State of the art and eVALUE scope

(1)

Testing and Evaluation Methods for ICT-based Safety Systems

Collaborative Project

Grant Agreement Number 215607

Deliverable D1.1

State of the Art and eVALUE scope

Confidentiality level: Public

Status: Final

Executive Summary

eVALUE will address the real function of ICT-based safety systems and their capability to perform the function through two courses of action: defining and quantifying the function out-put to be achieved by the safety system and developing the testing and evaluation methods for the ICT-based safety systems.

The safety systems within the eVALUE scope are classified into four clusters: longitudinal, lateral and yaw/stability. The fourth cluster remains open for upcoming systems. Based on market availability and penetration rate, the consortium decided to focus on eight preventive or mitigating safety systems: ACC, FCW and CM by braking, in the longitudinal assistance domain; BSD, LDW and LKA, in the lateral assistance domain; and finally, ABS and ESC, in the yaw/stability assistance domain. Following the description of current test and evaluation methods, sensor technologies, system function output and ECUs globally applicable to ICT-based safety systems, the report covers these technologies and components for the eight se-lected systems in detail.

As a next step to this deliverable and according to the work plan, concepts for design re-views, physical vehicle testing as well as laboratory testing will be analysed. The result will be an in-depth understanding of the possibilities to investigate and evaluate the eight active safety systems within the first phase of the project. The different concepts will then support the decision about the development of the testing and evaluation methods that are able to point out the safety benefit of those systems in the most representative way.

(2)

eVALUE 2 ICT-2007-215607 eVALUE-080402-D11-V14-FINAL.doc Document Name eVALUE-080402-D11-V14-FINAL.doc Version Chart

Version Date Comment

0.1 18.02.2008 Draft version created by ROBOTIKER

0.2 28.02.2008 Draft version to be discussed during 4/3/08 meeting

1.0 06.03.2008 Draft version, based on outline approved during 4/3/08 meeting 1.1 14.03.2008 Draft version, contributors compiled by ROBOTIKER

1.2 17.03.2008 Draft version, general conclusions added, reviewed by IKA 1.2b 18.03.2008 Draft version, reviewed by SP

1.2c 19.03.2008 Draft version, reviewed by VTI 1.2d 24.04.2008 Draft version, reviewed by IBEO 1.2e 25.03.2008 Draft version, reviewed by CRF

1.2f 26.03.2008 Draft version, reviewed by VTEC

1.3 31.03.2008 Final version, generated by ROBOTIKER 1.4 02.04.2008 Final version as delivered to EC

Authors

The following participants contributed to this deliverable:

Name Company Chapters

I. Camuffo CRF 2

K. Fürstenberg, D. Westhoff IBEO 2,7

A. Aparicio IDIADA 2

A. Zlocki, J. Lützow, M. Benmimoun,

M. Lesemann IKA 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

I. Iglesias, L. Isasi,. J. Murgoitio ROBOTIKER-TECNALIA 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7

J. Jacobson, H. Eriksson, J. Hérard SP 2, 3, 6, 7

S. Leanderson, K. Heinig, A.-S. Karlsson VTEC 2, 3, 5, 6, 7

J. Jansson, H. Andersson VTI 2, 3, 5, 6, 7

Coordinator

Dipl.-Ing. Micha Lesemann

Institut für Kraftfahrwesen Aachen

Steinbachstraße 7, 52074 Aachen, Germany Phone: +49-241-8027535

Fax: +49-241-8022147

E-mail: lesemann@ika.rwth-aachen.de

Copyright

(3)

eVALUE 3 ICT-2007-215607

eVALUE-080402-D11-V14-FINAL.doc Table of Contents

1 INTRODUCTION ... 6

2 STATE OF THE ART... 7

2.1 Roadmap of ICT-based safety systems ... 7

2.1.1 Sensor Technologies and Trends... 8

2.1.2 Actuators and Trends ... 11

2.1.3 ECUs and Trends... 13

2.2 Testing and Evaluation Methods... 16

2.2.1 Standards and Reports ... 16

2.2.1.1 Testing Based on Systems... 16

2.2.1.2 Testing Based on Accident Statistics... 18

2.2.2 Other Projects ... 19

2.2.2.1 ASTE ... 19

2.2.2.2 PReVAL ... 21

2.2.2.3 AIDE ... 22

2.2.2.4 APROSYS... 23

2.2.2.4.1 APROSYS Pre-crash System Test Methodology... 23

2.2.2.4.2 Assessment methods for a side pre-crash protection system ... 23

3 Scope of eVALUE... 25

3.1 CLUSTER 1: Longitudinal assistance domain... 27

3.1.1 Adaptive Cruise Control (ACC)... 27

3.1.2 Forward Collision Warning (FCW) ... 27

3.1.3 Collision Mitigation (CM) ... 28

3.2 CLUSTER 2: Lateral Assistance Domain... 29

3.2.1 Blind Spot Detection (BSD) ... 29

3.2.2 Lane Departure Warning (LDW)... 29

3.2.3 Lane Keeping Assistant (LKA)... 30

3.3 CLUSTER 3: Yaw / Stability Assistance Domain ... 31

3.3.1 Antilock Brake System (ABS) ... 31

(4)

eVALUE 4 ICT-2007-215607

eVALUE-080402-D11-V14-FINAL.doc

4 CONCLUSIONS ... 33

5 GLOSSARY AND ACRONYMS ... 35

6 LITERATURE ... 37

7 ANNEX ... 42

7.1 State of the art ... 42

7.1.1 Detailed description of ICT based safety systems ... 42

7.1.1.1 Cluster 1: Longitudinal Assistance Domain ... 42

7.1.1.2 Cluster 2: Lateral Assistance Domain... 44

7.1.1.3 Cluster 3 Yaw/Stability Assistance Domain ... 46

7.1.1.4 Cluster 4: Additional Assistance Domain... 47

7.1.1.5 Sensor Technologies and Trends... 49

7.1.1.5.1 RADAR ... 49

7.1.1.5.2 LIDAR ... 51

7.1.1.5.3 VISION... 53

7.1.1.5.4 Infrared (IR)... 55

7.1.1.5.5 Specific Dynamic Sensors... 57

7.1.1.6 Actuators and Trends... 60

7.1.1.6.1 Warning ... 60

7.1.1.6.2 Support and Autonomous Intervention ... 61

7.1.1.7 ECUs and Trends... 69

7.1.1.7.1 Functional Safety ... 72

7.1.1.7.2 Reliability... 76

7.1.2 Evaluation methodology ... 78

7.1.2.1 Standards and Reports ... 78

7.1.2.2 Other Projects ... 99

7.2 Scope of eVALUE... 109

7.2.1 Adaptive Cruise Control (ACC)... 109

(5)

eVALUE 5 ICT-2007-215607

7.2.3 Collision Mitigation (CM) ... 117

7.2.4 Blind Spot Detection (BSD) ... 120

7.2.5 Lane Departure Warning (LDW)... 123

7.2.6 Lane Keeping Assistant (LKA)... 127

7.2.7 Antilock Brake System (ABS) ... 130

(6)

eVALUE 6 ICT-2007-215607

eVALUE-080402-D11-V14-FINAL.doc 1 INTRODUCTION

ICT-based safety systems have proven to be a key contributor to the reduction of road casu-alties in the last 20 years. Some of these systems, such as ABS, are nowadays mandatory for new vehicles. In the near future it is likely that other systems will also be mandatory for new vehicles. Accident data has already proven the beneficial effects of systems such as ESC, which seems a good candidate to be included.

