ADAS ADS Companion-2022
ADAS ADS Companion-2022
ADAS ADS Companion-2022
COMPANION
www.messring.de
ADAS/ADS Companion 2022/23
Page 19 - 85
Page 86 - 100
SafetyAssurance
Verification &
Validation
Technologies
Life Cycle
Management
6
i
Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) and Automated Driving Systems (ADS)
are synonymous with many technologies, development tools, processes, standards, ADAS/ADS
law and regulations, consumer assessments and others that are defining the future of COMPANION
mobility. The speed of development in this area is breath-taking and new information SafetyWissen on
is created by the minute, all over the world. 82 pages
Engineers working in or entering this field are overwhelmed by the sheer amount of
information. The all new ADAS/ADS Companion is our attempt to bring structure to
this mountain of information and also create entry points to more specific knowledge
and resources.
The ADAS/ADS Companion follows in its form and structure the highly popular SafetyCompanion by carhs.training
which has been published and updated annually since 2005. The SafetyCompanion has its focus on passive safety and
covers legal and consumer requirements from all over the world.
In compiling the new ADAS/ADS Companion, we have been very fortunate to gain the support of our international
editorial board (see next page) which helped us to develop the structure of the Companion and also gave us advice in
selecting the most relevant topics.
The ADAS/ADS Companion is by no means complete. It probably will never be as both technologies and require-
ments in the ADAS/ADS field are developing rapidly. Our aim is to add more relevant content to the Companion with
every edition and to make the Companion accessible to a large global engineering community. With the help of our
advertisers, we are happy to provide the ADAS/ADS companion free of charge (S&H may apply) to engineers around
the world.
The ADAS/ADS Companion is accompanied by SafetyWissen.com, our web portal to get access to full documents,
descriptions, tables and news for the automotive development engineer. QR-codes on the knowledge pages of the
Companion directly lead to deeper information on the respective topics. SafetyWissen.com also provides a superfast
navigation to resources in ADAS/ADS and Safety development, as well as knowledge in the field of virtual engineering.
The first edition of the ADAS/ADS Companion will be in English only; future editions will also come in different lan-
guages.
Enjoy reading and making use of the ADAS/ADS Companion for your daily work. We would be happy for any feed-
back from your side.
8
i
Editorial Board
The ADAS/ADS Companion is supported by an international editorial board with distinguished experts and industry
leaders in ADAS/ADS:
9
carhs.training gmbh
i
Seminars at carhs.training - Your Benefits
Free parking
The carhs TrainingCenter in Alzenau offers plenty of free and secure parking spaces for our course
participants. You don't have to plan any time for searching for a parking space and can start your
course in a relaxed way.
Free EV charging
You can use our charging station for electric and hybrid vehicles free of charge during your course
attendance at the carhs TrainingCenter in Alzenau. Two 11 kW type-2 charging stations are available
at your disposal.
And WiFi?
Of course, WiFi is also available free of charge at the carhs TrainingCenter in Alzenau. How-
ever, we recommend that you not be distracted while attending the seminar. But that is of
course your choice.
10
carhs.training gmbh
i
In-house Seminars
Seminars at your site - efficient, flexible and customized
Are you looking for an individual and customized training for your employees?
Most of the seminars from our training program can also be booked as in-house seminars in English, German or with simulta-
neous translation into your preferred language. Whether on your company site or at another venue of your choice, the scale
of our in-house seminars is tailored to your needs.
Your advantages
You retain full cost control. We offer attractive fixed prices for our
in-house seminars, depending on the number of participants and the
related service. Many of our customers have integrated
Even for a small number of participants you can save a lot of money our in-house seminars into their
compared to the individual booking of seminars. Additionally, there company's training program.
are no costs for travel and time of your employees.
We respect your target dates as far as possible – also upon short
Take advantage of this offer, too! We
notice in „urgent cases“. will be pleased to prepare you an
You benefit from our professional organization and the top-quality
individual offer.
seminar manuals.
Our lecturers answer your individual questions.
Even if you are interested in very specific questions – we are looking
for a qualified lecturer and develop the seminar.
