9. (c) Automatically Commanded Steering Function (ACSF)
|
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.
|
GRRF-82-08 | Proposal for amendments to Regulation No. 79
|
Proposal for amendments to Regulation No. 79
|
|
Reference Number: GRRF-82-08
|
|
Proposal to amend “option 4” as presented in the proposal introduce technical requirements for Corrective Steering Functions under UN R79 (document GRRF/2016/45). Option 4 for consideration by GRRF 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.
The ACSF informal group intends to define provisions for systems of categories B2, C, D and E during its future sessions. Testing requirements will be defined in a separate informal document.
|
|
Document date: 16 Sep 16
|
|
Document status: Superseded
|
|
Relevant to
|
|
View full document file for more information
|
GRRF-82-09 | Proposal for amendments to ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2016/45
|
Proposal for amendments to ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/2016/45
|
|
Reference Number: GRRF-82-09
|
|
Proposal of amendments to the draft proposal concerning technical requirements for automated steering functions operating at speeds up to 10 km/h and for corrective steering functions under UN R79.
|
|
Submitted by: Germany
|
|
Document date: 16 Sep 16
|
|
Document status: Superseded
|
|
Relevant to
|
|
View full document file for more information
|
GRRF-82-12 | Proposal for amendments to GRRF-82-08
|
Proposal for amendments to GRRF-82-08
|
|
Reference Number: GRRF-82-12
|
|
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.
|
|
Submitted by: OICA
|
|
Document date: 16 Sep 16
|
|
Document status: Superseded
|
|
Relevant to
|
|
View full document file for more information
|
GRRF-82-14 | Justification for an acceleration greater than 1.0 m/s² under document GRRF-82-08 (CSF)
|
Justification for an acceleration greater than 1.0 m/s² under document GRRF-82-08 (CSF)
|
|
Reference Number: GRRF-82-14
|
|
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.
|
|
Submitted by: OICA
|
|
Document date: 16 Sep 16
|
|
Document status: Superseded
|
|
Relevant to
|
|
View full document file for more information
|
GRRF-82-15 | Proposal for amendments to GRRF-82-09
|
Proposal for amendments to GRRF-82-09
|
|
Reference Number: GRRF-82-15
|
|
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.
|
|
Submitted by: CLEPA and OICA
|
|
Document date: 19 Sep 16
|
|
Relevant to
|
|
View full document file for more information
|
GRRF-82-17 | Presentation of the ACSF informal group proposal to amend UN R79
|
Presentation of the ACSF informal group proposal to amend UN R79
|
|
Reference Number: GRRF-82-17
|
|
Explanatory presentation on document GRRF-82-08.
|
|
Document date: 20 Sep 16
|
|
Relevant to
|
|
View full document file for more information
|
GRRF-82-18 | Support for the amendments to Regulation No. 79 to allow the approval of ACSF, in particular LCA and enhanced LKA systems
|
Support for the amendments to Regulation No. 79 to allow the approval of ACSF, in particular LCA and enhanced LKA systems
|
|
Reference Number: GRRF-82-18
|
|
Submitted by: EC
|
|
Document date: 20 Sep 16
|
|
Relevant to
|
|
View full document file for more information
|
GRRF-82-26 | Proposal for amendments to GRRF-82-12
|
Proposal for amendments to GRRF-82-12
|
|
Reference Number: GRRF-82-26
|
|
Proposal to amend the consolidated draft amendment to UN R79 to introduce technical requirements for Corrective Steering Functions and Level B1 ACSF under UN R79 (document GRRF/2016/45).
|
|
Submitted by: France
|
|
Document date: 21 Sep 16
|
|
Document status: Superseded
|
|
Relevant to
|
|
View full document file for more information
|
GRRF/2016/45 | Proposal for amendment to Regulation No. 79
|
Proposal for amendment to Regulation No. 79
|
|
Reference Number: GRRF/2016/45
|
|
Proposal to introduce technical requirements for Corrective Steering Functions (lane departure prevention, lane-keeping assistance (LKAS), steering angle correction, etc.) as defined in the regulation. The proposal offers four options to ensure appropriate approvals of LKAS and related CSF systems until such time as more precise requirements can be defined: - Option 1 and option 2: Not to grant any type approvals for corrective steering functions until detailed technical requirements for CSF are incorporated into this Regulation.