All OEMs have implemented in their product range a series of ICT-based safety systems which sometimes mislead the customers in two main aspects: real function of the system and capability of the system to perform the function.

The eVALUE project will address these two aspects through two courses of action: 1. Definition and quantification of the system function to be achieved by the systems 2. Development of testing and evaluation methods for ICT-based safety systems. This document identifies the technologies and the test and evaluation methods representa-tive for ICT-based safety systems, focusing on commercially available or systems under de-velopment with the aim to prevent or mitigate accidents.

Following the description of current test and evaluation methods, sensor technologies, sys-tem function output and ECUs globally applicable to ICT-based safety syssys-tems are pre-sented. An overview of certain systems that are currently available and aiming to increase vehicle safety is given. The involved sensors and actuators as well as the ECUs are also covered.

(7)

eVALUE 7 ICT-2007-215607

eVALUE-080402-D11-V14-FINAL.doc 2 STATE OF THE ART

Present safety systems can be classified considering the criteria of active and passive safety. Active safety systems support the driver before a potential crash. The grade of support ranges from acoustic or visual warnings, to interventions in the brake/engine or steering sys-tem. Passive safety systems can be understood as protecting mechanisms, which contribute to the reduction of the accident consequences (see Fig. 2-1).

Active Safety

• Warning Systems • Assisting Systems

• Automatic Safety Systems

Passive Safety

• Safety Systems for minor Accidents • Safety Systems after Crash

Pre-Crash

Acute Occ. Protection Rescue

Collision Avoidance Post-Crash Normal In-Crash

S

it

u

a

ti

o

n

S

y

s

te

m

A

c

ti

o

n

H

a

z

a

rd

Time

Accident Prevention Hazard

Detection Damage Reduction

Hazard Mitigation

S

ta

g

e

_Hazard Avoidance

Fig. 2-1: Classification of active and passive safety

Today different systems for active and passive safety, such as collision avoidance, pre-crash and post-crash are under development or already on the market. The state of the art analysis of all ICT-based safety systems provides an overview of modern and future systems.

2.1 Roadmap of ICT-based safety systems

In Fig. 2-2 a roadmap for ICT-based safety systems is given. The time horizon ranges from today up to long term (> 10 years). All systems help to improve safe driving in order to pre-vent accidents or mitigate the consequences of an accident by means of active safety. The roadmap shows that ICT-based systems are getting more and more complex, combining existing functionalities, thus the necessary technology needs to be more reliable.

(8)

eVALUE 8 ICT-2007-215607 eVALUE-080402-D11-V14-FINAL.doc today short-term - 5 years medium-term 5 - 10 years long-term > 10 years ACC ACC Stop&Go

LDW ESC ABS Traction Control Blind Spot Monitoring Night Vision Brake Assistant Driver Drowsiness Warning Obstacle and Collision Warning Lane Keeping Assistant Adaptive Headlights Speed Alert

Active Font Steering Torque Vectoring Damper Control Roll Stability Control Curve Speed Assistant Warning Traffic Jam End Active Rear Steering

Active Wheel Load Distribution Active Spring Systems Adaptive Brake Assistant Intersection Assistant Lane Change Assistant

Merging Assistant Overtaking Assistant

Left Turning Assistant

IVDC

Active Wheel Load Distribution Lane Change Warning

Long. Collision Avoidance Collision Mitigation by Braking

E-Call

Pedestrian Protection

Autonomous Driving

Pre-Crash Systems

Fig. 2-2: Roadmap – time horizon for safety relevant ICT-based systems

Therefore the state of the art for sensor technology, actuators, electronic control elements and necessary hardware is described in the following chapter. Future trends are given, which indicate the next development step of these technologies.

The description of the ICT based systems presented on Fig. 2-2 can be found in Annex 7.1.1 - Detailed description of ICT based safety systems.

2.1.1 Sensor Technologies and Trends

Depending on the safety system functionality, a particular system may use a combination of the following sensor technologies: sensors that detect longitudinal or lateral proximity ob-jects, and sensors that detect features on the roadway or that detect in-vehicle parameters required to achieve stability of the subject vehicle. For instance, in the case of BSM (Blind Spot Monitoring) short-range rear proximity objects can be detected either by IR, vision, short range radar or Laserscanner technologies.

(9)

eVALUE 9 ICT-2007-215607

Fig. 2-3: Sensor technologies depending on the view area

The different sensor technologies that can be applied to the ICT-based safety systems can be summarized in the following:

• Radar. This technology uses high-frequency electromagnetic waves to measure dis-tance and relative speed. Commonly used radar systems operate at 24 GHz and at 76/77 GHz. 79 GHz can be considered as a future trend.

• Lidar and laserscanner. Laser Imaging Detection and Ranging or laser radar is the generic term for laser-based sensors. Laserscanner sensors are also called scanning Lidar. They increase the field of view and the resolution of lidar/radar sensors. Laser-scanner track and classify road users and obstacles in the field of view.

• Vision. Vision-based systems use one or more digital video cameras to view the characteristics of the roadway and/or the objects near or around the subject vehicle. Image processing will determine parameters such as lane position or presence of ob-jects in the path of the subject vehicle, for instance.

• IR. Active IR sensing technologies use an IR LED and a corresponding IR detector cell to measure lateral distances between points on the subject vehicle and detect-able characteristics on the roadway surface. Both active and passive IR technologies are used in automotive night vision systems. The system used by some manufactur-ers is a near infrared system (NIR) that requires illumination, while other systems are FIR based. Second generation systems will include object recognition and provide some kind of driver support apart form just displaying the IR image.

FRONTAL

LATERAL

REAR BLIND SPOT

(10)

eVALUE 10 ICT-2007-215607

• Specific dynamics sensor, such as wheel speed sensor, yaw rate sensor, accelera-tion sensor, steering wheel angle sensor and other sensors are used in some sys-tems by certain OEMs.

Three major trends can be found today in the field of automotive sensors:

• Integration of sensors: Variety of applications require complex measurements that do not rely on a single sensor signal. For instance, it is very common to measure temperature to compensate for sensor drift. Measuring temperature does not require a complex sensor but e.g. measuring humidity, a variety of gases or even fragrances, oil quality or several axes of vehicles dynamics call for sophisticated solutions. The in-tegration of several sensors needs new stacking and housing technologies. There-fore, paying special attention to the interdependencies of the suggested measuring principles is still a must.

