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.

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.

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

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).

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).

Revised proposal to align GTR No. 3 with technical progress, addressing among others: electromagnetic compatibility/immunity of ABS-systems, ABS performance requirements for category 3-5 vehicles (three-wheelers), uniform requirements for equipment such Emergency Stop Signal and the means to disable the ABS, if equipped. This amendment aims to harmonize GTR with recent amendments made to UN Regulation No. 78 while addressing its use under self-certification compliance systems.

Revised technical report to accompany the proposal for amendment 3 (concerning mainly ABS issues) to GTR 3.

Report on the development of AEBS requirements for light vehicles, including a note on the intention to seek GRRF approval for a new regulation on M₁/N₁ vehicle AEBS separate from the current UN R131 on heavy-duty vehicle AEBS.

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.

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.

This document presents two proposals. (1)The new series 02 of Regulation 79 introduced requirements for RCP (remote controlled parking) systems. An RCP system requires the engagement of an EPB (electronic parking brake) once the manoeuvre has finished and the ignition is switched off. This proposal would allow the release or disconnection of the EPB by a remote control system (approved to R79) so the RCP can subsequently drive the vehicle out of a parking spot. (2) Proposal to permit illumination of the stop lamp for electric regenerative braking under 0.7m/s² deceleration in order to allow for “one-pedal driving” of electric vehicles.

OICA counter-proposal to address the German concern over manual deactivations of AEB systems. The original document (GRRF/2017/24) proposed automatic reactivation of the AEBS when the vehicle speed exceeds 30 km/h. OICA proposes reactivation after 15 minutes of continuous operation at a speed above 70 km/h.

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.

Germany proposed, in document GRRF/2017/24, to require automatic reactivation of a manually deactivated automatic braking system. One concern with the proposal invoked the need for prolonged deactivation under certain circumstances, such as when a vehicle is fitted temporarily with a snow plow. This proposal would explicitly require AEBS to be capable of detecting a blocked sensor (already implicit in the regulation) such that AEBS would not reactivate in such cases.

Revision 7 of Regulation No. 13 includes a former version of Figure 1B which was changed with Amend 4 to Revision 6 of UN Regulation No. 13. This correction is also needed for Revision 8, which contains the same error.

Revised proposal concerning remote-controlled parking (RCP). The new series 02 of Regulation 79 introduced requirements for RCP systems. An RCP system requires the engagement of an EPB (electronic parking brake) once the manoeuvre has finished and the ignition is switched off. This proposal would allow the release or disconnection of the EPB by a remote control system (approved to R79) so the RCP can subsequently drive the vehicle out of a parking spot. The second proposal in the original document concerning regenerative braking and stop lamp activation will be discussed again as a revised formal document at the September 2018 GRRF session.

Summary of discussions within GRRF regarding the development of a regulation for the approval of light-vehicle AEBS.

Updated version of document GRRF/2017/14 to amend UN R78 with regard to stop lamp activation. IMMA has proposed (document GRE/2015/42) to allow stop lamp activation under UN R53 through means other than application of the brakes (e.g., by electric vehicle regenerative braking). This proposal accordingly amends UN R78 regarding generation of the brake signal.