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 automatic 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’s activities.

Euro New Car Assessment Programme (NCAP) will start to test pedestrian Automatic Emergency Braking Systems (AEB) from 2016 on. Test procedures for these tests had been developed by and discussed between the AsPeCSS project and other initiatives (e.g. the AEB group with Thatcham Research from the United Kingdom). This paper gives an overview on the development process from the AsPeCSS side, summarizes the current test and assessment procedures as of March 2015 and shows test and assessment results of five cars that had been tested by BASt for AsPeCSS and the respective manufacturer. The test and assessment methodology seems appropriate to rate the performance of different vehicles. The best test result - still one year ahead of the test implementation - is around 80%, while the worst rating result is around 10%. Other vehicles are between these boundaries.

Accidents between right turning trucks and straight riding cyclists often show massive consequences. Accident severity is much higher than in other accidents. The situation is critical especially due to the fact that, in spite of the six mirrors that are mandatory for ensuring a minimum field of sight for the truck drivers, cyclists in some situations cannot be seen or are not seen by the driver. Either the cyclist is overlooked or is in a blind spot area that results from the turning manoeuvre of the truck and its articulation if it is a truck trailer or truck semitrailer combination. At present driver assistance systems are discussed that can support the driver in the turning situation by giving a warning when cyclists are riding parallel to the truck just before or in the turning manoeuvre. Such systems would generally bear a high potential to avoid accidents of right turning trucks and cyclists no matter if they ride on the road or on a parallel bicycle path. However, performance requirements for such turning assist systems or even test procedures do not exist yet. This paper describes the development of a testing method and requirements for turning assist systems for trucks. The starting point of each development of test procedures is an analysis of accident data. A general study of accident figures determines the size of the problem. In-depth accident data is evaluated case by case in order to find out which are representative critical situations. These findings serve to determine characteristic parameters (e.g. boundary conditions, trajectories of truck and cyclist, speeds during the critical situation, impact points). Based on these parameters and technical feasibility by current sensor and actuator technology, representative test scenarios and pass/fail-criteria are defined. The outcome of the study is an overview of the accident situation between right turning trucks and straight driving cyclists in Germany as well as a corresponding test procedure for driver assistance systems that at this first stage will be informing or warning the driver. This test procedure is meant to be the basis for an international discussion on introducing turning assist systems in vehicle regulations

Automatic Emergency Braking (AEB) Systems are becoming important to increase traffic safety. Test procedures in testing for consumer information, manufacturer self-certification and technical regulations are used to ensure a certain minimum performance of these systems. Consequently, test robustness, test efficiency and finally test cost become increasingly important. The key driver for testing effort and test costs is the required repeatable accuracy in a test design - the higher the accuracy, the higher effort and test costs. On the other hand, the performance of active safety systems depends on time discretization in the environment perception and other sub-systems: for instance, typical sensors supply information with a cycle time of 50 - 150 ms. Time discretization results in an inherent spread of system performance, even if the test conditions are perfectly equal. The proposed paper shows a methodology to derive requirements for a test setup (e.g. test repeats, use of driving robots, ...) as function of AEB system generation and rating method (e.g. Euro New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) points awarded, pass/fail, ...). While the methodology itself is applicable to AEB pedestrian and AEB Car-Car scenarios, due to the lack of sufficient test data for AEB Car-Car, the focus of this paper is on AEB pedestrian scenarios. A simulation model for the performance of AEB Pedestrian systems allows for the systematic variation of the discretization time as well as test condition accuracy. This model is calibrated with test results of 4 production vehicles for AEB Pedestrian, all fully tested by BASt according to current Euro NCAP test protocols. Selected parameters to observe the accuracy of the test setup in case of pedestrian AEB is the calculated impact position of pedestrian on the vehicle front (as if no braking would have occurred), and the test vehicle speed accuracy. These variable was shown in real tests to be repeatable in the range of ± 5 cm and ± 0,25 km/h, respectively, with a fully robotized state of the art test setup. The sensitivity of AEB performance (measured in achieved speed reduction as well as overall rating result according to current Euro NCAP rating methods) towards discretization and the sensitivity of performance towards test accuracy then is compared to identify economic yet robust test concepts. These comparisons show that the available repeatability accuracy of current test setups is more than sufficient for today's AEB system capabilities. Time discretization problems dominate the performance spread especially in test scenarios with a limited pedestrian dummy reveal time (e.g. child behind obstruction, running adult scenarios with low car speeds). This would allow to increase test tolerances to decrease test cost. A methodology which allows to derive the required tolerances in active safety tests might be valuable especially for NCAPs of emerging countries that do not have the necessary equipment (e.g. driving robots, positioning units) available for the full-scale and high tolerance EuroNCAP active safety procedures yet still want to rate active safety systems, thus improving the global safety.