The integration of proximity sensor and other sensors used to create situational awareness outside of the host vehicles body is also another example of sensor inte-gration.

• Distributed systems: Advances in sensor technology and computer networks have enabled distributed sensor networks (DSNs) to evolve from small clusters of large sensors to large swarms of micro-sensors, from fixed sensor nodes to mobile nodes, from wired communications to wireless communications, from static network topology to dynamically changing topology. However, these technological advances have also brought new challenges to processing large amount of data in a bandwidth-limited, power-constraint, unstable and dynamic environment. Recent developments in DSNs are focused on four aspects: network structure, data processing paradigm, sensor fu-sion algorithm with emphasis on fault-tolerant algorithm design, and optimal sensor deployment strategy.

• Sensor fusion / virtual sensors: Data fusion refers to the fusing of information re-sulting from several, possibly different, physical sensors, i.e. to compute new virtual sensor signals. These include underlying real sensors used to measure characteris-tics of the environment of the car, to monitor the internal parameters and status of the vehicle and to observe or anticipate the driver’s intent and driving behaviour. All sig-nals are fed into a sensor integration unit, which merges the information from different sources and allows the computation of virtual sensor signals. These, in turn, may be used as inputs to various control systems, such as antiskid systems and adaptive cruise control systems, or in Human/Machine Interfaces (HMI), such as e.g. a dashboard or overhead display.

There is a huge potential for the use of data and sensor fusion technology to substi-tute expensive precision sensors and to create high-precision virtual sensors at a modest cost.

(11)

eVALUE 11 ICT-2007-215607

The possibility to compute virtual sensor signals allows assessing complex dimen-sions like oil quality or obstacle detection. Additionally, fault diagnosis/self-test of the physical sensors can be improved. Thus, by using sensor fusion, analytical redun-dancy is introduced, which can be used to detect and isolate different sensor faults. Classical designs rely on hardware redundancy to achieve these goals, which is a very expensive solution compared to using sensor fusion software.

Sensor technologies are explained more in detail in the Annex 7.1.1.5 Sensor Technologies and trends (page 49).

2.1.2 Actuators and Trends

Depending on the safety system functionality, its function output can be one or a combination of the following:

• Warning: The output from the function is a haptic, acoustic and/or visual warning to the driver issued by the ICT-based safety system activated. In this case, the system relies on the driver to respond to the warning, with the appropriate action to avoid any hazard. Thus, for proper functionality of the system the driver must responds cor-rectly, e.g. as intended by the system designer.

• Support: The function output is providing a support to the driver linked to vehicle components such as engine, braking, steering and/or transmission. Unlike a warning the supportive function provides a physical contribution to the driving task by e.g add-ing a torque in the steeradd-ing or buildadd-ing up the brake pressure. However, rather than carrying out the entire action this type of actuators actively supports and contributes to the driver’s action and gives feedback to the driver on which should be his/her re-sponse.

• Autonomous intervention: A function output through the engine, or through braking, steering and/or transmission. Occurs when the ICT-based safety system reaction im-plies a physical response such as braking of the subject vehicle for instance and the subject vehicle itself acts directly for the proper functionality of the safety system.

(12)

eVALUE 12 ICT-2007-215607

Fig. 2-4: Warning and autonomous intervention in ICT-based safety systems.

There is currently a generalized trend of integrating electronic devices in existing elements of the steering, engine, and gearbox, allowing autonomous behaviours meant to give more complex answers to the new requirements of the safety systems. In addition, communication among all these systems is now vital, since many systems make use of several vehicle elec-tronic and mechanical devices to solve dangerous situations effectively. The first ESC gen-eration e.g. was limited to stabilize the car actuating exclusively on the brake system. How-ever, today it can stabilize the vehicle more effectively using the brake system, the differen-tial control system and the management of the engine or gearbox.

Fig. 2-5: All-wheel drive schematic

Another trend that is becoming more popular is to replace mechanical actuators with electri-cal ones. Control and operational modes of systems based on this type of electrielectri-cal actuators

(13)

eVALUE 13 ICT-2007-215607

are then greater than before. A good example for this can be found in electric power steering, EPS, broadly used today in the Automotive industry with multiple possibilities of interaction with safety systems and different modes of operation.

In other systems like the braking system, mechanical parts will be replaced by electrical parts. This change will contribute to increase operation logic versatility and easiness of inte-gration level, in more complex systems.

The electronic-mechanic interface that enables this interaction between safety systems and system components, basically mechanical (braking system, for instance), is not completely free of errors but still valuable for simplifying and extending the operation modes of the safety system.

Fig. 2-6: Electric braking calliper used in the EWB system (source: Siemens-VDO)

A more detailed description on the actuators implemented on the ICT-based safety systems can be found in Annex 7.1.1.6 Actuators and trends (page 60).

2.1.3 ECUs and Trends

Electronic Control Units (ECUs) are subsystems consisting of CPUs and assorted signal in-puts and outin-puts dedicated to controlling a component within the vehicle. They range in complexity from an Engine Control Unit which handles the logic for managing the power-train system efficiency to an Anti-lock Braking (ABS) Control unit that monitors vehicle speed and brake fluid, to a simple body module that controls the automatic door locks or power win-dows. In many cases, these modules communicate with each other through such protocols as CAN, LIN, J1850, and J1959.

Historically, automotive electronics have been built up using discrete, smaller integrated cir-cuits. They relied on proprietary, dedicated wire communication schemes, at least for many sensor systems, and directly wired power outputs to the actuators. This led to large PCBs,

(14)

eVALUE 14 ICT-2007-215607

large ECU housing sizes, and excessive wiring. Before in-vehicle networks, point-to-point control was the rule, which meant that every system was connected to its control point by a separate wire. Each new wire added complexity and potentially decreased reliability. Wiring introduces other problems since it consumes space, adds weight and expense, is susceptible to EMI, and can be difficult to maintain.

Improvements in vehicle-networking standards and mixed-signal semiconductor processes are addressing these issues and introducing new possibilities to distribute intelligent systems throughout a vehicle. The trend in vehicle-networking standardization includes the wide adoption of CAN and LIN architecture, now in version 2.0. FlexRay protocol serves also as a communication infrastructure for future generation high-speed control applications in vehi-cles, providing various network topologies, communication modes, and message exchange principles. The MOST protocol is a networking standard intended for interconnecting multi-media components in vehicles. It differs from existing vehicle bus technologies due to the fact that an optical fibre is used as the physical medium, thus providing a bus-based network-ing system at bit-rates much higher than available on previous vehicle-bus technologies (see fig. 2.7).

Fig. 2-7: Different network standards in a car.

Basically, LIN and CAN network standards are providing a balance between performance and cost optimization across automotive systems. CAN provides a high-speed network for chassis, power-train and body-backbone communications, while LIN answers the need for a simple network for sensor and actuator subsystems that reduces cost and improves robust-ness through standardization. The wide use of CAN and the availability of LIN coincides with

(15)

eVALUE 15 ICT-2007-215607

improvements in mixed-signal semiconductor-process technologies that bring together all the functionality needed for smaller automotive systems onto a single IC, or a few ICs for more advanced systems.

