Industry comments on the draft conceptual framework and principles for automated vehicles.

Input on car-to-bicycle, false reaction avoidance, temporary deactivation provisions.

Text submitted by the expert from CLEPA to include state-of-art electro-mechanical braking systems

Proposal for provisions concerning:

• B1 lane centering
• ACSF activation conditions
• Driver override
• Clarification of ACSF standby-mode
• Clarification of “ready-to-intervene"
• Indication to the driver in case of suppression
• Clarification of suppression criteria
• Sensor test before activation.

The proposal was prepared by the expert from the European Association of Automotive Suppliers (CLEPA) to clarify aspects the current procedure, formalises the assessment practice and aims to improve the transparency and consistency of Type Approval testing results.

Proposals to clarify the draft text.

Proposals to clarify provisions for collision avoidance in a cut-in scenario, collision avoidance with regard to crossing pedestrians, on “other activities than driving”, and on “permanent visibility” of the means for the driver to activate and deactivate the system.

Commented version of the working draft amendments. Revised to include additional AEBS stakeholder comments.

Draft proposal for a new UN Regulation on uniform provisions concerning the approval of motor vehicles with regard to the Moving Off Information System for the Detection of Pedestrians and Cyclists (GRSG/2020/5).

Proposal to amend the test procedures with regard to N₂ and M₂ vehicles.

Proposal for a new UN Regulation on uniform provisions concerning the approval of motor vehicles with regard to the Moving Off Information System for the Detection of Pedestrians and Cyclists.

Proposal to change PBC from 0.9 to 1.0, indicate the reference tyre, note the lighting conditions, and allow for deviating test conditions at the manufacturer’s discretion and with the agreement of the Technical Service under the car-to-bicycle test provisions.

Proposal to introduce requirements for the type approval of Electro-Mechanical Braking (EMB) systems.

Proposal to improve the uniformity of requirements for stop lamp illumination with regard to various types of braking systems, including those of electric vehicles.

Proposals for “tasks and deliverables” with regard to enhanced child restraint systems and alternative seating configurations enabled by automated driving.

Proposal to clarify aspects of document GRSP/2020/03, which is based on documents GRSP-66-11 (Digital User Guide) and GRSP-66-12 (Test Report Template) introduced during the 66th GRSP session. The proposed amendments are based on feedback received from stakeholders.

Proposal for amendments to the injury assessment criteria for frontal and rear impact to specify limit values for tension force and flexion moment measured in the upper neck of the Q0, Q1 and Q1.5 dummies.

Consolidated proposal based on document GRSP/2020/3 to clarify aspects the current procedure, formalize the assessment practice and improve the transparency and consistency of Type Approval testing results. The document incorporates proposals for Digital User Guide and Test Report Template pursuant to discussions on document GRSP-67-16.

Proposal for an alternative to ensure user attentiveness when activating a remote-controlled parking system.

Proposal to modify the following elements:

1. paragraph 5.6.4.2.3., delete “temporarily”
2. paragraph 5.6.4.5.2.1., replace “actually” by “anticipated to be”
3. paragraph 5.6.4.6.6., B1 shall resume “in a timely manner”
4. paragraph 5.6.4.6.8.1., clarify the suppression criteria
5. paragraph 5.6.4.7., define distance tolerances for lane-change critical distances
6. Annex 8, Paragraph 2., Carry over the language already adopted for ACSF B1: “At the manufacturer’s discretion and with the agreement of the Technical Service, a lane with a width of less than 3.5 m may be used, if the correct function of the system on roads with wider lanes can be demonstrated.” and allow for lower temperature and wet surface test conditions, and
7. Annex 8, Paragraph 3.5.1.2. (j), amend the pass condition with regard to direction indicator deactivation.

Consolidated proposal incorporating comments from OICA/CLEPA, CITA, Germany, and AVERE (including most recent proposal to the 7th GRVA session).

Proposal to clarify the text with regard to:

1. paragraph 2.6., Definition of an imminent collision
2. paragraphs 5.1.9 and 7.1.4., Lifetime of the system
3. paragraph 5.2.3.3., Traffic Rules and Safety Distance to the front
4. paragraph 5.2.5.2. – “anticipated TTC” in cut-in scenario
5. paragraph 6.2.5.1., Deactivation by input to driving controls
6. paragraph 6.2.6., Transition to assisted driving
7. paragraph 6.4.4., Examples of information to the driver
8. Annex 5 – Tests
   • Section 5.1. contains physical tests that have to be performed at the time of type approval
   • Section 5.2. aims to confirm at the time of type approval, that the system complies with the corresponding provisions of the main text. This confirmation shall be done by at least one physical test per provision, if possible due to the nature of the provision, and may be supported by further evidence.
   • Section 5.3. is a collection of additional scenarios, that the ALKS could encounter. Whether they are relevant to the ALKS depends on its ODD. So either the manufacturer explains why his system will not need to handle these scenarios, or has to explain the behaviour of the ALKS.
   • larify the content of par. 5.2. by rewording the provisions similar to that of the core text.