- Option 3: Amend the definition of CSF as proposed in this document.
- Option 4: Amend the definition of corrective steering functions and to include technical requirements for LKAS as an ASCF of Category B1 as proposed in this document.
|
|
Submitted by: EC, France, Germany, Japan, Korea, Netherlands, and Sweden
|
|
Document date: 08 Jul 16
|
|
Document status: Superseded
|
|
Relevant to
|
|
View full document file for more information
|
GRRF-82-19 | Proposal for amendments to Annex 6 of Regulation No. 79
|
Proposal for amendments to Annex 6 of Regulation No. 79
|
|
Reference Number: GRRF-82-19
|
|
Proposal to amend the annex on complex electronic systems, in particular, to require auditing of the methodologies used to ensure system safety at both concept and system level. Concept level specifically requires consideration of interaction with other vehicle systems.
|
|
Submitted by: EC
|
|
Document date: 20 Sep 16
|
|
Document status: Superseded
|
|
Relevant to
|
|
View full document file for more information
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
GRRF-82-14 | Justification for an acceleration greater than 1.0 m/s² under document GRRF-82-08 (CSF)
|
Justification for an acceleration greater than 1.0 m/s² under document GRRF-82-08 (CSF)
|
|
Reference Number: GRRF-82-14
|
|
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.
|
|
Submitted by: OICA
|
|
Document date: 16 Sep 16
|
|
Document status: Superseded
|
|
Relevant to
|
|
View full document file for more information
|
|
|
|
|
|
55. The expert from Germany presented GRRF-82-34 with test results obtained with a standard vehicle, demonstrating the feasibility of the test procedures proposed in Annex 8.
|
GRRF-82-34 | Automatically Commanded Steering Function: Demonstration of the Feasibility of the Proposed Test Cases with a Production Vehicle
|
Automatically Commanded Steering Function: Demonstration of the Feasibility of the Proposed Test Cases with a Production Vehicle
|
|
Reference Number: GRRF-82-34
|
|
Presentation on trial runs of the proposed test procedures for evaluating automated steering systems under UN R79.
|
|
Submitted by: BASt and Germany
|
|
Document date: 26 Sep 16
|
|
Relevant to
|
|
View full document file for more information
|
|
|
|
|
|
56. GRRF adopted GRRF-82-12-Rev.3, subject to confirmation in January 2017 by GRRF, and requested the secretariat to submit it to WP.29 and AC.1 as a draft Supplement 6 to the 01 series of amendments to Regulation No. 79 (Steering equipment) for consideration and vote in March 2017.
|
GRRF-82-12/Rev.3 | Consolidated proposal for amendments to GRRF-82-08
|
Consolidated proposal for amendments to GRRF-82-08
|
|
Reference Number: GRRF-82-12/Rev.3
|
|
Updated version of the proposal to introduce corrective steering and B1 level ACSF provisions into UN R79 as agreed by the GRRF during its September 2016 session.
|
|
Document date: 22 Sep 16
|
|
Document status: Superseded
|
|
Relevant to
|
|
View full document file for more information
|
|
|
|
|
|
57. The expert from FIA presented GRRF-82-07 on data privacy and cybersecurity of (partly) automated driving and on Data Storage Systems for ACSF (DSSA). He advocated against potential DSSA installation requirements for data protection and cybersecurity reasons as, to date, no clarity would be provided on consumer protective measures. He stated that such systems could facilitate the collection (also over-the-air, outside of the vehicle) and interpretation of a large amount of data, that could easily be used against the driver, in various situations (e.g. for commercial, warranty, recall and liability purposes). He urged therefore GRRF to ban such systems as long as no fair and balanced relations among stakeholders would be guaranteed.