All together, the vehicle networking standards and advanced mixed-signal processes provide an opportunity for automotive manufacturers to introduce affordable new electronic systems as well as to reduce the cost of existing systems. They also improve maintenance and reli-ability while providing advanced convenience and safety features to the occupants of a car. In the future, automotive networks will simplify the operation of control systems and simulta-neously increase the number of features by attaching more and more control modules into high-speed data networking backbones.

In-vehicle networking is a mission-critical component of environmentally friendly automobiles such as hybrids, which would not be possible without fast, reliable inter-communication bet-ween hybrid-drive components. Hybrids include energy storage system, which means battery charging and management. The architecture also requires precise coordination between the electric motor and the gasoline engine – adding up to a lot more control and a lot more com-munication.

Within the next years, FlexRay will increase its market penetration. FlexRay is a high-speed (10 Mbps) network well-suited for time-critical applications. It has been in development since 1999 and is now in use in some vehicles, for safety applications such as active suspensions.

Fig. 2-8: Network standard data rate vs. relative cost per node

Because of the growth forecast in the number of ECUs, automotive engineers are looking to combine the functions of multiple ECUs into one. In addition to reduced complexity, func-tional integration also improves cost efficiency. This trend towards combining ECUs presents both a challenge and an opportunity to semiconductor companies. On one hand, it typically means more than one transceiver and perhaps more than one microcontroller per ECU.

(16)

eVALUE 16 ICT-2007-215607

Some companies are taking advantage of the trend by integrating more functionality into their transceiver products. This integration reduces costs and increases reliability because there are fewer components on the ECU circuit board. The architecture also gives first-tier elec-tronic module suppliers and auto manufacturers more flexibility and scalability. Integrating other functions into transceivers has the benefit of allowing the implementation of fail-safe safety features. If, for example, an MCU fails, a smart transceiver can isolate it from the rest of the network.

The integration of CAN/LIN plus other ECU components and functionality will be one of two major networking trends. The other will be the steady growth of FlexRay. Integrated CAN/LIN components will surpass standalone components in the long run and FlexRay will sustain a high growth rate.

ECU technologies are discussed more in detail in the Annex 7.1.1.7 ECUs and Trends (page 69).

2.2 Testing and Evaluation Methods

This section will present the current state-of-the-art with respect to testing and evaluation of active safety systems. The first part will briefly introduce existing and upcoming testing stan-dards and recommendations, and the second part will present results of other research pro-jects that might have an impact on the work to be carried out in the eVALUE project.

2.2.1 Standards and Reports

For ABS, ESC, ACC, FCW, and LDW international performance testing standards and re-ports are available today. Additionally, standardization work is on-going for Lane Change Decision Aid Systems (e.g. Blind Spot Detection) as well as Low Speed Following Systems and Full Speed Range ACC Systems.

2.2.1.1 Testing Based on Systems

In this section, a list of relevant standards and reports is presented. The standards and re-ports are coarsely grouped into four areas: general, longitudinal assistance, lateral assis-tance, and yaw/stability assistance. More thorough descriptions of selected standards can be found in Annex 7.1.2 Evaluation methodology.

General

• ISO 15037-1:2006 Road vehicles – Vehicle dynamics test methods – Part 1: General conditions for passenger cars [15037-1]

• ISO 15037-2:2002 Road vehicles – Vehicle dynamics test methods – Part 2: General conditions for heavy vehicles and buses [15037-2]

(17)

eVALUE 17 ICT-2007-215607

• ISO 15622:2002 Transport information and control systems – Adaptive Cruise Control Systems – Performance requirements and test procedures [15622]

• ISO 15623:2002 Transport information and control systems – Forward vehicle colli-sion warning systems – Performance requirements and test procedures [15623] • ISO/DIS 22178 Intelligent transport systems – Low speed following (LSF) systems –

Performance requirements and test procedures

• ISO/DIS 22179 Intelligent transport systems – Full speed range adaptive cruise con-trol (FSRA) systems – Performance requirements and test procedures

• SAE J2399 Adaptive Cruise Control (ACC) Operating Characteristics and User Inter-face [J2399]

• SAE J2400 Human Factors in Forward Collision Warning Systems: Operating Char-acteristics and User Interface Requirements [J2400]

• FMCSA-MCRR-05-007 Concept of Operations and Voluntary Operational Require-ments for Forward Collision Warning Systems (CWS) and Adaptive Cruise Control (ACC) Systems On-Board Commercial Motor Vehicles [FMCSA05b]

Lateral Assistance Domain

• ISO 17361:2007 Intelligent transport systems – Lane departure warning systems – Performance requirements and test procedures [17361]

• ISO/DIS 17387 Intelligent transport systems – Lane change decision aid systems – Performance requirements and test procedures

• SAE J2478 Proximity Type Lane Change Collision Avoidance

• FMCSA-MCRR-05-005 Concept of Operations and Voluntary Operational Require-ments for Lane Change Warning System (LDWS) On-Board Commercial Motor Vehi-cles [FMCSA05a]

Stability/Yaw Assistance Domain

• ISO 3888-1:1999 Passenger cars – Test track for a severe lane-change manoeuvre – Part 1: Double lane change [3888-1]

• ISO 3888-2:2002 Passenger cars – Test track for a severe lane-change manoeuvre – Part 2: Obstacle avoidance [3888-2]

• ISO 6597:2005 Road vehicles – Hydraulic braking systems, including those with elec-tronic control functions, for motor vehicles – Test procedures [6597]

• ISO 7401:2003 Road vehicles – Lateral transient response test methods – Open-loop test methods [7401]

• ISO 7975:2006 Passenger cars – Braking in a turn – Open loop test methods [7975] • ISO 21994:2007 Passenger cars – Stopping distance at straight-line braking with

(18)

eVALUE 18 ICT-2007-215607

• SAE J2536 Anti-lock brake system (ABS) road test evaluation procedure for trucks, truck-tractors and buses [J2536]

• FMVSS 126 Laboratory test procedure for electronic stability control systems [FMVSS126]

• GRRF-63-26 Draft global technical regulation on electronic stability control systems

Standard/Report ACC FCW BSD LKA LDW ABS ESC

ISO 3888-1:1999 ● ISO 3888-2:2002 ● ISO 6597:2005 ● ISO 7401:2003 ● ISO 7975:2006 ● ISO 15622:2002 ● ISO 15623:2002 ● ISO 17361:2007 ● ISO/DIS 17387 ● ● ISO 21994:2007 ● ISO/DIS 22178 ● ISO/DIS 22179 ● SAE J2399 ● SAE J2400 ● SAE J2478 ● SAE J2536 ● FMCSA-MCRR-05-005 ● FMCSA-MCRR-05-007 ● ● FMVSS 126 ● GRRF-63-26 ●

Table 2-1: Connection between different standards/reports and systems (standard names put in italic are not yet public available or at different levels of development)

The connections between standards/reports and different systems are summarized in table 2-1. Naturally, there are more standards/reports available for the systems which have been around for a while, i.e. for ABS and ESC systems. There are also standards available for manoeuvring aids for low speed operation, e.g. reverse collision warning system, but they have been omitted in this report, as they are not considered relevant in terms of safety.