References
ACTS, AIT, ARRK, AUDI, Autoform, AZOS, Bentley Motors, Bertrandt, BMW, Bosch, Brose, CATARC, Continental, CSI, Daimler,
Dalphimetal, Delphi, Dura Automotive, EDAG, Faurecia, Ford, F.S. Fehrer Automotive, Global NCAP, Grammer, HAITEC, Honda,
Hopium, Hyundai, IAV, IABG, IDIADA, IEE, JCI, IVM, Key Safety Systems, LEAR, Magna, Mahindra & Mahindra, MAHLE, MBtech,
MESSRING, MGA, NEVS, Opel, Open Air Systems, PATAC, Porsche, SAIC, SMP, SMSC, SEAT, Siemens, StreetScooter, TAKATA,
TASS, Tata, TECOSIM, TRW, TTTech, TÜV Süd, Valeo, VIF, Vinfast, Visteon, Volkswagen, ZF
Attractive prices
With reference to our regular seminar fees we offer attractive discounts on our in-house seminars:
11 11
SafetyWissen
SafetyWissen.com
ADAS/AD Definitions
13
SafetyWissen
SafetyWissen.com
14
SafetyWissen
SafetyWissen.com
Classification Definition
Passenger car A motor vehicle with motive power, except a low-speed vehicle, multipurpose passenger
vehicle, motorcycle, or trailer, designed for carrying 10 persons or less.
Multipurpose A motor vehicle with motive power, except a low-speed vehicle or trailer, designed to carry
passenger vehicle 10 persons or less which is constructed either on a truck chassis or with special features for
MPV occasional off-road operation.
Truck A motor vehicle with motive power, except a trailer, designed primarily for the transportation of
property or special purpose equipment.
Bus A motor vehicle with motive power, except a trailer, designed for carrying more than 10
persons.
Motorcycle A motor vehicle with motive power having a seat or saddle for the use of the rider and designed
to travel on not more than three wheels in contact with the ground.
Trailer A motor vehicle with or without motive power, designed for carrying persons or property and
for being drawn by another motor vehicle.
Low-speed vehicle A motor vehicle, that is 4-wheeled, whose speed attainable in 1 mile (1.6 km) is more than 20
miles per hour (32 kilometers per hour) and not more than 25 miles per hour (40 kilometers per
hour) on a paved level surface, and whose GVWR is less than 3,000 pounds (1,361 kilograms).
Pole Trailer A motor vehicle without motive power designed to be drawn by another motor vehicle and
attached to the towing vehicle by means of a reach or pole, or by being boomed or otherwise
secured to the towing vehicle, for transporting long or irregularly shaped loads such as poles,
pipes, or structural members capable generally of sustaining themselves.
15
SafetyWissen
SafetyWissen.com
0 0
- No automa- No automa-
tion tion
1
1
Some Functionspe-
Driver
driving modes cific automa-
assistance
tion
Assisted
2
2
Some Combined
Partial
driving modes function
automation
automation
3
3
Some Limited self
Conditional
driving modes Automated driving auto-
automation
mation
4
Some
High
driving modes 3/4
automation
Limited self
driving auto-
Autonomous mation /
Full self
driving auto-
5
All mation
Full
driving modes
automation
16
SafetyWissen
SafetyWissen.com
The levels apply to the driving automation feature(s) that are engaged in any given instance of on-road operation of an equipped
vehicle. As such, although a given vehicle may be equipped with a driving automation system that is capable of delivering multiple
driving automation features that perform at different levels, the level of driving automation exhibited in any given instance is
determined by the feature(s) that are engaged.
The three primary actors in driving are: the (human) user, the driving automation system, and other vehicle systems and com-
ponents.
The levels of driving automation are defined by reference to the specific role played by each of the three primary actors in
performance of the DDT and/or DDT fallback. “Role” in this context refers to the expected role of a given primary actor, based on
the design of the driving automation system in question and not necessarily to the actual performance of a given primary actor.
Active safety systems, such as electronic stability control (ESC) and automatic emergency braking (AEB), and certain types of
driver assistance systems, such as lane keeping assistance (LKA), are excluded from the scope of this driving automation tax-
onomy because they do not perform part or all of the DDT on a sustained basis, but rather provide momentary intervention
during potentially hazardous situations. Due to the momentary nature of the actions of active safety systems, their intervention
does not change or eliminate the role of the driver in performing part or all of the DDT, and thus are not considered to be driving
automation, even though they perform automated functions. In addition, systems that inform, alert, or warn the driver about
hazards in the driving environment are also outside the scope of this driving automation taxonomy, as they neither automate
part or all of the DDT, nor change the driver’s role in performance of the DDT.
