ACSF-C2 2-actions system

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The necessity of New Regulations for New Technologies regarding R79 Japan September / 2012 Informal document GRRF (73rd GRRF, September 2012,
Advertisements

Proposal of Automated Driving from Ad- hoc group on LKAS/RCP Submitted by the Chair of the Special Interest Group on Lane Keeping Assist Systems (LKAS)
ACSF Informal Group Industry proposals 1 st Meeting of ACSF informal group April 29 and 30, 2015 in Bonn 1 Informal Document ACSF
3rd ACSF meeting Munich, September 2-3 Industry proposals for ACSF status definition and HMI Informal Document: ACSF Submitted by the experts from.
Outline of Definition of Automated Driving Technology Document No. ITS/AD (5th ITS/AD, 24 June 2015, agenda item 3-2) Submitted by Japan.
Presentation for Document ACSF-03-03_rev1 Oliver Kloeckner September rd meeting of the IG ASCF Munich, Airport Informal Document.
Difference for "Automatically commanded steering function", "Corrective steering function" and " Autonomous Steering System " Informal Document: ACSF
1 ACSF Test Procedure Draft proposal – For discussion OICA and CLEPA proposal for the IG Group ACSF Tokyo, 2015, June Informal Document ACSF
IHRA-ITS UN-ECE WP.29 ITS Informal Group Geneva, March, 2011 Design Principles for Advanced Driver Assistance Systems: Keeping Drivers In-the-Loop Transmitted.
Protective Braking for ACSF Informal Document: ACSF
Minimum Risk Manoeuvres (MRM)
Safety Distances and Object Classifications for ACSF Informal Document: ACSF
Results of the Study on ACSF Transition Time Informal Document: ACSF National Traffic Safety and Environment Laboratory, Japan 4th Meeting of ACSF.
CLEPA Position Special GRRF Session on Automatic Emergency Braking and Lane Departure Warning Systems Brainstorming Meeting 9 Dec UN Palais des.
ACSF - Traffic Jam Assist on all roads OICA and CLEPA proposal for the IG Group ACSF Tokyo, 2015, June Informal Document ACSF
1 6th ACSF meeting Tokyo, April 2016 Requirements for “Sensor view” & Environment monitoring version 1.0 Transmitted by the Experts of OICA and CLEPA.
Transmitted by the Experts of TRL (EC)
Informal Document: ACSF-06-16
Lane Change Test for ACSF
7th ACSF meeting London, June 28-30, 2016
Presentation of ACSF C tests
Common Understanding on Major Horizontal Issues and Legal Obstacles
Informal Working Group on ACSF
Submitted by the experts of Japan Informal Document: ACSF-06-25
Submitted by the expert form Japan Document No. ITS/AD-09-12
Annex 12 #2.6.4 Camera Monitor arrangement
Industry proposal Driver availability recognition system
Informal Document: ACSF Rev.1
Timing to be activated the hazard lights
ACSF-C2 2-actions system
Working Principle of Blind Spot Technology in Car
AEBS/LDW Proposed changes with regard to the implementation of technical specifications for Lane Departure Warning Systems (LDWS) GRRF st.
Informal document GRRF-86-36
Comparison of Cat.C HMI solution and vehicle without Cat.C
Statement of Principles on the Design of High-Priority Warning Signals
ACSF Category B1 (LKAS) Concern with “Default-on” strategy
on Transition for level 3 Automated Driving system
Submitted by the Expert of Sweden
Status of the Informal Working Group on ACSF
Proposals from the Informal Working Group on AEBS
Status of the Informal Working Group on ACSF
Informal document GRSG
ACSF C tests Prepared by JAPAN 15 November, 2017
Signalling of information and warnings
Quintessences Proposal for Category C of Germany and Japan
ACSF B1+C functional description
Status of the Informal Working Group on ACSF
ACSF – Automated Driving Systems Taxonomy and Definitions - SAE J3016 Jean-Michel Roy Transport Canada.
Proposals from the Informal Working Group on AEBS
Comparison of Cat.C HMI solution and vehicle without Cat.C
Questions/Comments on ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSG/2019/10
Safety concept for automated driving systems
Informal Document: ACSF-10-08
Definition of aysmax Interpretation 1
Status of discussion about “Reversing Motion”
Informal document No. GRSG-87-7
Maximum allowable Override Force
ACSF - Category C1 Definition of Sensor range and safety distances
ACSF B1+C functional description
Emergency Steering Function
Interpretation of CSF warnings #2
Status of discussion about “Reversing Motion” in VRU-Proxi
ACSF B2 SAE Level 2 and/or Level 3
ACSF B2 and C2 Industry expectations from ACSF IG Tokyo meeting
Hands-off detection versus Start of Lane Change Manoeuvre
6th ACSF meeting Tokyo, April 2016
Status of the Informal Working Group on ACSF
Regulation ECE R79-03 ACSF C 2-Step HMI
Automated Lane Keeping Systems
Informal document GRVA-04-34
Presentation transcript:

