1. Automated Driving: Challenges in the Light of Human Actions
Danilo da Costa Ribeiro, Pierre Blüher,
Systems & Technology, Continental Chassis & Safety Division
Chassis & Safety

2. Complexity Increase A Glimpse in History
2 November 2018
D. da Costa Ribeiro, P. Blüher © Continental AG

3. Growing Challenges A Glimpse in History
System Complexity
Driver Awareness
Assumption in a conventional car:
There is always a licensed driver to cope
with some unexpected scenario
New Hazards
2 November 2018
D. da Costa Ribeiro, P. Blüher © Continental AG

4. Human Interface Highly Automated Vehicles
2 Main Goals
Understand the new role
New Interfaces Assessment
2 November 2018
D. da Costa Ribeiro, P. Blüher © Continental AG

5. Future Mobility Role of the Driver vs. Role of the System
Privately owned
Highly Automated Car incl. Assisted Functions
Public shared
Driverless Car →
Technical check before/while driving (low tire pressure, visual damages, tread depth, …)
Manual Driving →
Automated Driving → (within use cases)
→ (within use cases)
Secure control of technical operation (accelerating / braking / steering)
Manual Driving →
Automated Driving → (within use cases) →
Evaluate weather/road condition (dry, wet, snow, ice, wind)
2 November 2018
D. da Costa Ribeiro, P. Blüher © Continental AG

6. Automated Driving Objectives and Challenges
Social Acceptance of Residual Risks
More
Comfort
Safety
Efficiency
“Flawless” Perception
“Flawless” Decision Making
Safe Driver Interaction
Safe & Secure Operation & Degradation
Verify & Validate
2 November 2018
D. da Costa Ribeiro, P. Blüher © Continental AG

7. Automated Driving Safety Objectives
Challenges
Social Acceptance of Residual Risks
More
Comfort
Safety
Efficiency
“Flawless” Perception
“Flawless” Decision Making
Safe Driver Interaction
Safe & Secure Operation & Degradation
Verify & Validate !
No Matter if
Partially / Highly / Fully
Automated Driving
Silent Testing
≥ 210 million
kilometers*
Degradation tests
Simulation
1st BASIC SAFETY OBJECTIVE
No life-threatening hazards in ABSENCE of failure
2nd BASIC SAFETY OBJECTIVE
No life-threatening hazards in presence of single failure
* Wachenfeld, W., Winner, H., Auswirkungen des autonomen Fahrens auf das Fahrzeugkonzept, Autonomes Fahren, Springer Verlag 2015
2 November 2018
D. da Costa Ribeiro, P. Blüher © Continental AG

8. Understand the New Role
Human Factors?
What are the new roles
to be performed by the vehicle?
To increase safety we need to understand
the positive and improving points
of the human driver
2 November 2018
D. da Costa Ribeiro, P. Blüher © Continental AG

9. Understand the New Role: Be Attentive

10. Understand the New Role: Drive Responsibly

11. Understand the New Role: Behave Defensively

12. Human-Machine Interface: Assisting

13. Human-Machine Interface: Adaptive & Intuitive

14. Human-Machine Interface: Focused

15. Human Factors Issues Power Window Switches
1.5 deaths per year ( )*
5 deaths in 1998*
*Source: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
2 November 2018
NHTSA:
/federal-motor-vehicle-safety-standards-power- operated-window-partition-and-roof-panel-systems
D. da Costa Ribeiro, P. Blüher © Continental AG

16. Human Factors Issues Seat Belts
Many people do not
use the seat belt.
Effect:
People are not protected by passive safety systems.
Optical and acoustical
warning
Cause:
► Convenience
► Comfort
Can we treat the Cause, instead of the effects?
► Robust Product
2 November 2018
D. da Costa Ribeiro, P. Blüher © Continental AG

17. Automated Driving Example Occupant Protection in a Passenger Vehicle
Systems ?
New flexibility requires adapted passive safety solutions
2 November 2018
D. da Costa Ribeiro, P. Blüher © Continental AG

18. New flexibility requires adapted passive safety solutions
Automated Driving Example Occupant Protection in a Driverless People Mover
Sitting?
Standing?
Younger?
Older?
Disabled?
Occupant
Monitoring
Restraint Systems
Seatbelt
Airbag
New flexibility requires adapted passive safety solutions
2 November 2018
D. da Costa Ribeiro, P. Blüher © Continental AG

19. System-Theoretic Process Analysis (STPA)
Unsafe Control Actions
Causal Factors
Safety Constraints
Safety Requirements
2 November 2018
D. da Costa Ribeiro, P. Blüher © Continental AG

20. Analysis Conclusion Highly Automated Vehicles
System-Theoretic Process Analysis (STPA)
Top-down
Early Phase
Suitable for complex systems
Less dependent of a very experienced analyst
Hazard and Operability (HAZOP)
Bottom-up
Later Phase
Not very suitable for complex systems
Dependent of one very experienced analyst
In a brand new scenario, there is no one experienced.
2 November 2018
D. da Costa Ribeiro, P. Blüher © Continental AG

21. Contact
System Safety Engineer Danilo da Costa Ribeiro C S&T Systems Engineering Phone: +49 (69)
Senior Expert Safety Engineering for Automated Driving Pierre Blüher C S&T Systems Engineering Phone: +49 (69)
2 November 2018
D. da Costa Ribeiro, P. Blüher © Continental AG

22. Thank you for your attention! 2 November 2018
D. da Costa Ribeiro, P. Blüher © Continental AG

23. SensePlanAct 2 November 2018
D. da Costa Rubeiro, P. Blüher © Continental AG