently, the second part delves into the effects of the delay time, \(t_{\delta,delay}\), in the drivers' steering inputs on the vehicle's response to crosswind. Lastly, the third part elucidates the effects of various drivers' steering inputs on the characteristics of aerodynamic forces and moments exerted by crosswind on the vehicle. The Effects of Drivers' Steering Inputs with Different Driving Skills on the Vehicle's Reaction to the Crosswind  
Figure 5 presents the comparisons between the vehicle dynamics results obtained with three drivers, each possessing different driving skills and identified as Driver 1, Driver 2, and Driver 3 in the study. These results are juxtaposed with those obtained without any driver's steering input. As explained previously in Section 2.1.1, Driver 1 represented the least skilled driver, while Driver 3 represented the most skilled driver in the study. Additionally, in this part of the study, after the onset of the crosswind, i.e., \(t_{\delta,start}\) = 2.67 s, all drivers' steering inputs began with a delay of \(t_{\delta,delay}\) = 0.5 s. The crosswind ceased at \(t_{\delta,end}\) = 5.1 s. The simulation without a driver's steering input was finished at \(t\) = 6.45 s, whereas the simulations with a driver's steering input were continued until \(t\) = 10 s. Aerodynamics and vehicle dynamics simulations were coupled in two-way until \(t\) = 6.45 s for both cases, including and not including the driver's steering inputs. The greatest variations between the lateral displacement results for all drivers occurred at their first peaks, as shown in Figure 5a, i.e., the maximum lateral displacement of Driver 1 is about 1.53 times larger than that of Driver 3. Moreover, the greatest variations between the other results, e.g., yaw and roll angles, happened at their second and third peaks, as shown in Figure 5b,c. Figure 5 indicated that the patterns of yaw angle and lateral displacement findings exhibited a reversal after the initiation of drivers' steering inputs, in contrast to the results obtained without any steering input from the driver. On the contrary, the drivers' steering inputs caused the roll angle results to have the same trends as the results obtained without any steering input from the driver. Moreover, the introduction of drivers' steering inputs led to an increase in the absolute maximum magnitudes of the roll angle results, in contrast to the results obtained without any steering inputs from the driver. Additionally, as expected, the magnitudes of the oscillations observed in the vehicle dynamics results after the crosswind ceased were the least in the results of Driver 3, who is the most skilled in the simulations. Figure 6 compares the percentage variations, \(|\epsilon|\), between the results obtained with steering inputs from the driver and without any steering input from the driver in the first \(\Delta t=0.5\) s period after the steering inputs started. The lateral displacement results given in Figure 6 showed larger differences than the roll and yaw angle results at the beginning, i.e., \(|\epsilon|\sim 2.5\%\) at \(t_{\delta}=3.35\). However, the differences in the lateral displacement results showed less increase than the corresponding differences in the roll and yaw angle results at a later instant, e.g., at \(t=3.57\) s. On the other hand, the percentage variations between the roll angle results obtained with steering inputs from the driver and without any steering input from the driver were larger than those of lateral displacement and yaw angle at the end of this period of the steering inputs, which was \(|\epsilon|\sim 15\%\).