|
GRRF-82-07 | Data Privacy and Cyber Security in (partly) Automated Driving
|
Data Privacy and Cyber Security in (partly) Automated Driving
|
|
Reference Number: GRRF-82-07
|
|
FIA comments on data privacy provisions under UN Regulations including remarks concerning the work of the informal groups on automated driving (ITS/AD), automatic emergency calls systems (AECS), and automatically commanded steering functions (ACSF). The presentation covers issues such as protection of personal data, aggregation of data to protect individual identities, protection against unauthorized access (hacking), and prohibition against data use for purposes other than those specifically intended by a regulation. FIA proposes the deletion of data storage (DSSA) provisions under the draft texts for ACSF.
|
|
Submitted by: FIA Foundation
|
|
Document date: 16 Sep 16
|
|
Relevant to
|
|
View full document file for more information
|
|
|
|
|
|
58. The expert from OICA presented GRRF-82-13 proposing the introduction of provisions applicable for Emergency Steering Functions (ESF). GRRF supported the proposal but noted the absence of objective testing requirements to verify the safe operation of such systems at the time of Type Approval. Therefore, GRRF invited the IWG on ACSF to develop provisions for ESF.
|
GRRF-82-13 | Emergency Steering Function (ESF)
|
Emergency Steering Function (ESF)
|
|
Reference Number: GRRF-82-13
|
|
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.
|
|
Submitted by: OICA
|
|
Document date: 16 Sep 16
|
|
Document status: Superseded
|
|
Relevant to
|
|
View full document file for more information
|
|
|
|
|
|
59. The expert from the European Commission presented GRRF-82-18 reporting on research activities looking for ways to improve Annex 6 on Complex Electronic Systems in Regulation No. 79 and introducing GRRF-82-19 with amendments to this annex. GRRF requested the secretariat to distribute GRRF-82-19 with an official symbol at its next session.
|
GRRF-82-18 | Support for the amendments to Regulation No. 79 to allow the approval of ACSF, in particular LCA and enhanced LKA systems
|
Support for the amendments to Regulation No. 79 to allow the approval of ACSF, in particular LCA and enhanced LKA systems
|
|
Reference Number: GRRF-82-18
|
|
Submitted by: EC
|
|
Document date: 20 Sep 16
|
|
Relevant to
|
|
View full document file for more information
|
GRRF-82-19 | Proposal for amendments to Annex 6 of Regulation No. 79
|
Proposal for amendments to Annex 6 of Regulation No. 79
|
|
Reference Number: GRRF-82-19
|
|
Proposal to amend the annex on complex electronic systems, in particular, to require auditing of the methodologies used to ensure system safety at both concept and system level. Concept level specifically requires consideration of interaction with other vehicle systems.
|
|
Submitted by: EC
|
|
Document date: 20 Sep 16
|
|
Document status: Superseded
|
|
Relevant to
|
|
View full document file for more information
|
|
|
|
|
|
60. The expert from Germany introduced on behalf of Germany and Japan revised draft ToR for the IWG on ACSF (GRRF-82-20-Rev.1). GRRF adopted the document as reproduced in Annex V.
|
GRRF-82-20/Rev.1 | Revised proposal for updated ToR for the IWG on ACSF
|
Revised proposal for updated ToR for the IWG on ACSF
|
|
Reference Number: GRRF-82-20/Rev.1
|
|
Updated terms of reference for the automated steering informal group as agreed during the September 2016 GRRF session.
|
|
Submitted by: Germany and Japan
|
|
Document date: 23 Sep 16
|
|
Document status: Mandate approved
|
|
Relevant to
|
|
View full document file for more information
|
|
|
|
|