Overview of Test Procedures, etc

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 TP/EMD European State of the Art for AEBS systems Stuttgart, May 2008 Dr. Jürgen Trost AEBS/LDWS
Advertisements

Chapter 10: Negotiating Intersections
Signals o Steady lights o Flashing lights o Signal/Sign combinations T – 1.22 Signals by traffic lights indicate the following: Steady red – moving traffic.
The necessity of New Regulations for New Technologies regarding R79 Japan September / 2012 Informal document GRRF (73rd GRRF, September 2012,
Beckwithshaw CP School Safety and Safeguarding Road Safety (with an emphasis on pedestrian safety around our school) Parent Presentation and Discussion.
Future Assessment of VRU Safety Features
Understanding the Virginia Driver’s Manual
1 Consideration of Issues Japan Presentation Informal document No. GRRF-S08-13 Special GRRF brainstorming session 9 December 2008 Agenda item 5.
Presentation for Document ACSF-03-03_rev1 Oliver Kloeckner September rd meeting of the IG ASCF Munich, Airport Informal Document.
Damage Mitigation Braking System
NEGOTIATING INTERSECTIONS
Traffic Accidents caused by Lane Departure in Japan  Data of Traffic Accidents around Japan Transmitted by the expert from Japan Informal document GRRF
1 ACSF Test Procedure Draft proposal – For discussion OICA and CLEPA proposal for the IG Group ACSF Tokyo, 2015, June Informal Document ACSF
Identification of regulatory needs for ACSF Oliver Kloeckner 16-17th June nd meeting of the IG ASCF Tokyo – Jasic Office Informal Document.
1 Analysis of in-use driving behaviour data delivered by vehicle manufacturers By Heinz Steven
Protective Braking for ACSF Informal Document: ACSF
Minimum Risk Manoeuvres (MRM)
1 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration An Overview of NHTSAs Vehicle Safety Research Priorities Nathaniel Beuse Associate Administrator, Vehicle.
Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism New Priorities of Japan -Future Measures for Vehicle Safety for a Society with No Traffic Accidents-
Safety Distances and Object Classifications for ACSF Informal Document: ACSF
Traffic Lights Road Signs Road Markings. Do Now… True or False  A stop sign is shaped like a triangle.  A broken yellow line means that you can pass.
1 ISO TC204/WG14 FVCMS Operation Performance, and Verification Requirements 9, December 2008 WG14 Expert Member of Japan Informal document No. GRRF-S08-08.
5 th ACSF meeting French views Bonn January 2016 Informal Document - ACSF Submitted by the expert of France.
1 6th ACSF meeting Tokyo, April 2016 Requirements for “Sensor view” & Environment monitoring version 1.0 Transmitted by the Experts of OICA and CLEPA.
Module 3 Brianna James Percy Antoine. Entering the Roadway/Moving to the Curb/Backing  The seven steps to safely pull from a curb. Place foot firmly.
Patrick Seiniger Federal Highway Research Institute Germany
Traffic Signs, Signals, and Road Markings
Motorcycle Noise Emission
Informal Document: ACSF-06-16
Drive Right Chapter 2 Unit 1
Informal Working Group on ACSF
Comments and Questions on Proposal for new Class VIII close-proximity and close rear-view devices UN R46 Devices for indirect vision GRSG (Japan)
Informal Document: ACSF Rev.1
Dr. Patrick Seiniger, Federal Highway Research Institute (BASt)
Automatic Emergency Braking Systems (AEBS)
Timing to be activated the hazard lights
Technical Feasibility
Rules of the Road.
AEBS/LDW Proposed changes with regard to the implementation of technical specifications for Lane Departure Warning Systems (LDWS) GRRF st.
Proposal for UN Regulation on AEBS for M1/N1
Dr. Patrick Seiniger, Federal Highway Research Institute (BASt)
John Lenkeit, Terry Smith
Industry Homework from AEB 02
Traffic Signs, Signals, and Road Markings
Submitted by the experts of OICA
Proposals from the Informal Working Group on AEBS
Attachment 1: Procedures for Evaluating Automatic Braking (for Vehicles) under Japan’s New Car Assessment Program (JNCAP) ○ Test vehicles (mainly ordinary/compact/light.
AEBS 4th Meeting UK Position Paper December 18 OFFICIAL-SENSITIVE
Submitted by the experts of OICA
Informal document GRSG
Quintessences Proposal for Category C of Germany and Japan
Average Deceleration and Peak Deceleration
ABS, Crash Speed and Injury Severity
Include cone to account for initial swerving?
VEHICLE TECHNOLOGY BRAKE SYSTEMS.
Reason for performance difference between LVW and GVW
Proposals from the Informal Working Group on AEBS
AEB 07 – Euro NCAP Summary Overview
AEB IWG 02-XX Industry Position
AEB IWG 02 ISO Standard: FVCMS
AEB 07 – Industry Input.
Informal Document: ACSF-10-08
Terms of Reference (AEBS Rev.1)
Safety considerations on Emergency Manoeuver
Example of cones and signs as traffic control at a roadway incident.
Emergency Steering Function
AEBS-08 – Industry Input.
AEB Pedestrian and Cyclist - minimum velocities Sensor opening angles
General Safety Regulation 5: AEBS – Proportion of M1 vehicles likely to pass the vehicle to pedestrian test of proposed draft regulation June 2019.
Automated Lane Keeping Systems
Presentation transcript:

