Proposal to introduce new text concerning activation: “Notwithstanding the activation criteria above and following the activation request at any type of road by a deliberate action with the same means as for ACSF of Category B1, the ACSF of Category C may turn automatically to standby mode when entering a type of road as described above.”

70. GRVA agreed, following the recommendation of the TF on ADAS, to keep ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/9 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/10 on its agenda for the January 2023 session.

71. The expert from OICA introduced GRVA-14-25, detailing an amendment proposal to the provisions on the activation of Automatically Commanded Steering Function of Category C to reduce the driver’s confusion.

72. The expert from Japan supported the proposal. The expert from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland supported the intention of the proposal and suggested to review the text proposed.

73. The expert from Germany was not in favour of GRVA-14-25. He suggested to address this concern via a better human-machine interface requirement.

74. The expert from OICA presented GRVA-14-24/Rev.1, aimed at addressing the comment from the expert from Germany. The expert from Germany welcomed the modifications proposed but still had concerns with the wording of paragraph 5.6.4.5. because it would introduce a weak requirement, difficult to verify. GRVA agreed in principle with the aim of the proposal but required an improved wording for consideration at its January 2023 session.

70. GRVA agreed, following the recommendation of the TF on ADAS, to keep ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/9 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/10 on its agenda for the January 2023 session.

71. The expert from OICA introduced GRVA-14-25, detailing an amendment proposal to the provisions on the activation of Automatically Commanded Steering Function of Category C to reduce the driver’s confusion.

72. The expert from Japan supported the proposal. The expert from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland supported the intention of the proposal and suggested to review the text proposed.

73. The expert from Germany was not in favour of GRVA-14-25. He suggested to address this concern via a better human-machine interface requirement.

74. The expert from OICA presented GRVA-14-24/Rev.1, aimed at addressing the comment from the expert from Germany. The expert from Germany welcomed the modifications proposed but still had concerns with the wording of paragraph 5.6.4.5. because it would introduce a weak requirement, difficult to verify. GRVA agreed in principle with the aim of the proposal but required an improved wording for consideration at its January 2023 session.

Proposal to

1. Align lane-centering provisions with principles applied to UN R157 (ALKS)
2. Permit Category C ACSF to remain in stand-by during temporary roadway transitions
3. Clarify overriding provision (para. 5.6.4.3) reference to stand-by mode
4. Introduce a tolerance factor for “critical situation” lane changes
5. clarification to test conditions
6. Align direction indicator deactivation under a pass conditions with previously adopted provisions.

49. The expert from OICA introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/9 as amended by GRVA-09-30. She announced that the amendment to the tolerance in square bracket was withdrawn. GRVA adopted the proposal (without the amendment to the tolerance in para. 5.6.4.7.) and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 for consideration and vote at their June 2021 sessions.

72. GRVA noted that the review of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/9, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/10 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/11 by the Task Force on ADAS was still ongoing. The expert from AVERE withdrew ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2021/7.

72. GRVA agreed to keep ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/9 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/10 on the agenda for the September 2022 session.

70. GRVA agreed, following the recommendation of the TF on ADAS, to keep ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/9 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/10 on its agenda for the January 2023 session.

71. The expert from OICA introduced GRVA-14-25, detailing an amendment proposal to the provisions on the activation of Automatically Commanded Steering Function of Category C to reduce the driver’s confusion.

72. The expert from Japan supported the proposal. The expert from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland supported the intention of the proposal and suggested to review the text proposed.

73. The expert from Germany was not in favour of GRVA-14-25. He suggested to address this concern via a better human-machine interface requirement.

74. The expert from OICA presented GRVA-14-24/Rev.1, aimed at addressing the comment from the expert from Germany. The expert from Germany welcomed the modifications proposed but still had concerns with the wording of paragraph 5.6.4.5. because it would introduce a weak requirement, difficult to verify. GRVA agreed in principle with the aim of the proposal but required an improved wording for consideration at its January 2023 session.

Proposal to allow up to seven seconds to start and perform a lane change.

50. The expert from AVERE introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/10 proposing revised amendments to the ACSF of Category C provisions (time range during which the lane change manoeuvre is initiated) in UN Regulation No. 79. The experts from UK, European Commissions and Japan supported the proposal. The expert from Korea supported the proposal and indicated that a longer time than the one proposed would be preferable. The expert from the Netherlands opposed to the proposal for the same reasons as the one expressed in September 2020. The expert from Norway also opposed to the proposal. He wondered about the possible benefits of stretching the limits. The expert from France supported the proposal but pointed out inconsistencies in the drawing compared to the provisions in the text. The expert from OICA supported the proposal. The expert from AVERE provided answers to the statements and questions raised. The Chair asked if all doubts were cleared. The experts from the Netherlands, Sweden, Germany and Finland still had reservations to the proposal but agreed that it could be further discussed at a task force meeting.

72. GRVA noted that the review of ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/9, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/10 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/11 by the Task Force on ADAS was still ongoing. The expert from AVERE withdrew ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2021/7.

72. GRVA agreed to keep ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/9 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/10 on the agenda for the September 2022 session.

70. GRVA agreed, following the recommendation of the TF on ADAS, to keep ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/9 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2021/10 on its agenda for the January 2023 session.

71. The expert from OICA introduced GRVA-14-25, detailing an amendment proposal to the provisions on the activation of Automatically Commanded Steering Function of Category C to reduce the driver’s confusion.

72. The expert from Japan supported the proposal. The expert from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland supported the intention of the proposal and suggested to review the text proposed.

73. The expert from Germany was not in favour of GRVA-14-25. He suggested to address this concern via a better human-machine interface requirement.

74. The expert from OICA presented GRVA-14-24/Rev.1, aimed at addressing the comment from the expert from Germany. The expert from Germany welcomed the modifications proposed but still had concerns with the wording of paragraph 5.6.4.5. because it would introduce a weak requirement, difficult to verify. GRVA agreed in principle with the aim of the proposal but required an improved wording for consideration at its January 2023 session.