The levels of continuous vehicle automation have become common knowledge. They facilitate overall understanding of the issue. Yet, continuous vehicle automation described therein does not cover "automated driving" as a whole: Functions intervening temporarily in accident-prone situations can obviously not be classified by means of continuous levels. Continuous automation describes the shift in workload from purely human driven vehicles to full automation. Duties of the driver are assigned to the machine as automation levels rise. Emergency braking, e.g., is obviously discontinuous and intensive automation. It cannot be classified under this regime. The resulting absence of visibility of these important functions cannot satisfy " especially in the light of effect they take on traffic safety. Therefore, in order to reach a full picture of vehicle automation, a comprehensive approach is proposed that can map out different characteristics as "Principle of Operation" at top level. On this basis informing and warning functions as well as functions intervening only temporarily in near-accident situations can be described. To reach a complete picture, levels for the discontinuous, temporarily intervening functions are proposed " meant to be the counterpart of the continuous levels already in place. This results in a detailed and independent classification for accident-prone situations. This finally provides for the visibility these important functions deserve.
Per definition, SAE Level 2 (L2) Systems perform both the lateral and longitudinal vehicle motion control with the expectation that the driver completes the Object and Event Detection and Response (OEDR). Since every system performs also parts of the OEDR itself and this amount of OEDR also varies between different L2 systems depending on the intended system design, it cannot be taken for granted that drivers automatically understand their roles and responsibilities in interaction with the system. Especially highly reliable L2 systems performing a greater amount of OEDR while at the same time requiring only little driver input over time can make it difficult for drivers to correctly identify their role and responsibility. Until now, neither application-oriented assessment methods nor design guidelines for OEDR related system design features taking safety of human-machine-interaction into account are available. The objective is therefore to deliver a standardized tool for the assessment of human-machine-interaction-related safety of vehicles with L2 systems currently available on the market. To evaluate the impact of different system design aspects on safety of human-machine-interaction and also to be able to differentiate between system designs, a holistic, standardized and application-oriented assessment procedure is proposed. The novel tablet-based assessment tool focuses not only on available standards and guidelines but measures also concrete user behaviour and user understanding in interaction with the L2 systems. The aim is to gain further insights which cannot be measured directly by simple checklist instruments. For preparation, based on international standards, literature reviews and expert consultations, a first checklistbased expert-evaluation for currently available vehicles with L2 systems was developed. These assessments are focusing on different sources of user information (e.g. user manual), human-machine-interface design as well as the prevention of unintended use by different driver monitoring techniques. The checklist-tool was developed in cooperation with experts of different EuroNCAP test laboratories and validated in a common expert workshop to gain high level of standardization and agreement. However, to assess safety of human-machine-interaction holistically beyond these rather explicit forms of information design criteria, also implicit forms of drivervehicle-communication via vehicle dynamics, functional behavior or reliability play an important role and should be taken into account. Therefore, the main and novel methodological aim is to consider also interaction related processes regarding user´s understanding of roles and responsibilities when applying automated driving functions as well as user´s awareness of automation modes or traffic situations in the modular tablet-based assessment tool.
Except for corrective steering functions automatic steering is up to now only allowed at speeds up to 10 km/h according to UN Regulation No. 79. Progress in automotive engineering with regard to driver assistance systems and automation of driving tasks is that far that it would be technically feasible to realise automatically commanded steering functions also at higher vehicle speeds. Besides improvements in terms of comfort these automated systems are expected to contribute to road traffic safety as well. However, this safety potential will only be exhausted if automated steering systems are properly designed. Especially possible new risks due to automated steering have to be addressed and reduced to a minimum. For these reasons work is currently ongoing on UNECE level with the aim to amend the regulation dealing with provisions concerning the approval of steering equipment. It is the aim to revise requirements for automatically commanded steering functions (ACSF) so that they can be approved also for higher speeds if certain performance requirements are fulfilled. The paper at hand describes the derivation of reasonable system specifications from an analysis of relevant driving situations with an automated steering system. Needs are explained with regard to covering normal driving, sudden unexpected critical events, transition to manual driving, driver availability and manoeuvres to reach a state of minimal risk. These issues form the basis for the development of test procedures for automated steering to be implemented in international regulations. This holds for system functionalities like automatic lane keeping or automatic lane change as well as for addressing transition situations in which the system has to hand over steering to the driver or addressing emergency situations in which the system has to react instead of the driver.
At IAM RoadSmart we share the excitement about autonomous cars " who wouldn't! However over half of the drivers we polled supported concentrating on making drivers safer " among IAM RoadSmart members it was 70%. Driverless cars are still years away but delivering safer drivers can help reduce death and injury from tomorrow. Governments, academics and car makers need to work hard to convince sceptical British and American drivers that autonomous cars can deliver the benefits promised such as a 90% plus reduction in road deaths.