Abbiegeunfalle mit Kollisionen zwischen rechtsabbiegenden Guterkraftfahrzeugen und Fahrradern haben in der Regel schwerwiegende Folgen fur den ungeschutzten Verkehrsteilnehmer. In der Vergangenheit wurde durch eine steigende Anzahl von Spiegeln das individuelle Sichtfeld des Lkw-Fahrers vergrosert und die Sicherheit fur ungeschutzte Verkehrsteilnehmer durch den Seitenunterfahrschutz verbessert. Da Abbiegeunfalle trotz der Vielzahl an Spiegeln auch heute noch geschehen, gleichzeitig aber Fahrerassistenzsysteme Einzug in viele Fahrzeugklassen gehalten haben, liegt es nahe, derartige Systeme fur die Verhinderung von Abbiegeunfallen zu nutzen. Um entsprechende Systementwicklungen fordern zu konnen oder aber auch Systeme vorschreiben zu konnen, sind Anforderungen und passende Testmethoden fur Abbiegeassistenzsysteme erforderlich. Ziel der BASt war es, solche Anforderungen und ein mogliches Testverfahren hierfur zu entwickeln. Ausgehend von Analysen des Unfallgeschehens wurden charakteristische Parameter und Begleitumstande von Unfallen zwischen Fahrradern und rechtsabbiegenden Lkw identifiziert. Aus fahrdynamischen Uberlegungen folgt bei den gegebenen Parametern, dass nur eine fruhe, aber niederschwellige Fahrerinformation eine wirkungsvolle Assistenzfunktion zur Verhinderung der Unfalle sein kann. Fur automatische Bremsungen gibt es bisher noch zu wenig Erfahrungen im Feld, und klassische, hochschwellige, aber sehr spat erfolgende Warnsignale wurden durch die dann noch verstreichende Reaktionszeit keine rechtzeitige Bremsung des Lkw-Fahrers mehr hervorrufen. Basierend auf dem identifizierten Parameterraum, der zum komfortablen Anhalten erforderlichen Zeit und einem geeigneten Kinematikmodell lassen sich die raumlichen Bereiche um den Lkw definieren, in dem eine Umfelderkennung den Fahrradfahrer detektieren konnen muss, damit das Informationssignal durch das Assistenzsystem an den Lkw-Fahrer rechtzeitig ausgegeben wird. Aktuell wird davon ausgegangen, dass ein Abbiegeassistenzsystem, das die hier beschriebenen Prufungen besteht, einen sehr positiven Einfluss auf das Unfallgeschehen zwischen rechtsabbiegenden Lkw und Fahrradern haben wird.

It is well known that most accidents with pedestrians are caused by the driver not being alert or misinterpreting the situation. For that reason advanced forward looking safety systems have a high potential to improve safety for this group of vulnerable road users. Active pedestrian protection systems combine reduction of impact speed by driver warning and/or autonomous braking with deployment of protective devices shortly before the imminent impact. According to the (European New Car Assessment Programme EuroNCAP) roadmap the Autonomous Emergency Braking system tests for Pedestrians Protection will be set in force from 2016 onwards. Various projects and organisations in Europe are developing performance tests and assessment procedures as accompanying measures to the EuroNCAP initiative. To provide synthesised input to EuroNCAP so-called Harmonisation Platforms (HP’s) have been established. Their main goal is to foster exchange of information on key subjects, thereby generating a clear overview of similarities and differences on the approaches chosen and, on that basis, recommend on future test procedures. In this paper activities of the Harmonisation Platform 2 on the development of Test Equipment are presented. For the testing targets that mimic humans different sensing technologies are required. A first set of specifications for pedestrian targets and the propulsion systems as collected by Harmonisation Platform 2 are presented together with a first evaluation for a number of available tools.

OBJECTIVE:It is commonly agreed that active safety will have a significant impact on reducing accident figures for pedestrians and probably also bicyclists. However, chances and limitations for active safety systems have only been derived based on accident data and the current state of the art, based on proprietary simulation models. The objective of this article is to investigate these chances and limitations by developing an open simulation model.METHODS:This article introduces a simulation model, incorporating accident kinematics, driving dynamics, driver reaction times, pedestrian dynamics, performance parameters of different autonomous emergency braking (AEB) generations, as well as legal and logical limitations. The level of detail for available pedestrian accident data is limited. Relevant variables, especially timing of the pedestrian appearance and the pedestrian's moving speed, are estimated using assumptions. The model in this article uses the fact that a pedestrian and a vehicle in an accident must have been in the same spot at the same time and defines the impact position as a relevant accident parameter, which is usually available from accident data. The calculations done within the model identify the possible timing available for braking by an AEB system as well as the possible speed reduction for different accident scenarios as well as for different system configurations.RESULTS:The simulation model identifies the lateral impact position of the pedestrian as a significant parameter for system performance, and the system layout is designed to brake when the accident becomes unavoidable by the vehicle driver. Scenarios with a pedestrian running from behind an obstruction are the most demanding scenarios and will very likely never be avoidable for all vehicle speeds due to physical limits. Scenarios with an unobstructed person walking will very likely be treatable for a wide speed range for next generation AEB systems.

It is well known that most accidents with pedestrians are caused by the driver not being alert or misinterpreting the situation. For that reason advanced forward looking safety systems have a high potential to improve safety for this group of vulnerable road users. Active pedestrian protection systems combine reduction of impact speed by driver warning and/or autonomous braking with deployment of protective devices shortly before the imminent impact. According to the Euro NCAP roadmap the Autonomous Emergency Braking system tests for Pedestrians Protection will be set in force from 2016 onwards. Various projects and organisations in Europe are developing performance tests and assessment procedures as accompanying measures to the Euro NCAP initiative. To provide synthesised input to Euro NCAP so-called Harmonisation Platforms (HP’s) have been established. Their main goal is to foster exchange of information on key subjects, thereby generating a clear overview of similarities and differences on the approaches chosen and, on that basis, recommend on future test procedures. In this paper activities of the Harmonisation Platform 2 on the development of Test Equipment are presented. For the testing targets that mimic humans different sensing technologies are required. A first set of specifications for pedestrian targets and the propulsion systems as collected by Harmonisation Platform 2 are presented together with a first evaluation for a number of available tools.