1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Document Title General Safety Regulation: ACEA discussion paper
Reference Number AEBS/LDWS-01-11
Date
28 Jul 2009
Source(s) ACEA
Rulemaking Area(s) UN R131 Advanced Emergency Braking
Meeting(s)
Downloads
UNECE server .pdf format
Excerpts from session reports related to this document
AEBS/LDWS | Session 1 | 25-26 Jun 2009

Discussions:
ACEA presented AEBS-LDWS-01-11
o Sensing technology: most equipments are based on video systems, others are infra-red systems
o Limit is the lane marking
o Warning: usually acoustic and visual. Sometimes haptic (steering wheel or seat vibration)
o After-sale: usually exists for trucks, in USA
o The driver can always switch the system off and on

→ Feedback from the field:
o Daimler: lot of feedback, usually the user switches off the system when too many alarms. LDWS is useful on highways only. This is the reason for a minimal speed (60 km/h)
o MAN: bad feedback in Italy because of the joints on the street
o IVECO: raised the minimum speed from 60km/h to 65km/h. The users claim for 70km/h
o Scania: same input as IVECO
o JAMA:
• 2 manufacturers out of 4 have a similar experience as Daimler, MAN and IVECO
• the driver can adjust the warning delay with a dial
• Minimum speed is 60 km/h

o PSA: presented document WP29-135-22
• Sensor technology: Infra-red is cheaper and more robust (bad weather) than video sensors
HMI: acoustic warning followed by vibrations in the seat
• Minimum speed on passenger car in current production: 80km/h
• Automatic reset at each ignition

GRRF-S08-02 presented by Dr. Gail
o Japan:
• appropriate to consider content of ISO. However challenges a direct reference to the standard in the regulation
• Minimum speed and latest distance for warning: need to consider carefully the appropriate figures
• As for AEBS: supports introduction into a new regulation, as for any new technology. Would keep the freedom for the Contracting Parties

→ Exchange of views:
o Reference to ISO 17361:2007:
• Simple reference to the standard (supported by D)
• Copy/paste of the standard
• Copy/paste of the interesting parts of the standard (supported by J and OICA)

o Latest warning:
• the existence of a technology does not force us to mandate it, need to take the reality into account
• distance vs. time
• need for some hysteresis in activation/de-activation
• mandatory value vs. choice of the manufacturer.

o Hierarchy of systems (AEBS/LDWS/others):
• currently under the responsibility of the vehicle manufacturer.
ISO 17361:2007 foresees suppression of warning (see item 4.4.(i))

Conclusion: Informal group to take this information into account when making decisions