2.2.1.2 Testing Based on Accident Statistics

The previous section discussed standards and reports which are targeting a specific system. However, the tests which are presented in this section are derived from accident data and consequently they do not target a specific system but rather specific (crash imminent) traffic scenarios.

(19)

eVALUE 19 ICT-2007-215607

The Integrated Vehicle-Based Safety System (IVBSS) programme has published a report recommending a basic set of crash imminent test scenarios for integrated vehicle-based safety systems designed to warn the driver of an impending rear-end, lane change, or run-off-road crash [810757]. The scenarios are selected based on the U.S. 2000-2003 General Estimates System (GES) crash databases.

The scenarios are divided into the following categories: • Rear-end crash threat scenarios

• Lane change threat scenarios

• Road departure crash threat scenarios • Multiple-threat scenarios

• No-warn threat scenarios

More information on the IVBSS imminent crash test scenarios can be found in Annex 7.1.2 Evaluation methodology.

2.2.2 Other Projects

Strategies and methodologies for test and evaluation of preventive safety functions have been addressed in several research projects in Europe and US during the last years. This section provides a short survey of some of the work done in the field within EU and brings up some key aspects and concepts that are of importance for the future eVALUE work that can be concluded as follows:

While PReVAL project addressed how to evaluate different systems, ASTE ad-dressed the potential and feasibility of a future performance testing program, where harmonization of test methods and systems is concluded to be an important first step. In AIDE the focus was on methods for evaluating IVIS, but these methods could also be used in evaluation of preventive safety functions (acceptance, workload and us-ability). Therefore it would be of interest for the eVALUE project.

All these projects described next provided general test concepts for evaluating safety systems; however test methods explicitly derived in detail were not provided so far. Thus it will be the scope of eVALUE to derive detailed test methods.

2.2.2.1 ASTE

This study investigated the feasibility of setting up an objective test program for intelligent vehicle safety systems. The aim of the work was

• To assess the feasibility of setting up an independent performance and conformance testing programme for Intelligent Vehicle Safety Systems

(20)

eVALUE 20 ICT-2007-215607

• To define the needed methods and principles for verification and validation of Intelli-gent Vehicle Safety Systems, and

• To evaluate if a consensus of the proposed principle can be achieved with different stakeholders.

The results from the study were presented in the final report [ASTE]. The report contains a proposal on how to define performance testing and the important dimensions of testing of ac-tive safety systems that need to be considered. A summary of this discussion is provided in Annex 7.1.2 Evaluation methodology.

A major output from ASTE is the proposal of different test strategies for doing performance testing. Two main approaches were proposed for physical testing, each taking into account traffic scenarios based on real accident statistics; the system-based approach and the sce-nario-based approach. These two ways of performing physical test could also be comple-mented with document-based reviews. Each strategy for physical test was concluded to have advantages and disadvantages.

• The scenario-based approach is defined in ASTE as development of test methods for testing the performance of a vehicle in traffic scenarios, extracted from real accident data, where the tests are independent of specific systems that the vehicle is equipped with. The first step in this approach is to categorize relevant accidents. Based on acci-dent statistics available, assumptions are made on the most important traffic scenarios to test and the characteristics of these scenarios. The tests aim at being general and addressing the performance of the complete vehicle rather then being specifically adapted for a certain type of system. Thus, the performance is addressed with the ve-hicle as a “black-box”, where several different systems could contribute separately or in combination.

• The system-based approach is defined in ASTE as development of test methods, adapted to certain systems or system cluster, starting from the systems and the tech-nology they are based on. Based on the system descriptions relevant traffic scenarios are searched among the accident statistics available, where the current systems are assumed to have an impact. Assumptions are thus made in what traffic scenarios these systems are useful. For each system that is considered, a number of relevant traffic scenarios will be suggested for testing the performance of the vehicle equipped with the safety function.

For both approaches, real world accident data is of great importance for deriving relevant traffic scenarios for testing a vehicle equipped with a safety function. The main difference is the way of categorizing the accident data and the way of considering the systems installed in the vehicle. Traffic scenarios can be either general; not addressing a certain system in par-ticular (scenario-based approach) or being specified for a certain system (system-based ap-proach). A further discussion of the two approaches as presented in ASTE is provided in An-nex 7.1.2 Evaluation methodology.

(21)

eVALUE 21 ICT-2007-215607

In the ASTE study the scenario based approach was proposed for a future performance test-ing program. A high-level test methodology starttest-ing from analysis of accident data was pro-posed. Examples of test cases were provided, that takes into account the important dimen-sions of a test scenario; attributes on driver state, vehicle and environment parameters. A proposal on how to break down a relevant accident to a traffic scenario for performing a test is provided in Annex 7.1.2 Evaluation methodology.

2.2.2.2 PReVAL

This project was performed as a subproject of the PReVENT Integrated Project (IP) of the 6th Framework Programme and aimed at assessing the safety impact of the functions developed within PReVENT and also to develop a general framework for evaluation and assessment of preventive safety functions. A best practice in evaluation was defined based on experience from within PReVENT1 and other projects such as AIDE and APROSYS.

For human factors evaluation the following dimensions were addressed • Time frame of test; short term testing vs. long term

• Intended effects and unintended effects

• Level of intervention of the function and on what action level the system supports the driver (operational, tactical or strategical, levels proposed by MICHON) [Michon85]. A concept introduced in PReVAL was situational control referring to the degree of control that a driver-vehicle system has in specific traffic situation. With this concept; the purpose of a preventive safety system can be understood as an attempt to increase situational control. In validation, where both technical performance and human factors performance are impor-tant parts, the aim is to collect data to quantify the system effects, and to see whether situ-ational control has been changed. Fig. 2-9 shows how technical performance testing and human factors testing are connected to situational control. According to this figure, situational control is the concept used for the overall effects the function has on the vehicle and the driver, where the technical performance is the input, as well as the driver’s acceptance and usability (part of human factors performance).

1

(22)

eVALUE 22 ICT-2007-215607

Fig. 2-9: The technical performance of a safety system and the human factors related is-sues induced, together constitute an assembled impact on the situation which can be summarized as situational control.

The methodology used for evaluation of technical performance and human factors is pre-sented in Annex 7.1.2 Evaluation methodology. A final report will be delivered in PReVAL, with a framework integrating the technical and human factors evaluation, which is currently not yet public.