ACSF-C2 2-actions system Submitted by the experts of OICA Informal Document: ACSF-14-05 ACSF-C2 2-actions system Industry input to ACSF IG 14th meeting August 2017, Köln v4

Summary Philosophy Ultra-sonic sensors capablities Radar capabilities Proposal for a blind zone detection Proposal Justifications Mode confusion issue

Philosophy Level-2 system, i.e. the driver drives, the system assists: the driver monitors the vehicle environment the driver may not perform secondary tasks The driver is aware of the vehicle environment thanks to direct FOV and R46 mirrors The system must only monitor the zones out of mirrors coverage M1/N1: Class I and III FOV N3: Class II, IV and V FOV

Ultra-sonic sensor capabilities Range: 0-5 m Sensor-to-target relative speed: < 10 km/h Angle of detection: ~ 120° Target movement: stationary and moving Target nature: any solid, no distinction HMI: ON/OFF detection Sensitivity to wheather conditions: low

Radar sensor capabilities Range: < 100m Sensor-to-target relative speed: 0-max speed Angle of detection: 150° Target movement: stationary and moving Target nature: any solid, no distinction HMI: can transmit distance and speed Sensitivity to weather conditions: low

Proposed blind zone detection M1/N1 Rear edge Ocular points 95%ile Leading edge 3m 0.5m 3m 4m Outside edge 1m 4m 20m UN R46 Class III Field of view ISO 17387 „shall warn“ area

Proposed blind zone detection N3 vehicles Driver‘s ocular points 3m Leading edge Rear edge (truck) 0.5m 3m Outside edges 1m 2m 5m 4.5m 2.75m UN R46 Class II Field of view 1.5m 15m 4m UN R46 Class IV Field of view UN R46 Class V Field of view 10m ISO 17387 „shall warn area“ 25m 30m

Proposal “3X3m” blind spot detection area (ISO17387 – see sketches) for M1/N1 “3X3m” blind spot detection area inspired from ISO17387 – see sketches) for M2M3/N2N3 If target detected in blind spot, then Warn the driver Ignore 1st and 2nd actions Abort lane change support

Mode confusion issue A OK B What happens if the driver have wrong perception of the system installed in the car The driver thinks to have C1 C2 OK B A C1 The car is equipped with C2

A situation : The driver think to be in C1 in a C2 equiped car. Mode confusion issue A situation : The driver think to be in C1 in a C2 equiped car. The driver will use the command to launch the procedure without monitoring environment and nothing happen (the car expect a second action)  Not a safety issue B situation : The driver think to be in C2 in a C1 equiped car. The driver will use the direction indicator to start the procedure and : the car start a manoeuver if it is a safe situation

2-action ACSF Category-C Justifications Manual driving LC manoeuvre 2-action ACSF Category-C 1st action Activating the direction indicator to inform the other users 2nd action Action on the steering control to change lane The driver expects an HMI similar to that of the manual driving The driver can manage the time between the 2 actions Unintentional activation prevented thanks to ON/OFF switch 2-action activation Low overriding force (< 50 N)