Proposal to clarify requirements of the optical signal for a CSF intervention to ensure sufficient flashing tell-tale visibility for the driver, to specify the duration of such ACSF signals, to ensure a safe hierarchy of signals (e.g., ESF over CSF) by priority, to clarify that deactivation when departing an ODD means the “off mode”, and to add a cross-reference pointing to paragraphs that define cases of manual and automatic deactivation.

Proposal, based on document GRRF-86-13, to resolve measurement concerns in the test requirements for ACSF of Category B1 and C. The proposal addresses issues identified in Annex 8, improves reproducibility and robustness of the procedures, fills in gaps in the test cases, and provides additional details on measuring equipment and test execution.

Proposal to introduce provisions for the approval of Remote Control Manoeuvring (RCM) systems.

Proposal to clarify the assessments to be conducted by a technical service for complex electronic systems, particularly with regard to advanced driver assistance systems. The proposal includes a new definition to ensure the assessment includes system response to changes in the ambient and/or operating conditions, provisions to ensure that any disabled functions intended for use on a production vehicle are declared and assessed, and a footnote to clarify that the assessment must be reviewed and signed by the same type approval authority as the one responsible for issuing the approval to UN R79.

This text represents a first draft of “certification-neutral” technical requirements for a “Data Storage System for Automated Driving”, as presented by OICA in March 2018 ITS/AD session n°14.

This document aims at providing a better understanding of possible operational restrictions and capacity to safely transfer control back to the driver of a Category B2 ACSF (L3 Automated Lane-Keeping System). It contains examples of different possible detection and coping strategies.

Draft proposal with a view towards a possible decision to establish SAE Level 3 automatically commanded steering functions (ACSF) as a stand-alone regulation outside UN R79 on steering systems. This documents is also available with revision tracking in portable document format and in word document format.

GRVA-1 agreed to reconsider based upon a formal document at GRVA-2 taking into account particularly concerns over the impact of the filtering change on tolerances and interpretation of results.

Proposal for an editorial correction to paragraph 2.4.15.

Changes to the proposal for amendments to the requirements for Automatically Commanded Steering Functions (ACSF) of Category C, introducing specific provisions for the use of a lane change function with a two-step Human Machine Interface (HMI).

At its 86th meeting, GRRF recommended to cluster subjects together and form a number of task forces to deal with different issues related to the ACSF work. One task force was devoted to Periodic Technical Inspection (PTI).

Proposal to clarify that M₁ and N₁ not approved as category G may be equipped with Remote Controlled Maneuvering systems provided they meet the requirements to be classified as such.

This document presents the output of an informal group of experts reviewing the content of Annex 6 on complex electronic systems. Its purpose is to update Annex 6 to ensure its suitability when used in the assessment of steering systems featuring advances in automation.

Updated goals and objectives of the Automatically Commanded Steering Functions expert group based upon the work to date, including the possibility to establish requirements for automated lane-keeping functions as a new UN Regulation. The previous terms of reference focused only on amendments to UN R79.

ACSF B2 – Industry Concept for

• Driver Availibility Recognition
• Transition Demand
• Minimum Risk Manoeuvre
• Emergency Manoeuvre

Korea input regarding criteria for ensuring automated vehicles maintain a safe following distance from preceding vehicles as a function of time in seconds.

UN R79 ACSF informal group working paper.

Proposal for requirements for systems able to keep the vehicle in the lane without any driver command on the steering control (B2).

Proposal to permit the limited use (in non-total control use-cases) of external signals to improve the overall reliability and safety of ACSF functions.

Proposal to introduce provisions in UN Regulation No. 79 (Steering equipment) for the approval of Remote Control Manoeuvring (RCM) systems.

Proposal for amendments to the requirements for Automatically Commanded Steering Functions (ACSF) of Category C, introducing specific provisions for the use of a lane change function with a two-step Human Machine Interface (HMI).

OICA and CLEPA comments on the submission from Germany (ACSF-18-04) proposing requirements for Category B2 ACSF related to the General System Classification / Human Driver Priority / Information to the Driver.

Comments on document ACSF-18-03.

Input on provisions for dynamic driving tasks, headway control, and minimal risk manoeuvres.

Comments and proposed changes to the draft text with regard to the general system classification, human driver priority, and information to the driver provisions.

Initial proposal for “external” (roadway, speed, etc.) and “internal” (driver availability recognition, data recording, transition request protocols, etc.) for Category B2 ACSF (Level 3 lane keeping systems).