Overview of Test Procedures, etc Overview of Test Procedures, etc. for Advanced Emergency Braking Systems (Braking for Pedestrians)

Table 1 Test vehicle speed Test vehicle speed: The test vehicle speed ranges are as shown in Table 1. Each test starts at the lowest vehicle speed and keeps increasing the speed by 5 km/h or 10 km/h. The initial vehicle speed can be raised at the request of a vehicle manufacturer, etc. Similarly, the final vehicle speed can be reduced at the request of a vehicle manufacturer, etc. However, in either case, test results for those speeds at which no testing was conducted shall be treated the same as when the system was not activated. Table 1 Test vehicle speed   AEBS Test CPN Scenario 1060 km/h CPNO Scenario 10256045 km/h

2. Test Scenarios After the standard evaluation tests are conducted, partial evaluation tests shall be performed separately for AEBS and FCWS under the following conditions. As regards the test in (5), it shall be performed with the test target’s initial lateral position changed to 6.0 m.  (1) CPNO Scenario Collision point of 50%, test target speed of 5 km/h, child dummy  (2) CPN Scenario  (3) CPN Scenario Collision point of 25%, test target speed of 5 km/h, adult dummy  (4) CPN Scenario Collision point of 75%, test target speed of 5 km/h, adult dummy  (5) CPN Scenario Collision point of 50%, test target speed of 8 km/h, adult dummy

3. Proposed Test Conditions Daytime evaluation 1 Nearside Test (CPN: Car to Pedestrian Nearside) (*) Assuming a general 7-m-wide road Standard test track Walking speed: 5 km/h 4.0 m(*) 1.0 m 1.0 m (Target acceleration + stabilization zones) Virtual collision point (25%) (*) Pedestrian’s initial position TTC at start of crossing = 2.8 s (mean value of the microdata distribution below) Walking speed = 5 km/h = 1.4 m/s       Initial position = 1.4 x 2.8  4.0 m (If the test vehicle speed is less than 20 km/h, the walking speed shall be 3 km/h.) Cumulative percentage (%) Crossing from the left side Number of fatal accidents (case) Up to 0.5 s Up to 1.0 s Up to 1.5 s Up to 2.0 s Up to 2.5 s Up to 3.0 s Up to 3.5 s Up to 4.0 s Up to 4.5 s Up to 5.0 s More than 5.0 s TTC at start of crossing TTC at entry into the vehicle lane Cumulative % of TTC at start of crossing Cumulative % of TTC at entry into the vehicle lane 0.5 m 3.0 m 4

Nearside – Obstructed Test (CPNO: Car to Pedestrian Nearside Daytime evaluation 2 Nearside – Obstructed Test (CPNO: Car to Pedestrian Nearside Obstruction) Walking speed: 5 km/h Standard test track 4.0m XX m XX m 1.0 m 3.0 m 5

(Target acceleration + stabilization zones) Farside Test (Warning Verification Only) (CPF: Car to Pedestrian Farside) Daytime evaluation 3 Standard test track Walking speed: 8 km/h 6.0 m 1.0 m 1.0 m (Target acceleration + stabilization zones) 3.0 m 3.0 m 0.5 m 6

(CPF: Car to Pedestrian Farside) Farside Test (CPF: Car to Pedestrian Farside) Nighttime evaluation 1 Under discussion Standard test track Walking speed: 5 km/h 6.0 m 1.0 m 1.0 m (Target acceleration + stabilization zones) 3.0 m 3.0 m 0.5 m 7

Farside – Obstructed Test (CPFO: Car to Pedestrian Farside Obstruction) Nighttime evaluation 2 Under discussion Standard test track Walking speed: 5 km/h 6.0 m XX m 1.0 m 1.0 m (Target acceleration + stabilization zones) XX m The shape, dimensions, color, position, etc. of the obstruction vehicle are to be discussed later. 3.0 m 3.0 m 0.5 m 8