Hands-off detection warning time for B1-systems

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Warning Timing for AEBS AEBS/LDWS Proposal of Warning Timing 1) Warning has two functions; to induce the driver to take an avoiding maneuver.
Advertisements

How many passengers can be in the vehicle if the driver holds a Special Learners Permit?
ABS(Antilock braking system)
ACSF Informal Group Industry proposals 1 st Meeting of ACSF informal group April 29 and 30, 2015 in Bonn 1 Informal Document ACSF
Odysa ® Experiences with an individual “green wave” Marcel Willekens / Arjan Bezemer / Kristiaan Langelaar.
1 Different use cases for ACSF Prepared from the experts of OICA and CLEPA 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.
Presentation for Document ACSF-03-03_rev1 Oliver Kloeckner September rd meeting of the IG ASCF Munich, Airport Informal Document.
Damage Mitigation Braking System
Driver Examination Study Questions Question 1 How many passengers can be in the vehicle if the driver holds a Special Learners Permit? Any number of.
ECE Regulation No.79 Informal Document No. GRRF (61 st GRRF, 5-9 February 2007 agenda item 5.) Proposal for Amendments Presented by the Expert from.
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
Working paper number WLTP-DHC Comparison of different European databases with respect to road category and time periods (on peak, off peak, weekend)
Remote Control Parking (RCP)
Quiet road surfaces Eurocities - working group noise Chair: Henk Wolfert Transmitted by the expert from the Netherlands Informal document GRB Add.1.
Push Bumper Training HERO UNIT Training Module. Introduction This course is designed to provide the HERO operator with the proper techniques for pushing.
Protective Braking for ACSF Informal Document: ACSF
Minimum Risk Manoeuvres (MRM)
Results of the Study on ACSF Transition Time Informal Document: ACSF National Traffic Safety and Environment Laboratory, Japan 4th Meeting of ACSF.
Vehicle Balance, Traction Loss, Roadway and Vehicle Technology Driver Education.
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.
Rollover Avoidance System
Hand-off Warning Time of LKA
Anti-Lock Braking Systems
St. Francis Prep Driver Education
Lane Change Test for ACSF
7th ACSF meeting London, June 28-30, 2016
Presentation of ACSF C tests
Informal Working Group on ACSF
Submitted by the experts of Japan Informal Document: ACSF-06-25
Industry proposal Driver availability recognition system
Informal Document: ACSF Rev.1
ACSF-C2 2-actions system
Timing to be activated the hazard lights
Design Consistency and Positive Guidance
Alternative Approach to UN R13 Type-IIA for Battery Electric Vehicles
Informal document GRRF-86-36
Comparison of different gearshift prescriptions
Comparison of Cat.C HMI solution and vehicle without Cat.C
ACSF Category B1 (LKAS) Concern with “Default-on” strategy
on Transition for level 3 Automated Driving system
MAINTAINING VEHICLE BALANCE
AEBS 4th Meeting UK Position Paper December 18 OFFICIAL-SENSITIVE
ACSF C tests Prepared by JAPAN 15 November, 2017
Signalling of information and warnings
Quintessences Proposal for Category C of Germany and Japan
Safety Distance to the front
ACSF B1+C functional description
ACSF – Automated Driving Systems Taxonomy and Definitions - SAE J3016 Jean-Michel Roy Transport Canada.
Comparison of Cat.C HMI solution and vehicle without Cat.C
Chapter 5 Natural Laws & Car Control
Alabama Driver Manual Chapter 3
Alcohol and the Law.
Informal Document: ACSF-10-08
Definition of aysmax Interpretation 1
Maximum allowable Override Force
ACSF - Category C1 Definition of Sensor range and safety distances
ACSF B1+C functional description
Interpretation of CSF warnings #2
Status of discussion about “Reversing Motion” in VRU-Proxi
ACSF B2 SAE Level 2 and/or Level 3
Driver initiated transition demand and system reaction
Hands-off detection versus Start of Lane Change Manoeuvre
Introduction: Modifications to UN R131 AEBS for Heavy Vehicles
Modular Vehicle Combinations Informal Working Group (MVC IWG)
Alternative Approach to UN R13 Type-IIA for Battery Electric Vehicles
Status of the Informal Working Group on ACSF
Automated Lane Keeping Systems
Presentation transcript:

Hands-off detection warning time for B1-systems 31.08.2016 Submitted by the experts of OICA Informal Document: ACSF-08-09 Hands-off detection warning time for B1-systems 31.08.2016 International Organization of Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Organisation Internationale des Constructeurs d'Automobiles

Hands-off detection warning time for B1-systems Following issues should be considered: Technology neutrality Steering input are difficult to measure/identify on road segments in very good conditions at low speeds if drivers will have a relaxed attitude on holding the steering wheel The balance for the detection: „Hands-off-the steering wheel“ interpreted as „hands-on“ => avoiding due to safety aspects „Hands-on-the-steering-wheel“ interpreted as „hands-off“. => avoiding to attain a high acceptance of the systems

Hands-off detection warning time for B1-systems Brown Line: Summary of the detected “hands-on” situations by time sequence percent of hands-on detection in x seconds (%) Vset = 85 km/h highway with good surface and low traffic situation Tractor-trailer combination (s)

Hands-off detection warning time for B1-systems Brown Line: Summary of the detected “hands-on” situations by time sequence percent of hands-on detection in x seconds (%) 90% Vset = 35 km/h highway with good surface and high traffic situation (stop-and-go) Tractor-trailer combination (s)

Time span until the next detection Hands-off detection warning time for B1-systems positive „hands-on“ detection proportion of all routes Proportion (%) All roads ORK: Oval round course (long, straight road in high quality) DLK: Endurance course (long, straight road with small part of curves, average quality) Time span until the next detection

Time span until the next detection Hands-off detection warning time for B1-systems positive „hands-on“ detection proportion on straight routes Proportion (%) ORK: Oval round course (long, straight road in high quality) DLK: Endurance course (long, straight road with small part of curves, average quality) Time span until the next detection

Time span until the next detection Hands-off detection warning time for B1-systems positive „hands-on“ detection proportion on curves Proportion (%) ORK: Oval round course (long, straight road in high quality) DLK: Endurance course (long, straight road with small part of curves, average quality) Time span until the next detection

Conclusions Summary of technical rationales: 110s at 35 km/h gives the same reliability of the hands-off detection as 30s at 85km/h (slides 3 & 4) The distribution of timespan between two positive hands-on detection is very much influenced by the profile of the road: on a straight road: ~57% of measured timespan are below 10s in curves: ~90% of measured timespan are below 10s Recommendation: A detection time higher than 30s is recommended at lower speed, in order to avoid too frequent false warnings, leading to low driver acceptance, while preserving the same level of safety

Backup