AEBS-M proposed test scenario (Collision mitigation)

Transcription

1 This ocument is an attempt to consoliate the posits of the parties after the 9 th meeting of the GRRF informal group hel in Tokyo in Octor * Common agreements: Initial istance tween subject an : > 120 m Vehicle centreline offset: < 0.5 m Subject vehicle initial : 80 : text limite to the 2 latest s an principle of a cascae is aopte AEBS-M propose test scenario (Collis mitigat) / Statary J / -0 Subject vehicle reuct, measure at the time of collis. emergency braking Pass/fail criter: reuct ( phase [Soonest time for 1 st ] Latest time for 1 st Latest time for 2 n [50] [50] [Y 1 ] [Y 2 ] st Statary [20] [20] [X fore 3.0 s TTC 1 ] [X 2 ] st CLEPA 15 ± 1 Statary OICA / -0 Statary D / -0 Statary collis > 65 > 65 posit 2.5 / / 2.0 posit posit 1.4 posit 1 st Subject vehicle reuct, measure at the time of collis > 65 > 65 posit 2.5 / / 2.0 posit posit 1.4 posit 1 st collis posit not posit posit posit posit Any means Any means 2 n means Subject vehicle reuct, measure at the time of collis. collis [50] [50] not posit posit posit posit Any means Any means 2 n means compromise possible compromise possible 1 st 2.0 posit 1 st posit posit posit posit 2 n means 2 n means posit posit Necessary to consier Overreliance,Interrupt of river operat, brake, alarm, etc. Maximum braking eman 4m/s 2 for N category. For /,nuisances coul reuce if the 1 st is brought back to 0.8s, hence the nee for a cascae collapses Can accept 1 Regulat only. Was keen to follow the GRRF recommenat for 2 Regulats, but can 1 Regulat only Warning time winow: If the winow is wie, perhaps nee to limit the maximum ecelerat provoke by the braking. Warning cascae: not against, but fins it non necessary avantage of having 2 Regulats for one system vehicle of category / is equippe with AEBS technology at this point in time, no experience. Warning time winow is restrictive against early, hence against safety The no posit mainly reflect that we are keen to have 1 Regulat only. But table is OK Warning time winow: nee for time to investigate the proper values. Mitigat is not important, o not mitigat Page 1

2 / Statary UK / -0 Statary NL / -0 Statary S / -0 DK** Avoi collis, assuming that system performance in real worl conits: Avois false brake applicat Does not prevent the river from taking act to avoi collis Pass/fail criter: reuct ( phase [50] [50] no opin on iscriminat 2vs3 or MvsN no opin on iscriminat 2vs3 or MvsN [Soonest time for 1 st ] Latest time for 1 st Latest time for 2 n to remove to remove 1.4 posit 0.8 posit 1 st 1.4 posit 0.8 posit 1 st collis [50] [50] [50] [50] not st i ie i ie i ie i ie not st collis [50] [50] posit not 1.4 posit 0.8 posit 2 n means Statary Spee reuct posit not 1.4 posit 0.8 posit posit collis (at least in the moving scenario) collis (technology is available) posit t later than 2 s posit Warning time winow: avois system intervent while normal riving. [ ] s for the ease of posit the Technical Service coul exten the winow less esign restrictive Can accept one Regulat only, if possible. Was keen to follow the GRRF recommenat for 2 Regulats, but can 1 Regulat only posit OK with [1,4s] as a compromise tween 0,8 an 2 s posit no nee to make a ifference in reuct tween the categories. For category 2, nee for at least the same performance as for Cat3. Nee to iscriminate among the cat 2. Warning strategy: Cascae, same value for all scenarios Keen to have one Regulat only to keep the spirit of the 58 Agreement. Supports staggere approach as propose by OICA an UK. 2 n means Aim is to avoi nuisance alarm. AEBS cannot prevent suicie. Sleeping river is no river anymore. AEBS can an incentive to improve river s attent posit posit posit wish for AEBS - CC/ACC connect (the inf gr however ecie not to follow this suggest) wish for the strongest emans on AEBS from the ginning or alreay introucing both 1. an 2. stage (2. stage ing what is state of the art for the goo systems alreay toay, but may not possible to reach for everyboy alreay in 2013). F 30 collis not posit Latest time: Minimum react time provie by the Statary PL** - posit collis posit not t later than 2s collis collis posit posit t later than 2s posit posit posit surveys (J, ITS), increase by the time necessary to take into account the rowsiness posit posit posit posit Latest time: t earlier than 2.5 sec Page 2