It should be noted, however, that crash avoidance features, including intervention-type active safety systems, may be included in
vehicles equipped with driving automation systems at any level. For automated driving system (ADS) features (i.e., Levels 3 to 5)
that perform the complete DDT, crash mitigation and avoidance capability is part of ADS functionality.
Status
Latest Version: J3016_202104
Link
https://www.sae.org/standards/content/j3016_202104/
17
SafetyWissen
SafetyWissen.com
Operating Mode Driving Driving Safety Other Safety Human Role Vehicle Role
Active safety
Driving support
Driver Assistance Driving
Driving conve-
nience
Eyes ON the
road, monitor
Supervised Lane keeping
for an intervene
Automation in situations
Speed control
outside ODD
All aspects of
Autonomous No human driving and
Operation driver driving-related
safety
Automation
Trained safety being tested is
driver mitigates expected to
Vehicle Testing dangerous exhibit
behaviors dangerous
behaviors
Link
https://safeautonomy.blogspot.com/2022/01/simplified-proposal-for-vehicle.html
18
Legal & NCAP Latest info about
Seminar
this course
Dr. Gerd Müller (Technical University Berlin) has been working at the department automotive
Instructor
technology of the Technical University of Berlin since 2007. From 2007 to 2015 he was a research assistant.
Since 2015 he has been a senior engineer of the same department. His research focuses on vehicle safety and
friction coefficient estimation. Dr. Müller gives the lecture "Fundamentals of Automotive Engineering" and
conducts parts of the integrated course "Driver Assistance Systems and Active Safety".
30.11.2022 51/3933 Alzenau 1 Day 790,- EUR till 02.11.2022, thereafter 940,- EUR
19.-20.04.2023 51/4094 Online 2 Days 790,- EUR till 22.03.2023, thereafter 980,- EUR
19
Legal & NCAP Requirements
SafetyWissen.com Wissen
20
Legal & NCAP Requirements
Wissen SafetyWissen.com
Validating ADS safety is a highly complex task which cannot be done comprehensively nor effectively through one validation
methodology alone. As a result, it is recommended to adopt a multi-pillar approach for the validation of ADS, composed of a
scenarios catalogue and five validation methodologies (pillars).
(a) Scenarios catalogue
(b) Simulation/virtual testing,
(c) Track testing
(d) Real world testing
(e) Audit/assessment
(f) In-service monitoring and reporting
NATM
Audit
Test
Methods Real World Tests In-service
Monitoring &
Reporting
Track Tests
Simulation
Virtual Tool
Assessment
ODD Scenarios
Status
Informal document GRVA-13-35 13th GRVA, 23 - 27 May 2022
Link
https://unece.org/transport/documents/2022/05/informal-documents/vmad-status-report
21
Latest info about Legal & NCAP
Seminar
this course
Potomac Alliance, a Washington-based international regulatory affairs consultancy. In his client advisory role,
Mr. Creamer is regularly involved with meetings of the UN World Forum for the Harmonization of Vehicle
Regulations (WP.29). Previously, he has held positions with the US International Trade Commission and the
Motor & Equipment Manufacturers Association (representing the US automotive supplier industry), as the
representative of the US auto parts industry in Japan, and with TRW Inc. (a leading global automotive safety
systems supplier).
Dr. Thomas Kinsky (Humanetics Europe GmbH) completed his studies of automotive engineer-
ing at TU Dresden in 1991 and received a doctorate at TU Graz in 2015. From 1999 to 2018 Dr. Kinsky worked
for the car manufacturer Opel in the area of vehicle regulations. Lastly as a senior expert, he was responsible
for the development of legislation on passive vehicle safety and represented Opel in the discussion with au-
thorities and associations. Since 2018 he is Director of Business Development at Humanetics Europe GmbH.
In this role he is at Humanetics the contact for all topics regarding dummy development as well as for require-
ments on passive and active safety at Humanetics.
15.-16.11.2022 16/3917 Alzenau 2 Days 1.340,- EUR till 18.10.2022, thereafter 1.590,- EUR
22
Legal & NCAP Latest info about
Seminar
this course
Potomac Alliance, a Washington-based international regulatory affairs consultancy. In his client advisory role,
Mr. Creamer is regularly involved with meetings of the UN World Forum for the Harmonization of Vehicle
Regulations (WP.29). Previously, he has held positions with the US International Trade Commission and the
Motor & Equipment Manufacturers Association (representing the US automotive supplier industry), as the
representative of the US auto parts industry in Japan, and with TRW Inc. (a leading global automotive safety
systems supplier).
