Transcript Informal document No. GRRF-S08-10 Special GRRF brainstorming session 9 December 2008 Agenda item 4(a) Advanced Emergency Braking System / Lane Departure Warning System OICA POSITION

Informal document No. GRRF-S08-10
Special GRRF brainstorming session
9 December 2008
Agenda item 4(a)
Advanced Emergency
Braking System
/
Lane Departure Warning
System
OICA POSITION
1
Summary
Data: EU, F, J
Scope and justifications for a
future UNECE regulation
Requirements for AEBS
Requirements for LDWS
Organization of the work
2
Fatalities and Serious Injuries
by Vehicle Category (EU19)
Fatalities and serious injuries for accidents with at least one light vehicle
16,2%
HCV
5,5%
60,0%
Light vehicles
mainly collide
with each other
Light vehicles
Cat L vehicles
Bikes
15,6%
Pedestrians
Others
Fatalities and serious injuries for accidents with at least
one heavy commercial vehicle
2,2%
0,5%
8,3%
47,3%
Heavy commercial
vehicles mainly
collide with light
vehicles
When 1 HCV involved,
5,4%
10,3%
nearly ½ of all serious
injuries and fatalities
occur in light vehicles.
Source: CARE, EU19 in 2006 (LAB)
12,7%
16,1%
PL
VL
2RM
Vélo
Piéton
Autre
3
Accidents Caused by Large Trucks
by Accident Type (Japan)
With pedestrians
Head-on
4%
Single vehicle
3%
2%
Others
18%
Left turn
5%
Right turn
5%
intersection corners
8%
Rear-end collision
55%
When 1 HCV involved,
more than ½ of all
accidents are rear-end
accidents
Source: Macro Accident Data Japan 2005
4
Fatalities and Serious Injuries
by Accident Type (France)
Fatalities and serious injuries for accidents with at least one light vehicle
13,5%
The part of front-rear
accidents is nearly the
double for HCV compared
to light vehicles
Others
Front-rear
Head on
Front-lateral
28,9%
10,6%
Fatalities and serious injuries for accidents with at least
one heavy commercial vehicle
14,3%
43,7%
23,0%
19,0%
Source: BAAC, France in 2007 (LAB)
47,0%
Others
Front-rear
Head on
Front-lateral
Conclusions about available data:
The efficiency of one given
AEBS/LDWS varies according to
the vehicle category (slide 3)
The efficiency of a system
potentially preventing front-rear
accidents is nearly the double on a
HCV compared to a light vehicle
(slides 4 & 5)
5
Current Situation for
Advanced Vehicle Systems
Warning Systems
Advanced Vehicle Warning
Systems already exist on a
few vehicles
No safety need for
rulemaking when
voluntarily fitted
Active (intervening) Systems
Advanced Vehicle Active
Safety is ensured by
Systems already exist on a
CEL Annex of UNECE
few vehicles (acting on
R13/13H and R79
braking or steering)
With regard to existing regulations, additional
rulemaking has the only purpose to align the provisions if
the systems are fitted or required.
6
Installation of AEBS/LDWS
EU is the first region to require installation of
AEBS and LDWS on some categories
Scope proposed by EC:
Timeframe proposed by EC:
"Vehicles in Categories M2, M3, N2 and N3
shall be equipped with an AEBS/LDWS
which shall meet the requirements of this
Regulation."
29 October 2013 for New Types
29 October 2015 for New Registrations
In order not to waste time and resources, future UNECE Regulations
on AEBS and LDWS should be “if fitted” requirements
based on the scope proposed by OICA and the timeframe for
mandatory installation proposed by EC.
7
Mileage data helps defining the
relevant scope
5.000.000.000
N2, 3,5t to 12t
N3, > 12t
4.500.000.000
vehicles (km)
x quantity
Mileage
of vehiclesof(km)
x Number
Mileage
4.000.000.000
3.500.000.000
Average
Fahrleistungenvehicle
(Annahme) mileage:
> 12ttonnes
135.000 km :
> 12
135.000 km/year
7 - 12t 60.000 km
7 –< 12
60.000 km/year
7t tonnes:
17.000 km
< 7 tonnes:
17.000 km/year
3.000.000.000
2.500.000.000
2.000.000.000
1.500.000.000
1.000.000.000
500.000.000
24001
bis
26000
22001
bis
24000
20001
bis
22000
18001
bis
20000
16001
bis
18000
14001
bis
16000
12001
bis
14000
10001
bis
12000
9001
bis
10000
8001
bis
9000
7501
bis
8000
7001
bis
7500
6001
bis
7000
5001
bis
6000
4001
bis
5000
3501
bis
4000
0
Gross vehicle mass (kg)
Gross Vehicle Mass (kg)
8
Source: VDA 2007
Implementation of new
UNECE Regulation
The systems are the most efficient on the
following categories:
M3 Class II and III, > 12 t
4 x 2 and 6 x 2
(exception for M3G)
and
N3 > 16 t
4 x 2 and 6 x 2
(exception for N3G)
Should the
installation be
unavoidable,
OICA
recommends to
limit the scope to
these categories
A reasonable limitation of the scope is also
necessary to respect the EU time frame
9
Requirements for AEBS
Some systems
already available
Currently no
specific regulation
Avoid unnecessary
packaging
Keep legal flexibility
for non EU CPs
No need to regulate
categories where system
is not required
AEBS to be
introduced
into a new
UNECE
regulation
Aim: Collision avoidance
This
regulation to
be separated
from LDWS
Aim: Collision mitigation/reduction
Provisions should
be
be technology
performance
neutral
based
aim moving/
stopping
targets only
include test
procedure
covering rear-end
collisions
10
Requirements for LDWS
Some systems
already available
UNECE R79 covers
active systems
Keep legal flexibility
for non EU CPs
Currently no
specific regulation
No need to regulate
categories where system
is not required
LDWS to be
introduced
into a new
UNECE
regulation
Aim: lane keep and
change assist
This
regulation to
be separated
from AEBS
Aim: warning only
Provisions should
be
be technology
performance
neutral
based
Be based on
ISO17361
technical
provisions
Avoid direct
references to
ISO standards
11
Organization of work
EU dates
• October 2013 for New Types
• October 2015 for New Registration
Time frame
• Time frame for development of the new
regulation should be compatible with the
introduction dates
Content
• Content of the regulation should be compatible
with the introduction dates
Optimization of
the resources
• One informal working group is sufficient
12