1. eSafety 8 July 2002 1 e-Safety Working Group Brussels 8 July 2002 Sub-group 1: Autonomous In-vehicle Technologies

2. eSafety 8 July 2002 2 e-Safety - WG Sub-group 1 e-Safety - WG Sub-group 1 Autonomous In-vehicle Technologies Intelligent Passive Safety Technologies: Intelligent Passive Safety Technologies: State of the technology - assessment State of the technology - assessment expected developments, assessment and time scale for deployment expected developments, assessment and time scale for deployment limits of these systems (costs/benefits in terms of impact on safety) limits of these systems (costs/benefits in terms of impact on safety) Needs for new RTD (FP6) Needs for new RTD (FP6) Second Generation Integrated safety systems: Second Generation Integrated safety systems: Status of ADAS and intelligent Active Safety Status of ADAS and intelligent Active Safety Systems impact assessment; Systems impact assessment; Bottlenecks for implementation Bottlenecks for implementation Time scale for deployment. Time scale for deployment. Needs for new RTD (FP6) Needs for new RTD (FP6)

3. eSafety 8 July 2002 3 e-Safety - WG Sub-group 1 e-Safety - WG Sub-group 1 Autonomous In-vehicle Technologies Contribution Received Becker - Ford Bastiaensen - ERTICO Ulmer - Daimler Chrysler Cousyn - PSA Hoess - Siemens VDO Rault - EUCAR

4. eSafety 8 July 2002 4 e-Safety - WG Sub-group 1 e-Safety - WG Sub-group 1 Autonomous In-vehicle Technologies Content of the Report 1- Intelligent Passive Safety Technologies 2- 2nd generation integrated safety systems (ADAS) 3- The impact assessment of autonomous in vehicle technologies and systems on traffic safety 4- Limits and bottlenecks preventing integrated safety systems to be deployed in the market 5- Recommendations for the Action Plan

5. eSafety 8 July 2002 5 e-Safety - WG Sub-group 1 e-Safety - WG Sub-group 1 Autonomous In-vehicle Technologies Intelligent Passive Safety Technologies - Airbag Control Unit, crash compatibility, seat belts tensioner examples: pre-crash sensing, optimised deployment adapted to crash conditions comprising preventive systems for protection of vulnerable road users, Anticipated alerting or activation like reduced time-to- fire after crash.

6. eSafety 8 July 2002 6 e-Safety - WG Sub-group 1 e-Safety - WG Sub-group 1 Autonomous In-vehicle Technologies 2nd generation Integrated Safety Systems - Safe Speed Examples: Curve speed prediction, Traffic sign recognition, Speed advise, Road status, Intersection support, vehicle infrastructure communication) - Lane Support Examples: Lane keeping, Blind spot warning, Lane Change Assistant, Driver Drowsiness Detection and warning.

7. eSafety 8 July 2002 7 e-Safety - WG Sub-group 1 e-Safety - WG Sub-group 1 Autonomous In-vehicle Technologies 2nd generation Integrated Safety Systems - Safe Following Examples: Collision warning, Collision avoidance, ACC, Platooning, Stop & Go, Vehicle-vehicle communication. - Pedestrian Protection Examples: Vulnerable road user protection, Pedestrian awareness.

8. eSafety 8 July 2002 8 e-Safety - WG Sub-group 1 e-Safety - WG Sub-group 1 Autonomous In-vehicle Technologies 2nd generation Integrated Safety Systems - Improved Vision Examples: Night vision, detrimental meteorological conditions. - Driver Monitoring Examples: Driver Drowsiness Detection and warning.

9. eSafety 8 July 2002 9 e-Safety - WG Sub-group 1 e-Safety - WG Sub-group 1 Autonomous In-vehicle Technologies 2nd generation Integrated Safety Systems - Intersection Safety Examples: Intersection Collision Avoidance - Vehicle diagnostics and dynamics Examples: include roll-over warning systems and roll stability control, road surface monitoring (loss of traction alarms)

10. eSafety 8 July 2002 10 e-Safety - WG Sub-group 1 e-Safety - WG Sub-group 1 Autonomous In-vehicle Technologies Impact assessment of autonomous in vehicle technologies on traffic safety - No consistent input received - US IVI assessment per function - NL Ministry of Transport assessment per function - Industry perception is missing - RTD projects are working on it but approach is academic

11. eSafety 8 July 2002 11 e-Safety - WG Sub-group 1 e-Safety - WG Sub-group 1 Autonomous In-vehicle Technologies Limits and bottlenecks preventing integrated safety systems to be deployed in the market ( from RESPONSE) - 5 basic requirements have to be met by the systems - Reliability - Robustness (malfunction/misuse) - Perceptibility (HMI) - Comprehensibility/Predictability (syst.funct.) - Controllability (in any situation)

12. eSafety 8 July 2002 12 e-Safety - WG Sub-group 1 e-Safety - WG Sub-group 1 Autonomous In-vehicle Technologies Limits and Bottlenecks - Instruction to the driver on how to use ADAS - Legal issue of market introduction of ADAS: - Information Warning systems - Overridable Das intervention systems - Non Overridable DAS Intervention systems - Regulatory barriers for market introduction of ADAS - Standardisation of 24GHz short range radar

13. eSafety 8 July 2002 13 e-Safety - WG Sub-group 1 e-Safety - WG Sub-group 1 Autonomous In-vehicle Technologies Missing elements in the report - Contribution of the industry on the State of the art systems and technologies most of input is from EU RTD - Contribution of the industry on expected developments and RTD needs - Consistent Impact assessment is missing - Limits and bottlenecks not complete especially on the technical side

14. eSafety 8 July 2002 14 e-Safety - WG Sub-group 1 e-Safety - WG Sub-group 1 Autonomous In-vehicle Technologies Points to be discussed - Is the heading 2nd Generation Integrated safety systems including ADAS of clear understanding? - Is the presentation of ADAS by Function a good starting point? - What information exists and has not been provided? - What need to be done for the impact assessment? - Would it be possible to include the maturity of a function/technology in the report?