2.2.2.3 AIDE

This IP project concerns methods for assessment of IVIS and assessment of integrated HMIs for different IVIS applications. However, the project also addresses methods applicable for ADAS evaluation. In the project methods for evaluating human factor related issues like ac-ceptance, usability and workload are suggested, which is applicable for evaluation of both IVIS and ADAS. Some of the methods presented and discussed in AIDE are surveyed in An-nex 7.1.2 Evaluation methodology.

The European Statement of Principles (ESoP) handle in-vehicle information and commu-nication systems intended for use by the driver while the vehicle is in motion e.g. navigation systems, telephones and traffic information. They are not specifically intended to apply to Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) such as adaptive cruise control and collision mitigation systems. Even if ADAS require additional considerations in terms of Human Ma-chine Interaction, in comparison to in-vehicle information systems, these principles might provide an important basis when developing corresponding methods for ADAS.

(23)

eVALUE 23 ICT-2007-215607

eVALUE-080402-D11-V14-FINAL.doc 2.2.2.4 APROSYS

2.2.2.4.1 APROSYS Pre-crash System Test Methodology

In order to achieve the next significant step in traffic safety, new technologies must be intro-duced into the car.

Two novel technologies have been applied for the first time in an automotive application: • A side-impact detection system using stereo video and radar sensors.

• A Shape-Memory-Alloy based structural actuator.

As a technological showcase these technologies have been combined in an integrated side-impact protection system. The system was derived from accident statistics, as was the test programme. The latter has proved finally the effectiveness of the two technologies.

Fig. 2-10: APROSYS Pre-Crash systems Generic Test methodology

2.2.2.4.2 Assessment methods for a side pre-crash protection system

Within APROSYS SP1.3 an evaluation methodology for advanced safety systems is being developed. This generic method (as shown above) is suitable to assess the complete safety system. The system specific test conditions and assessment criteria are defined using rele-vant accident and traffic scenarios. The essential evaluation of the technical performance, which is the main part of the method, is split in three steps of pre-crash performance, crash

(24)

eVALUE 24 ICT-2007-215607

performance and driver-in-the-loop performance. This methodology is applied on the SP6 pre-crash safety system.

(25)

eVALUE 25 ICT-2007-215607

eVALUE-080402-D11-V14-FINAL.doc 3 Scope of eVALUE

The scope of eVALUE is automotive preventive safety systems. These systems inform, warn or support the driver in his actions e. g. by reducing system reaction time or interact autono-mously with the vehicle guidance. Thus, all systems are considered as long as they help to avoid an accident or mitigate its consequences. Pre-crash systems, which help to mitigate accident injuries (e.g. belt pre-tensioners, pre-fired airbags or whiplash protection) are not addressed by eVALUE. Systems, which become active in the post-crash phase (e.g. e-call) are also not considered to be in the scope of eVALUE.

The preventive safety systems can be classified into four domains: • Longitudinal assistance

• Lateral assistance • Yaw/stability assistance • Additional assistance

Fig. 3-1 shows the proposed roadmap for safety relevant ICT-based systems in the four do-mains. Longitudinal Assistance Domain Lateral Assistance Domain Yaw/Stability Assistance Domain Additional Assistance Domain today short-term - 5 years medium-term 5 - 10 years long-term > 10 years ACC ACC Stop&Go LDW ESC ABS Traction Control Obstacle and Collision Warning

Long. Collision Avoidance

Intersection Assistant Lane Change Assistant

Lane Keeping Assistant

Merging Assistant Overtaking Assistant

Left Turning Assistant Curve Speed Assistant Blind Spot Monitoring Night Vision Adaptive Headlights Collision Mitigation by Braking Warning

Traffic Jam End

Brake Assistant Speed Alert

Driver Drowsiness Warning

Active Font Steering

Torque Vectoring

IVDC Active Rear Steering Damper Control Active Wheel Load Distribution Active Spring Systems Adaptive Brake Assistant

Lane Change Warning Roll Stability

Control

(26)

eVALUE 26 ICT-2007-215607

The scope of eVALUE includes all four domains. When designing test methods within eVALUE, they will be applied on a selected number of systems, based on the presented roadmap of ICT-based safety systems. The selection process considers:

• All four domains: System should address at least one domain.

• Market availability (time horizon: today). Systems which are available today or within the project development or duration.

• Market penetration rate: Vehicles >50.000 may incorporate the system

The testing and evaluation methods to be developed in eVALUE will cover systems of all four domains. In order to apply and validate the developed methodology, systems need to be available as prototypes or already on the market today. Furthermore a high market penetra-tion range will provide systems with equal funcpenetra-tionality from different manufacturers.

Based on this statement the following systems are considered: • System Cluster 1 (longitudinal assistance):

o ACC

o Forward Collision Warning

o Collision Mitigation, by braking. • System Cluster 2 (lateral assistance):

o Blind Spot Detection

o Lane Departure Warning

o Lane Keeping Assistant

• System Cluster 3 (yaw/stability assistance):

o ABS

o ESC

• System Cluster 4 (additional assistance):

o Not defined at this stage (ICT-based systems becoming available during pro-ject duration)

A general description of the function of these systems is the focus of the next subchapters. A more detailed description per system can be found in Annex 7.2 Scope of eVALUE (page 109).

(27)

eVALUE 27 ICT-2007-215607

3.1 CLUSTER 1: Longitudinal assistance domain

3.1.1 Adaptive Cruise Control (ACC)

General data on ACC

Name of the system Adaptive Cruise Control (ACC)

General function Stand alone system for taking over task of longitudinal

ve-hicle control

ACC: velocity rangebetween 30 and 200 km/h ACC S&G: velocity range between 0 and 200 km/h

■ Passenger cars

■ Trucks

Type of vehicles

■ Buses

Related documents

(for further usage in eVALUE)

ISO 15622:2002 SAE J2399

FMCSA-MCRR-05-007

Major technologies • Distance sensor for environmental detection of

targets ahead up to 200m

• ECU, which processes sensor signals, time gap and desired velocity and calculates necessary ac-celeration

• Actuators to apply brake force or acceleration of the vehicle

ACC

SUBJECT, speed

SUBJECT to TARGET, relative speed SUBJECT to TARGET, distance

SUPPORT, braking

INPUTS OUTPUTS

AUTONOMOUS INTERVENTION, acceleration

and braking

WARN, on precautious actions

SUBJECT, vehicle dynamics

For further details on this system, refer to Adaptive Cruise Control (ACC), page 109.

3.1.2 Forward Collision Warning (FCW)

General data on FCW

Name of the system Forward Collision Warning (FCW)

General function Stand alone system that provides alerts to assist drivers in

avoiding or reducing the severity of crashes by striking the rear-end of another vehicle.

(28)

eVALUE 28 ICT-2007-215607

■ Buses

ISO 15623:2002 SAE J2400

FMCSA-MCRR-05-007

FCW

SUBJECT, speed SUBJECT to TARGET, relative speed

SUBJECT to TARGET, distance

For further details on this system, refer to Forward Collision Warning (FCW), page 113.