3 / Statary ROK* / -0 Statary Pass/fail criter: reuct ( phase posit posit (or, posit) [Soonest time for 1 st ] Latest time for 1 st Latest time for 2 n posit 1.4 posit 0.8 posit 1 st posit 1,4s for 1 st as a compromise tween 0,8 an 2 s In, the iea of test or false braking test * ROK communicate a posit by an sent to the informal group Secretariat on 4 Decemr ** DK an PL i not take part to the meetings subsequent to the 68 th sess of GRRF (Septemr 2010). As a consequence the posits of those Contracting Parties o not reflect the new situat of one Regulat aressing collis mitigat an one Regulat aressing collis avoiance. Page 3

4 AEBS-A propose test scenario (Collis avoiance) Common agreements: Initial istance tween subject an : > 120 m Vehicle centreline offset: < 0.5 m Subject vehicle initial : 80 : text limite to the 2 latest s an principle of a cascae is aopte J CLEPA 15 ± 1 mean fully evelope ecelerat of at least 5 m/s² impact OICA D posit posit Pass/fail criter: reuct ( phase [Soonest time for 1 st ] Latest time for 1 st Latest time for 2 n > 65 > 65 posit 2.0 posit 1.4 posit collis posit not posit posit posit posit Any means Any means 2 n means collis 2 n means test/ braking test Support / Support no no Necessary to consier Overreliance,Interrupt of river operat, brake, alarm, etc. Maximum braking eman 4m/s 2 for N category. For /,nuisances coul reuce if the 1 st is brought back to 0.8s, hence the nee for a cascae collapses All requirements shoul aligne on AEBS-M performance requirements. Warning time winow: If the winow is wie, perhaps nee to limit the maximum ecelerat provoke by the braking. Warning cascae: not against, but fins it non necessary nee to align collis mitigat an collis avoiance Regulats. Collis avoiance nees earlier compare to collis mitigat Changes of posit as in AEBS/LDWS Then suggests to C/P to the AEBS-M Regulat. avantage of having 2 Regulats for one system vehicle of category / is equippe with AEBS technology at this point in time, no experience. Warning time winow is restrictive against early, hence against safety false braking nor false test cause no safety nefits Warning time winow: nee for time to investigate the proper values. 1 test an no more in the Type Page 4

5 UK NL efine efine collis collis Pass/fail criter: reuct ( phase S 10 collis t less than 70 no opin on iscriminatio n 2vs3 or MvsN t less than 50 [Soonest time for 1 st ] Latest time for 1 st Latest time for 2 n not not n means 2 n means test/ braking test Approval, i.e. collis avoiance test Warning time winow: avois system intervent while normal riving. [ ] s for the ease of the Technical Service coul exten the winow less esign restrictive keen to harmonize the requirements, i.e. ait of a statary test in Avoiance Regulat. OK with [1,4s] as a compromise tween 0,8 an 2 s no nee to make a ifference in reuct tween the categories. For category 2, nee for at least the same performance as for Cat3. Nee to iscriminate among the cat 2. Warning strategy: Cascae, same value for all scenarios Supports a false test accoring the J proposal. Warning braking woul then forbien in the test. 1 test an no more in the Type Approval, i.e. collis test F 2s 2s ROK [30 +4 / -0 ] collis posit posit 1.4 posit 0.8 posit 1 st posit / Same with AEBS-M scenario in principle 1,4s for 1 st as a compromise tween 0,8 an 2 s In, the iea of test or false braking test Page 5