The UN Regulation No. 79 is going to be amended to allow automatically commanded steering functions (ACSF) at speeds above 10 km/h. Hence, requirements concerning the approval of automatically performed steering manoeuvres have to be set in order to allow safe use of automatic steering on public roads as well as improve overall road safety for the driver and the surroundings. By order of the German Federal Ministry of Transport and Digital Infrastructure (BMVI), BASt developed and verified physical test procedures for automatic steering to be implemented in UN Regulation No. 79. The usability of currently available test tools was examined. The paper at hand describes these test procedures and presents results from verification tests. The designated tests are divided in three sections: functionality tests, verifications for the transition of control and emergency tests. System functionality tests are auto matic lane keeping, automatic lane change and an automatic abort of an initiated lane change due to traffic. Those tests check if the vehicle remains in its lane (under normal operating conditions), is able to perform safe automatic lane change manoeuvres and if it considers other road users during its manoeuvres. Transition tests examine the vehicle's behaviour when the driver fails to monitor the system and in situations when the system has to hand over the steering control back to the driver. For instance these tests provoke driver-in-the-loop requests by approaching system boundary limitations, like missing lane markings, surpassing maximum lateral acceleration in a bend or even a major system failure. Even further the driver and his inputs are monitored and if the system detects that he is overriding system actions or contrary want to quit the driving task and unfastens the seat belt, it has to shut down and put the human back into manually control and the responsibility of driving. The last series of test consists of two emergency situations in which the system has to react to a time critical event: A hard decelerating vehicle and a stationary vehicle in front both with no lane change possibility for the ACSF vehicle. Some of the tests, especially the emergency manoeuvres, require special target vehicles and propulsion systems. Since no fully automatic steering vehicles are available, a current Mercedes E-Class with Mercedes' "drive pilot" system was used. It was shown that the vehicle is automatically able to brake to a full stop towards a static Euro NCAP target from partial-automatic driving at 90 km/h, that it could brake towards a rapidly decelerating lead vehicle when travelling at 70 km/h, that it was able during partially automatic driving to remain in its lane in normal operation conditions and to perform a automatic (driver initiated) lane change while surveilling the driver- activities.
Automatische Lenkfunktionen sind abgesehen von korrigierenden Lenkeingriffen entsprechend der UN-Regelung Nr. 79 bisher nur in einem Geschwindigkeitsbereich bis 10 km/h erlaubt. Die Weiterentwicklung der Technik im Bereich der Fahrerassistenzsysteme und der Automatisierung der Fahraufgabe wuerden es jedoch technisch erlauben, automatische Lenkfunktionen auch bei höheren Geschwindigkeiten einzusetzen. Neben einem Zugewinn an Komfort wird von diesen Systemen auch ein Beitrag zur Erhöhung der Verkehrssicherheit erwartet. Dieses Verkehrssicherheitspotenzial wird man jedoch nur ausschöpfen können, wenn die automatisierten Lenksysteme entsprechend gestaltet sind. Insbesondere sollten mögliche Risiken auf Grund automatischen Lenkens minimiert sein. Aus diesen Gründen laufen derzeit Arbeiten auf UNECE-Ebene, die Regelung Nr. 79 über einheitliche Bedingungen für die Genehmigung der Fahrzeuge hinsichtlich der Lenkanlage in Bezug auf automatische Lenkfunktionen (ACSF = Automatically Commanded Steering Functions) zu überarbeiten, um diese unter bestimmten Bedingungen auch bei höheren Geschwindigkeiten genehmigen zu können. Der vorliegende Beitrag reflektiert diese Arbeiten und stellt die Entwicklung der technischen Anforderungen an automatisches Lenken und der für die fahrzeugtechnischen Vorschriften vorgesehenen Testprozeduren dar.
