Proposal to specify a light general-purpose street motorcycle without fairings or windscreens having an engine capacity between 400 cm³ and 600 cm³ as the approaching vehicle in the testing of automated lane-change systems under UN R79.

OICA and CLEPA positions on the development of regulatory requirements for light vehicle automatic emergency braking systems.

Japanese guidelines on automated emergency braking systems (AEBS) pursuant to Kokujigi No. 353 of February 21, 2003 as amended by Kokujigi No. 181 of November 15, 2005, Kokujigi No. 143 of October 25, 2007, Kokujigi No. 139 of October 7, 2008, and Kokujigi No. 127 of June 30, 2011.

Proposal to require that a lane-keeping system used in conjunction with a lane-change system keep the vehicle centered within its lane of travel. The intent is to ensure that the vehicle starts its lane-change maneuver from a position where lateral movement signaling the impending lane change would be more easily detected even before the vehicle crosses into the adjacent lane.

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. This proposal seeks to permit remote manoeuvring capability provided that the vehicle is designed to operate off-road and the off-road location is confirmed throughout the whole period that the function is in use.

Proposal to clarify the purpose of UN R139 which was originally established through the extraction of brake assist system (BAS) provisions from UN R13-H on brake systems. Within the context of UN R13-H, the BAS provisions were written to assess performance in cases where a vehicle was fitted with a brake assist system. As a stand-alone regulation, UN R139 applies only to vehicles that are equipped with BAS. Therefore, this supplement proposes to refine the text to remove the “if fitted” language and ensure that UN R139 can only be applied to a vehicle equipped with a BAS.

Proposal to remove “if fitted” language from the text to clarify that UN R140 can only be applied to a vehicle equipped with a ESC system. UN R140 was originally established through the extraction of electronic stability controls (ESC) provisions from UN R13-H on brake systems. Within the context of UN R13-H, the ESC provisions were written to assess performance in cases where a vehicle was fitted with an electronic stability control system. As a stand-alone regulation, however, UN R140 applies only to vehicles that are equipped with ESC. The proposal also would correct an apparent error in to Annex 4, paragraph 2.1. where the reference to “ISO 15037 Part 1:2005” should read “ISO 15037 Part 1:2006”.

Draft amendment, pursuant to the 15th ACSF informal group session discussions, to introduce provisions for the approval of driver-initiated automated lane-change systems and for Emergency Steering Systems, including proposed amendments from Germany and Japan.

This document presents changes agreed by an informal group of experts reviewing the content of Annex 6 since the 84th session of GRRF. The proposal aims to clarify the purpose of Annex 6 and ensure its suitability when used in the assessment of steering systems featuring advances in automation (i.e., ACSF).

Updated text of provisions from the informal group on ACSF for the approval of emergency steering functions and driver-initiated automated lane changing systems.

Proposal of provisions for the approval of emergency steering functions under Regulation No. 79.

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).

Japan comments on the changes agreed by the informal group of experts which reviewed the content of Annex 6 and proposed (via document GRRF-85-1/Rev.1) to clarify the purpose of Annex 6 and ensure its suitability when used in the assessment of steering systems featuring advances in automation (i.e., ACSF). The proposal

1. corrects an editorial error by inserting a missing clause in paragraph 1, and
2. deletes the phrase “at least 10%” from paragraph 4.1.1. which changes the current meaning of text with regard to assessment of “the System”
   • Japanese technical services already verify each declared function by the manufacturer under the paragraph,
   • The wording “at least 10%” may result in a decrease in the number of tests where Japan believes number of tests should be decided by the Technical service considering which tests should apply.

mp4 format video from the presentation on the proposal for the 03 series of amendments.

Presentation concerning the introduction of provisions for emergency steering functions.

Proposal for the 03 series of amendments as approved by GRRF.

Transitional provisions for the implementation of requirements for ACSF Cat. C (driver-initiated automated lane-changing systems) and Emergency Steering Functions (ESF) as approved by the GRRF during its 85th session.