Summary of discussions held among interested parties in between the 2nd and 3rd ADAS task force sessions.

OICA/CLEPA Input to the TF ADAS special session dedicated to RMF.

Proposal for an alternative method to the actuation of the remote-control device for the use of RCP based on document GRVA-08-28.

Proposal to amend the provisions of ACSF of Category C with the main aim to include a truck – trailer data transmission.

Proposal to clarify the continuous support provided by the Automatically Commanded Steering Function of Category B1 after reaching its boundary conditions.

Proposal to exempt CSF and ESC from prohibition on use of Advanced Driver Assistance Steering Systems while an ADS feature is active.

Text from the European Association of Automotive Suppliers (CLEPA) and from the International Organization of Motor Vehicle Manufacturers (OICA) to align the braking performance requirements for M1 vehicles in Annex 3 of UN R79 with those of UN R13-H (light vehicle braking).

Text prepared by the International Organization of Motor Vehicle Manufacturers (OICA) in order to introduce the concept of “revision of approvals” into regulations under GRRF responsibility.

Several vehicle control regulations refer to compliance with UN Regulation No. 10 on electromagnetic compatibility. The proposal would revise these references to focus only on the technical (thus excluding administrative) requirements since some countries do not apply UN R10.

OICA positions opposed to the Japanese proposal for new regulations to govern lane-keeping assist systems and parking assist system, arguing that such systems are already covered under UN Regulation 79.

OICA comments on the CLCCR proposal to remove restrictions in UN R76 on the use of energy from a towing vehicle by its trailer.

OICA comments on Japan’s proposal and supporting justification for a new regulation on lane-keeping assistance systems (documents GRRF-74-40 and GRRF-74-41).

Change to the proposed text pursuant to agreement within the “LKAS Small Drafting Group” concerning the “means of detecting that the driver is likely to be no longer in primary control of the steering system” and related driver warning method(s).

Proposal to clarify the draft text to align UN R79 with UN R13-H concerning cases where the braking and steering systems have the same energy source. This proposal would clarify and reaffirm that where there is “a failure in the energy supply, the steering system shall have priority”.

Proposal, consolidating document GRRF-82-08 with the proposed test procedures, revising “option 4” as presented in the proposal introduce technical requirements for Corrective Steering Functions under UN R79 (document GRRF/2016/45). Option 4 proposes to amend the definition of corrective steering functions and to include technical requirements for LKAS as an ASCF of Category B1. The proposal includes:

• Clarification of Corrective steering function (CSF) incl. defining of new requirements;
• Establishment of new categories for automatically commanded steering function (ACSF): Categories A, B1, B2, C, D and E;
• Wording for requirements of Category A (incl. remote parking RCP), and Category B1.

During its 8th meeting (Stockholm), the ACSF informal group decided that all functions to “assist the avoidance of a collision” would be excluded from the definition of “Corrective Steering Function”. ACSF decided to establish a new definition for “Emergency Steering Functions (ESF)” with specific requirements. The intention was to draft this definition during a second phase effort through which requirements for ACSF categories beyond B1 will be established. In order to enable the approval of ESF systems critical to road safety, OICA has prepared this proposal for an ESF definition and simple requirements based upon provisions for Complex Electronics (CEL) in Annex 6. A footnote has also been added to define the specific conditions for the approval of these systems, until uniform provisions are defined by the ACSF informal group.

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.

Proposed changes to the draft amendments to UN R79 concerning ACSF B1 systems. The proposed new wording for the triggering condition of the warning (“any front tyre of the vehicle is crossing the lane marking”) is technically more specific than the original (“the vehicle is going to leave the lane”). The use of a haptic signal as an alternative to the acoustic signal achieves the goal pursued by Germany. This proposal is consistent with the warning strategy of AEBS specified in UN R131. In the case of M2 M3 N2 N3 vehicle categories, it is proposed to take as a base the requirements specified in UN R130 LDWS regulation, which achieves the goal.

OICA comments and questions regarding the EC proposal to amend the UN R79 annex on complex electronic systems to require auditing of methodologies used to ensure system safety at both concept and system level.

OICA request for confirmation that:

• the provisions for CSF, ACSF A and ACSF B1 will be introduced via a new supplement 06 to the current series of amendments to UN R79;
• the vehicles approved prior to the introduction of the new supplement will not be required to comply with it, even in case of an extension.

This proposal supplements proposal GRRF/2017/23 which amends UN R13, R13H and R140, to allow the use of the ESC tell-tale to indicate the intervention on the steering angle of one or more wheels for the purpose of vehicle stability. The intention allow design options that avoid two optical warning signals (ESC flashing + constant CSF) during an ESC intervention.

Draft proposal to enable the approval of automated emergency steering systems intended to avoid or mitigate collisions. The proposal based on document ACSF-14-07 submitted by OICA and CLEPA which was discussed during the 14th meeting of the ACSF informal group. The square brackets indicates paragraphs which are still under discussion in the informal group.

Set of diagrams illustrating the phases and timing of the test procedure for an automated lane-change maneuver as envisioned by the draft amendment to introduce Category C¹ ACSF into UN R79. These figures include the vehicle under test and approaching motorcycle speeds and distances under the lane-change phases, including timing and duration of each phase.

Proposal to cease approvals under the 02 series of amendments from September 2020 in order to allow manufacturers adequate time to adapt to the new requirements;

• ESF, ACSF C and unexpectedly ACSF B1 (despite originally assumed to be compatible with ACSF C new requirements),
• new CEL assessment (documentation, tests…) whose scope is also extended to all non-complex electronic systems under series 03.

Regarding the application to “All Types” (e.g. for new registration), industry proposes to leave unchanged the existing vehicles on the market which are approved on the base of national of regional exemptions by Contracting Parties signatories of the UN R79 regulation, given the heavy technical impacts on ACSF C (sensor range…) which are indirectly affecting ACSF B1 systems that were initially assumed to be compatible with cat. C (e.g. 3s hands-off detection instead of 15s, lane centering prior to the lateral movement towards the marking etc.), and the add-on of requirements restricting design possibilities without clear safety benefits (e.g. the use of direction indicators to suppress the procedure).

Presentation concerning the introduction of provisions for emergency steering functions.

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 for collective amendments of amendments to Regulations Nos. 13 (Heavy vehicle braking), 13-H (Brakes of M1 and N1 vehicles), 79 (Steering equipment) and 89 (Speed limitation devices) and the new Regulations on LDWS and AEBS to clarify the references to Regulation No. 10 into the UN Regulations mentioned above.

Text prepared by the International Organization of Motor Vehicle Manufacturers (OICA) to introduce the concept of “revision of approvals” into the UN Regulations under GRRF responsibility in order to align the UN Regulations with the EU Whole Vehicle Type Approval Directive 2007/46/EC in order to ease the administrative burden for both manufacturers and approval administrations regarding the extension of existing approvals.