Die Level kontinuierlicher Fahrzeugautomatisierung sind unter Fahrerassistenzexperten weithin bekannt und erleichtern das Verständnis. Sie können aber nicht Fahrzeugautomatisierung insgesamt zufriedenstellend beschreiben: Insbesondere temporär intervenierende Funktionen, die in unfallnahen Situationen eingreifen, können offensichtlich nicht nach dem Level kontinuierlicher Fahrzeugautomatisierung beschrieben werden. Diese beschreiben nämlich die zunehmende Aufgabenverlagerung vom Fahrer zur maschinellen Steuerung bei zunehmendem Automatisierungsgrad. Notbremsfunktionen, beispielsweise, sind offensichtlich diskontinuierlich und nehmen zugleich auf intensive Weise Einfluss auf die Fahrzeugsteuerung. Sie lassen sich gerade nicht sinnvoll nach dem Level kontinuierlicher Fahrzeugautomatisierung beschrieben. Das Ergebnis kann indes nicht zufriedenstellen. Die fehlende Sichtbarkeit dieser Funktionen wird ihrer Bedeutung für die Verkehrssicherheit nicht gerecht. Daher wird im Beitrag, um ein vollständiges Bild der Fahrzeugautomatisierung zu erlangen, ein umfassender Ansatz zur Beschreibung verfolgt, der sich auf oberster Ebene nach Wirkweise unterscheidet. Auf dieser Basis lassen sich sowohl informierende und warnende Funktionen als auch solche, die nur temporär in unfallgeneigten Situationen intervenieren, im Detail beschrieben. Das ermöglicht es, eine eigenständige Klassifikation für unfallgeneigte Situationen zu erstellen; dies kann für diese wichtigen Funktionen die eigenständige Sichtbarkeit herstellen, die ihrer Bedeutung gerecht wird.
The term driver assistance systems in the chapter title shall be understood to include vehicle automation. This chapter starts with a homogeneous and consistent classification and nomenclature of all kinds of driver assistance systems known and under discussion today (including vehicle automation). It thereby builds upon familiar classification schemes by the German Federal Highway Research Institute (BASt) and the standardization body SAE international. Detailed evaluation of the German legal situation for driver assistance systems and vehicle automation is provided in the following Sect. 2. In Sect. 3, an overview is given on the legal system in the US to reveal aspects relevant for vehicle automation. This is intended as initial information for those not acquainted to the US legal system which has been the first to regulate automation in several federal states. Finally, in Sect. 4, the current rating scheme of the European New Car Assessment Programme (EuroNCAP) is presented in comparison to legal instruments. The model of a consumer protection based approach proves to be a flexible instrument with great advantages in promoting new technologies. Technical vehicle regulations on the other hand rule minimum requirements. Both approaches are needed to achieve maximum vehicle safety.
Die schnell voranschreitende Entwicklung im Bereich der Fahrzeugautomatisierung wirft unter anderem die Frage auf, welche Anforderungen an eine entsprechende Gestaltung bzw. Adaptation der Infrastruktur daraus hervorgehen. Es kann davon ausgegangen werden, dass bei einer Infrastruktur mit regelwerkskonformer Umsetzung der Standards automatisiertes Fahren auf Autobahnen grundsätzlich möglich ist. Da in der Praxis automatisiert fahrende Fahrzeuge aber mit allen Gegebenheiten zurechtkommen müssen und der Status Quo der Infrastruktur nicht immer dem technischen Regelwerk entspricht, werden relevante infrastrukturseitige Umfeldbedingungen erörtert und im Vergleich mit dem Status Quo technologieoffen möglichen Lösungsansätzen sowie ihrer Realisierbarkeit gegenübergestellt. Dabei kommt einer digitalen Referenzkarte mit temporären Merkmalen eine zentrale Bedeutung zu. Entscheidend ist dabei auch der Aspekt der Bidirektionalität: So sollte die Referenzkarte einerseits Informationen zur Verfügung stellen, andererseits aber auch durch die Fahrzeugflotte selbst über plötzlich auftretende, durch die Fahrzeugsensorik erkannte Ereignisse Informationen aus der Fahrzeugflotte erhalten.
Jahresbericht 2018
(2019)
Mit diesem Jahresbericht gibt die BASt dem Forschungsjahr 2018 Gesichter. Ein Teil ihrer Arbeit ist präsent und steht im Fokus der Öffentlichkeit, beispielsweise der Feldversuch Lang-Lkw, das einzigartige Forschungsareal duraBASt im Autobahnkreuz Köln-Ost oder das innovative Messfahrzeug MESAS zur Zustandserfassung von Fahrbahnen im fließenden Verkehr. Ein großer Teil der Arbeit der BASt ist weniger öffentlichkeitswirksam aber nicht minder wichtig, etwa die unerlässliche Fortschreibung von Regelwerken, die Prüfung und Zulassung von Produkten und Verfahren sowie die Erstellung von Prognosen und Statistiken. Über 50 Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeiter berichten über ihre Forschungstätigkeiten und geben so einen Einblick in die Aufgaben der BASt mit ihren Kernbereichen Fahrzeugtechnik, Verkehrssicherheit, Verkehrstechnik, Straßenbau sowie Brücken- und Ingenieurbau. Schlaglichter sowie Zahlen und Fakten in kurzer und knapper Form ergänzen den Bericht.