1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Document Title Justification for an acceleration greater than 1.0 m/s² under document GRRF-82-08 (CSF)
Reference Number GRRF-82-14
Date
18 Sep 2016
Summary In order to enhance the safety of B1 corrective steering functions (by reducing the probability of driver over-reliance and misunderstanding of system limitations), OICA proposes a minimum value of 0.8 m/s2 for maximum lateral acceleration in place of the draft 1 m/s2 for the speed range between 100-130 km/h for M1 and N1 vehicles. OICA believes that this would ensure that a system is capable under all conditions of generating the required minimum acceleration.
Source(s) OICA
Rulemaking Area(s) UN R79 Steering Equipment
Proposal Status Superseded
Meeting(s)
Downloads
UNECE server .pdf format .doc format
Excerpts from session reports related to this document
GRRF | Session 82 | 20-23 Sep 2016

53. The expert from Germany introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2016/45, containing four options as possible ways forward to progress on ACSF. The Secretary of the IWG on Automatically Commanded Steering Function (ACSF) gave a presentation reporting on the progress made by the group (GRRF-82-17). He reported on definitions proposed for ACSF of Categories A to E, clarifications proposed for Corrective Steering Functions (CSF) and new provisions proposed for RCP. GRRF acknowledged the status report received and agreed to work on an amendment to Option 4 as proposed by GRRF-82-12. The proposal for Option 4 received several comments in GRRF-82-08, GRRF-82-09, GRRF-82-14, GRRF-82-15, GRRF-82-18, GRRF-82-19 and GRRF-82-26.

54. The expert from Sweden commented on GRRF-82-14 informing that road construction standards would define design requirements (inclination profile) leading to the road side forces corresponding to 1 m/s2 and that this value was even higher on roads designed for low speed. GRRF adopted the value 0.8 m/2 proposed in this document for ACSF of categories A and B1 only, as a strict minimum, noting that it was taking account of a 0.2 m/2 measurement uncertainty and that the value 0.8 m/2 would de facto impose manufacturers to design systems according to a higher value in practice.