This document proposes a new 04 series of amendments to Regulation 79 with regard to a system that aims at bringing the vehicle to a safe stop in case of driver unavailability, defining a “risk mitigation function”.

Proposal to permit manoeuvring assistance in defined low speed driving situations to reduce damages and injuries.

Proposal to address risks related to activities other than driving and to clarify that a declaration of a maximum operational speed that exceeds 60 km/h is possible, but not required.

Proposal to amend the proposal from Germany regarding lane-change functionality:

1. paragraph 5.2.1. – lane keeping
2. paragraph 5.2.6.1. – risk to safety of the vehicle occupants and other road users
3. paragraphs 5.2.6.2. and 5.2.6.3. – preconditions for a lane change procedure
4. paragraph 5.2.6.5. – timing of a lane change maneuver
5. paragraph 5.2.6.6. and its sub-paragraphs – criticality of a lane change maneuver
6. paragraph 7.1.3. – rear detection range
7. Annex 5. – test cases for rear detection range, lane change.

The intention of the proposed amendment is to clarify the existing text on continued support of an ACSF B1 if the boundary conditions are exceeded. It clarifies that under certain circumstances, e.g. if there are no lane markings present or if the vehicle has already drifted substantially out of the lane such that the lane may no longer be recognized, a continuation of support may no longer be possible or reasonable.

The proposal aims to correct 5 types of inconsistencies:

1. The reference to Annex 4 is repeated in each sub-paragraph and should instead be stated once in each paragraph.
2. Acronyms are used inconsistently. Proposal to use them consistently throughout similar to UN-R79, e.g. Emergency Manoeuvre (EM), and when used in the text as “emergency manoeuvre”
3. Each sub-paragraph has a heading, this helps understand the structure and should be carried over to par. 8.1., 9.1. and 9.2. as well, the wording for the heading of par. 9.1. and 9.2. are derived from UN-R155 and UN-R156 respectively.
4. Consistent use of term throughout, e.g. R₁₅₇SWIN without blank, Cyber Security as two words as used in UN-R155
5. Editorial corrections, e.g. missing paragraph numbers, missing full stop in the paragraph number.

The intention of the proposed amendment is to clarify the existing text on continued support of an ACSF B1 if the boundary conditions are exceeded.

Proposal to include all vehicle categories M and N in the scope of UN R157.

Proposal to replace the specification of the type and size of brake caliper and brake disc for brake lining CoP assessment with specifications for a pad area and thickness of the original approval. The original specification corresponds to obsolete caliper and rotor configurations no longer in widespread use.

This document was produced during an informal meeting (on 23 September 2020) of interested experts who reviewed the ALKS-related documents presented at GRVA on 24 September 2020.

Proposal to introduce provisions for a Digital User Guide.

Proposal to clarify provisions including the Test Report Template and Dimension Assessment Method.

Proposal to clarify that specific vehicle belted Enhanced Child Restraint Systems (ECRS) may be fitted with a support leg, top tether and lower tether attachments. This proposal also amends the existing support leg volume to improve the compatibility between the support leg volume and the Child Restraint Fixtures used for accessing the external dimensions of an ECRS.

Safety elements gathered from national guidelines, WP.29 documents, and other sources for consideration in developing eventual performance requirements for ADS.

Proposal to replace the specification of the type and size of brake caliper and brake disc for brake lining CoP assessment with specifications for a pad area and thickness of the original approval. The original specification corresponds to obsolete caliper and rotor configurations no longer in widespread use.

Proposal to permit automatic activation of functions providing continuous lateral and/or longitudinal control after ALKS deactivation.

Proposal to expand the scope to include N category vehicles and to apply the minimum performance for service braking systems (5 m/s²) as required in the 11 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 13, for vehicles of the Categories M2, M3, N2 and N3. The overall objective of the former Informal Working Group (IWG) on Automatically Commanded Steering Function (ACSF) was to develop technical requirements for Automated Lane Keeping Systems (ALKS). The initial limitation to passenger cars (M1 category vehicles) was agreed in order to deliver within the given timeline. After having successfully accomplished the work for the system in a first step, the automotive industry has now reviewed and examined the existing requirements under the premise of including all vehicle categories M and N.

Proposal to permit lane changes during a Minimum Risk Manoeuvre (MRM).

Proposal to clarify that a continuation of support by a Category B1 ACSF after its boundary conditions have been exceeded may not be possible under conditions as outlined in the manufacturer’s safety concept.

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.

Proposal to introduce provisions for truck/trailer data transmission for Category C ACSF.

Proposal for amendments to the injury assessment criteria for frontal and rear impact to specify limit values for tension force and flexion moment measured in the upper neck of the Q0, Q1 and Q1.5 dummies.

Proposal to introduce provisions for a Digital User Guide.

Proposal to clarify that specific vehicle belted Enhanced Child Restraint Systems (ECRS) may be fitted with a support leg, top tether and lower tether attachments.