3.1.3 Collision Mitigation (CM)

General data on CM

Name of the system Collision Mitigation (CM) by braking.

General function Stand alone driver assistance system that helps the driver

in mitigating imminent frontal collision by giving brake support, i.e. amplifying driver initiated braking, pre-charging the brake system (i.e. very light braking, not no-ticeable to the driver) or by autonomous brake interven-tion. The objective of the system is to reduce the collision speed when a collision is imminent. Ideally this means re-ducing the impact speed to zero.

■ Passenger cars (today)

■ Trucks (currently not on the market)

■ Buses (currently not on the market)

N/A

CM

SUBJECT, environment description

(29)

eVALUE 29 ICT-2007-215607

For further details on this system, refer to Collision Mitigation (CM) by braking, page 117.

3.2 CLUSTER 2: Lateral Assistance Domain

3.2.1 Blind Spot Detection (BSD)

General data on BSD

Name of the system Blind Spot Detection (BSD)

General function Stand alone driver assistance system that helps to avoid

side swipe collisions in lane change situations. The sys-tem issues a warning to the driver when an object is de-tected in the blind spot area. Normally the warning signal consists of a red warning light close to the left and right hand rear-view mirrors.

■ Trucks

■ Buses

ISO/DIS 17387

BSD

SUBJECT, lane change detection

SUBJECT’s BLIND SPOT, vehicle detection WARN, on precautious actions

For further details on this system, refer to Blind Spot Detection (BSD), page 120.

3.2.2 Lane Departure Warning (LDW)

General data on LDW

Name of the system Lane Departure Warning (LDW)

General function Stand alone system that supports the driver to stay in the

lane, by issuing a warning to the driver in case of an unin-tended lane change.

■ Trucks

■ Buses

ISO 17361:2007 FMCSA-MCRR-05-005

(30)

eVALUE 30 ICT-2007-215607

LDW

SUBJECT, upcoming lane marks detection WARN, on precautious actions SUBJECT, vehicle dynamics

For further details on this system, refer to Lane Departure Warning (LDW), page 123.

3.2.3 Lane Keeping Assistant (LKA)

General data on LKA

Name of the system Lane Keeping Assistant (LKA)

General function Stand alone system that supports the driver to stay in the

lane, by enhancing the Lane Departure Warning system with actuators which

• either applies a steering wheel vibration, or

• applies a torque on the steering system into the direc-tion of the lane centre. This torque is not strong enough to steer back, but it provides feedback to the driver in which direction he should steer, or

• autonomously steers back in the direction of the lane centre. ■ Passenger cars ■ Trucks Type of vehicles ■ Busses Related documents

N/A

LKA

SUBJECT, upcoming lane marks detection

SUPPORT, steering SUBJECT, vehicle dynamics

(31)

eVALUE 31 ICT-2007-215607

3.3 CLUSTER 3: Yaw / Stability Assistance Domain

3.3.1 Antilock Brake System (ABS)

General data on ABS

Name of the system Antilock Brake System (ABS)

General function Stand alone system that controls the brake wheel slips

and prevents locking of the individual wheels while brak-ing. The prevention of blocking wheels assures that the vehicle remains steerable and improves the driving stabil-ity of vehicles in specific braking situations.

■ Trucks

■ Buses

ISO 21994:2007 ISO 6597:2005 ISO 7975:2006 SAE J2536

ABS

INPUTS OUTPUTS AUTONOMOUS INTERVENTION,

individual wheel braking

SUBJECT, individual wheel slip detection

For further details on this system, refer to Antilock Brake System (ABS), page 130.

3.3.2 Electronic Stability Control (ESC)

General data on ESC

Name of the system Electronic Stability Control (ESC)

General function Stand alone system that helps to stabilize the yaw

behav-iour of a vehicle in critical driving situations by using con-trolled braking and engine interventions.

■ Trucks

■ Buses

ISO 3888-1:1999 ISO 3888-2:2002 ISO 7401:2003

(32)

eVALUE 32 ICT-2007-215607 eVALUE-080402-D11-V14-FINAL.doc FMVSS No. 126 GRRF-63-26

ESC

INPUTS OUTPUTS AUTONOMOUS INTERVENTION, braking

SUBJECT, stability loss detection

AUTONOMOUS INTERVENTION,

Engine / transmission

(33)

eVALUE 33 ICT-2007-215607

eVALUE-080402-D11-V14-FINAL.doc 4 CONCLUSIONS

The goal of eVALUE is the development of testing and evaluation methods for ICT-based safety systems. As a baseline, the technologies and components currently used in ICT-based safety systems as well as existing testing and evaluation methods have been col-lected.

An overview of the different systems that are currently available or under development, with aim to increase vehicle safety has been given. Besides the systems in general, the involved sensors and actuators as well as the ECUs are briefly described and summarised in the pre-vious sections. Detailed information is given in the Annex of this report.

While test methods for validation of ICT-based safety systems, with drivers in the loop, are scarce, testing and evaluation methods for testing of a specific system, against requirement specifications exist to some extent. These methods are officially, mainly given by means of standards. Some research projects have already been carried out in the field of testing and evaluation. Their focus was mainly on strategies and methodologies for testing active safety systems. Hence, to assess whether a system works for its intended purpose or not, driver-in-the-loop testing2 is required. For an ADAS system both HMI (graphics, layout, information to driver) and decision algorithms e.g. warning and automation strategies influence the interac-tion with the system.

Different means to evaluate ADAS systems could be used through out the development phase. For eVALUE, focus is on systems on a late prototype stage or systems already on the market. A challenge for eVALUE is to bring forth, collect and put together test methods that create a valid test battery able to capture the complex task of driving.

With the given input, some first conclusions are drawn for the eVALUE project. The systems to be regarded during the project are classified into four clusters. These domains are based on the driving path of the subject vehicle: longitudinal, lateral and yaw/stability. The fourth domain remains open for upcoming systems and will be defined at a later stage, but not after project month 18. This ensures to keep enough time for considering the systems of the fourth cluster within the testing methods.

A further classification of the systems has been done based on availability and market pene-tration. Based on these factors, the consortium decided to consider the following 8 ICT-based safety systems within the three clusters: Adaptive Cruise Control (ACC), Forward Col-lision Warning (FCW) and ColCol-lision Mitigation by braking (CM), in the longitudinal assistance domain; Blind Spot Detection (BSD), Lane Departure Warning (LDW) and Lane Keeping As-sistant (LKA), in the lateral assistance domain; and finally, Antilock Brake System (ABS) and Electronic Stability Control (ESC), in the yaw/stability assistance domain.

2

Driver-in-the-loop testing, meaning that the driver takes an active part in the iterative development process.

(34)

eVALUE 34 ICT-2007-215607

As a next step to this deliverable and according to the work plan, concepts for design re-views, physical vehicle testing as well as laboratory testing will be analysed. The result will be an in-depth understanding of the possibilities to investigate and evaluate the 8 active safety systems within the first phase of the project. The different concepts will then support the decision about the development of the testing and evaluation methods that are able to point out the safety benefit of those systems in the most representative way.

