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.

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.

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).

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).

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.

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

UN R79 ACSF informal group working paper.

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).