Initial draft proposal towards the definition of a “General Classification System” to replace the “Determination of the acceptable operational domain". The classification system would allow regulators to specify specific conditions under which a given system operates and thereby more clearly define the regulatory requirements. For example, a system defined as “highway” might require safe operation on roadways equipped with a physical separation that divides the traffic moving in opposite directions and which have at least two lanes in the direction the vehicles are driving. Moreover, since such roadways are prohibited to cyclists and pedestrians, a system classified as “highway” would not require pedestrian or cyclist detection (at least not to the degree that an urban system would). The proposal envisions a Class I, II, III, … nomenclature.

Draft proposal to add provisions for 2-step HMI for Cat. C ACSF systems while keeping the main performance of the system e.g. rear sensor range, critical situations, minimum distance and minimum operating speed, etc.

Document resulting from the web conference held on 22 March 2018. This document lays out the essential considerations in developing lane-keeping systems operating under Level 3 automation (driver as back-up to automated system).

Changes and notes made to the ACSF informal group status report as part of the GRRF discussion on how to deliver approval requirements for ACSF B2 (lane-keeping at Level 3 automation) within the prescribed mandate of the group. The ACSF group is expect to deliver a draft text within the next nine months.

Norwegian request for GRRF comments on protection of steering gear and attachment to heavy vehicle frames. In a collision in Norway, the steering gear detached from the vehicle frame following a frontal collision such that the driver could no longer control the vehicle. Norway seeks input on strengthening the protection of steering gear in order to avoid such a situation.

Proposal of amendments to the proposal to introduce provisions for the approval of Remote Control Manoeuvring (RCM) systems, defined as driver-actuated systems on off-road vehicles used for navigating exceptionally difficult terrain. OICA seeks to cover remote control applications for low speed manoeuvring not addressed in the original UK proposal.

Proposal from Germany and the Republic of Korea to resolve measurement concerns in the test requirements for ACSF of Category B1 and C. The proposal addresses issues identified in Annex 8, improves reproducibility and robustness of the procedures, fills in gaps in the test cases, and provides additional details on measuring equipment and test execution.

Draft proposal for automated lane-changes systems including maneuver initiation (activation of direction indicator) and a second deliberate action of the driver (two-step HMI).

Discussion presentation especially concerning the regulation of lane-keeping systems corresponding to SAE Level 3 automation criteria (vehicle under system control with human driver as fallback).

OICA input regarding variations in driver responses to system requests to take over control of the vehicle and the implications for system transition requirements.

Draft proposal from OICA and CLEPA to include provisions for lane-change systems involving a second deliberate action of the driver to initiate a system-assisted lane change, including blind spot detection to avoid collisions. OICA and CLEPA wish to have provisions for such Category C2 systems included in UN R79.

Vehicle and supplier industry perspectives on addressing lane-keeping and lane-change systems within the context of Level 3 and higher automation. Current automated steering provisions adopted under UN R79 implicitly refer to Level 2 automation where the driver is required to maintain constant engagement whereas higher levels of automation would enable the driver to engage in secondary tasks.

OICA discussion of lane-keeping systems (ACSF B2) in terms of the level of automation where Level 2 requires constant driver supervision of the system and engagement with the vehicle operating environment and Level 3 places the operation of the vehicle entirely under the control of the automated system with the human driver as a fallback option in the event the system detects conditions beyond its operational boundaries. OICA is concerned to ensure that B2 systems will be permitted under both levels of automation.

OICA proposal concerning specifications for Category C2 automated steering systems where a vehicle system assists the driver in effecting a lane change after the driver activates the turn signal and initiates the maneuver through a second deliberate action (under C1, the driver activates the turn signal and automated lane-change system to effect the maneuver automatically).

Proposal to introduce provisions for driver-initiated automated lane-change systems (Category C ASCF) and for automated emergency steering functions (ESF). This proposal includes amendments the annex on complex electronic systems (Annex 6), in particular, to require auditing of the methodologies used to ensure system safety at both concept and system level. The concept level specifically requires consideration of interaction with other vehicle systems.

Proposal to allow the use of the flashing electronic stability control (ESC) tell-tale to indicate the intervention of a corrective steering function (CSF) in cases where the CSF is controlled by the ESC (or other vehicle stability function) system. Outside such cases, CSF interventions are indicated by a continuous optical signal displayed for the duration of the intervention.