Taking into account the performance of the systems the safety impact of active safety in general can be estimated. This enables not only the project, but also all stakeholders to demonstrate the value of ICT-based safety systems and thus increase their acceptance. Eventually, increased acceptance and following market penetration will lead to a reduction of road fatalities, directly contributing to the target of the European Commission on this topic.

(35)

eVALUE 35 ICT-2007-215607

5 GLOSSARY AND ACRONYMS

Driver in the loop Driver-in-the-loop testing, meaning that the driver takes an active part in the iterative development process.

Driver model A model that completely specifies the drivers behaviour in one test case, with regard to vehicle inputs that may effect the test. Such in-puts are steering wheel angle, throttle position, brake pedal position, clutch, gear, turn signals, dummy driver gaze direction or eye closure. Driver Support Refers to the three levels of driving support defined by MICHON :

strategical, tactical, operational [Michon85]

False alarm An alarm where the (driver support) system does not work according to it's specifications/does not fulfil the system requirements.

Function Implementation of a set of rules to achieve a specified goal. Unambi-guously defined partial behaviour of one or more electronic control units

Function output Describes the resulting output of the system/ function in terms of in-formation: A continuous information or a warning is issued to the driver via different channels: optical/ acoustical/ haptical support: am-plify the driver action to a higher level. No autonomous action is taken by the system/ function, but the system ""prepares itself"" to reduce e. g. system reaction time. No action like steering or braking is taken without an initiation by the driver action: the system/ function acts autonomously without any action of the driver

Nuisance alarm An alarm that is perceived by the driver as a nuisance, this includes both false alarms and alarm where the system work as intended. Rear-end collision A collision where the host vehicle's front-end strikes a target vehicle's

rear-end

Subject vehicle Vehicle equipped with the systems under evaluation

System Combination of hardware and software enabling one or more func-tions Set of elements (at least sensor, controller, and actuator) in rela-tion with each other according to design. An element of a system can be another system at the same time. Then, it is called subsystem which can be a controlling or controlled system or which can contain hardware, software and manual operations.

Target vehicle Vehicle detected by the systems of the subject vehicle.

Validation Describes the process of evaluating the system impact e. g. on safety. That is, validation checks and tests whether the system "does what it was designed for", e. g. increase traffic safety by increasing headway, by avoiding impacts and so on. Driver-in-the-loop testing is required. Verification Describes the test of a system/ function against its requirements, that

is, whether it fulfils its requirements. ACRONYMS:

(36)

eVALUE 36 ICT-2007-215607

ABS Antilock Brake System IR Infrared

ACC Adaptive Cruise Control ISO International Standardisation organisation ACIM Alternating Current Induction Motor IVBSS Integrated Vehicle-Based Safety System ADAS Advanced Driver Assistance Systems IVDC Interactive Vehicle Dynamic Control AFS Adaptive Front-Lighting System IVIS Integrated Vehicular Information System AMR Anisotropic Magnetoresistance LCDAS Lane Change Decision Aid System BOS Beginning of Steer LCW Lane Change Warning

BSD Blind Spot Detection LDW Lane Departure Warning BSM Blind Spot Monitoring LDWS Lane Departure Warning System CAN Controller Area Network LED Light Emitting Diode

CCD Charge Coupled Device LIDAR Light Detection and Ranging CM Collision Mitigation LIN Local Interconnect Network CMbB Collision Mitigation by Braking LKA Lane Keeping Assistance CMBS Collision Mitigation Braking System LRR Long Range Radar CMOS Complementary Metal Oxide

Semiconduc-tor

LSF Low Speed Following CPU Central Processing Unit MCU Microprocessor Control Unit CWS Collision Warning System MMW Milimeter Wave

DC Diagnostic Coverage MOST Media Oriented System Transfer

DC Direct Current NHTSA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration DTI Diagnostic Test Interval NHTSA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration E/E/PES Electrical/Electronic/Programmable

Elec-tronic Safety

NIR Near Infrared

ECU Electrical Control Unit OEM Original Equipment Manufacturer EM Electromagnetic PCB Printed Circuit Board

EMI Electromagnetic Interference PDT Peripheral Detection Task

EPS Electric Power Steering PFH Probability of dangerous Failures per Hour ESC Electronic Stability Control Radar Radio Detection and Ranging

ESD Electrostatic Discharge RBD Reliability Block Diagrams EUC Equipment Under Control RCS Radar Cross Section EWB Electronic Wedge Brake RCS Radar Cross Section

FCW Forward Collision Warning SAE Society of Automotive Engineers FIR Far Infrared SAGAT Situation Awareness Global Assessment

Technique

FMCW Frequency Modulated Continuous Wave SART Structured Analysis for Real Time Systems FMEA Failure Modes and Effects Analysis SBW Steer by Wire

FMVSS Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard SFF Safe Failure Fraction FOV Field of View SFF Safe Failure Fraction FTA Fault Tree Analysis SRR Short Range Radar GES General Estimates System SV Subject Vehicle GPIO General Purpose Input/Output SWA Steering Wheel Angle GPS Global Positioning System TC Traction Control GVWR Gross Vehicle Weight Ratio TLC Time to Line Crossing HFT Hardware Fault Tolerance UDF Uncoupled Double Filter HMI Human Machine Interface V2I Vehicle to Infrastructure HUD Head-Up Display V2V Vehicle to Vehicle

IC Integrate Circuit VDM Visual Demand Measurement ICT Information and Communication

Tech-nologies

(37)

eVALUE 37 ICT-2007-215607

eVALUE-080402-D11-V14-FINAL.doc 6 LITERATURE

[15037-1] International standard ISO 15037-1:2006

Road vehicles – Vehicle dynamics test methods – Part 1: General conditions for passenger cars

International Standardisation Organisation, 2006 [15037-2] International standard ISO 15037-2:2002

Road vehicles – Vehicle dynamics test methods – Part 2: General conditions for heavy vehicles and buses

International Standardisation Organisation, 2002 [15622] International standard ISO 15622:2002

Transport information and control systems – Adaptive Cruise Control Systems Performance requirements and test procedures

Transport information and control systems – Forward vehicle collision warning systems –Performance requirements and test procedures

Intelligent transport systems – Lane departure warning systems – Perform-ance requirements and test procedures

Passenger cars – Stopping distance at straight-line braking with ABS – Open-loop test method

International Standardisation Organisation, 2007 [26262] ISO – International Organization for Standardization

ISO/WD 26262 “Road vehicles – Functional safety” 2007

[3888-1] International standard ISO 3888-1:1999

Passenger cars – Test track for a severe lane-change manoeuvre – Part 1: Double lane change

International Standardisation Organisation, 1999 [3888-2] International standard ISO 3888-2:2002

Passenger cars – Test track for a severe lane-change manoeuvre – Part 2: Obstacle avoidance