20.10.2022 184/3986 Alzenau 1 Day 790,- EUR till 22.09.2022, thereafter 940,- EUR
07.-08.06.2023 184/4081 Online 2 Days 790,- EUR till 10.05.2023, thereafter 980,- EUR
23 23
Legal & NCAP Requirements
SafetyWissen.com Wissen
Speed range 10 - 30 km/h > 30 - 60 km/h > 60 - 100 km/h > 100 - 130 km/h > 130 km/h
Maximum value M1, N1 3.0 m/s²
for the specified
maximum lateral
acceleration M2, M3,N2, N3 2.5 m/s²
Minimum value M1, N1 0 m/s² 0.5 m/s² 0.8 m/s² 0.3 m/s²
for the specified
maximum lateral
acceleration M2, M3,N2, N3 0 m/s² 0.3 m/s² 0.5 m/s²
Optical and acoustic or haptic warning if system reaches its boundary conditions
The activated system shall at any time, within the boundary conditions, ensure that the vehicle does not cross a lane
marking
Optical warning after ≤ 15 s hands off
Additional acoustic warning after ≤ 30 s hands off
System deactivation ≤ 30 s after start of acoustic warning if still hands are off
Default OFF
Tests
Lane keeping test
Maximum lateral acceleration test
Overriding force test
Transition test - hands on test
24
Legal & NCAP Requirements
Wissen SafetyWissen.com
25
Legal & NCAP Requirements
SafetyWissen.com Wissen
Approach to slower
target with 100 % overlap
① M3, N3, N2 > 8 t: v0 = 80 km/h v = 12 km/h
② M2, N2 ≤ 8 t: v0 = 80 km/h v = 67 km/h
False Pos.
v0 = 50 km/h v = 0 km/h
Requirements
System active from 15 km/h up to the max. design speed of the vehicle.
System shall be automatically ON at the initiation of each new iginition cycle.
Warning in at least 2 modes selected from acoustic, haptic or optical.
Speed reduction during warning phase ≤ 15 km/h or 30 % of the total speed reduction
Emergency braking @ TTC ≤ 3.0 s
≥ 0.8 s ≥ 0.8 s
≥ 1.4 s ≥ 1.4 s
before start before start
before start before start
of of
① of of
emergency emergency
M3, emergency emergency
braking ≥ 20 km/h braking no impact 12 ± 2 km/h
N3, braking braking
N2 > 8 t 2 modes: 2 modes:
1 mode: 1 mode:
haptic / haptic /
haptic / haptic /
acoustic / acoustic /
acoustic acoustic
optical optical
≥ 0.8 s
before start ≥ 0.8 s before start
before start
of before start of
of
emergency of emergency
② emergency
braking emergency braking
N2, braking ≥ 10 km/h no impact 67 ± 2 km/h
2 modes: braking 2 modes:
N2 ≤ 8 t: 1 mode:
haptic / 1 mode: haptic /
haptic /
acoustic / haptic / acoustic /
acoustic /
optica acoustic optical
optical
26
Legal & NCAP Requirements
Wissen SafetyWissen.com
GTR 8
FMVSS 126
Steer angle
-δ
One series uses counterclockwise steering for the first half cycle, and the other series uses clockwise steering for the first half
cycle. In each series of test runs, the steering amplitude is increased from run to run, by 0.5 A, starting at 1.5 A. The steering
amplitude of the final run in each series is the greater of 6.5 A or 270 degrees, provided the calculated magnitude of 6.5 A is less
than or equal to 300 degrees. If any 0.5 A increment, up to 6.5 A, is greater than 300 degrees, the steering amplitude of the final
run is 300 degrees.
Performance Requirements:
Yaw Rate
1 s after completion of the steering input (t0) < 35 % of the first peak value of yaw rate recorded after the steering wheel angle changes
sign.
1.75 s after completion of the steering input (t0) < 20 % of the first peak value of yaw rate recorded after the steering wheel angle changes
sign.
Lateral displacement of the vehicle center of gravity with respect to its initial straight path when computed 1.07 seconds
after the Beginning of Steer (BOS)
for vehicles with GVM (GVWR) ≤ 3500 kg > 1.83 m
for vehicles with GVM (GVWR) > 3500 kg > 1.52 m
Steer angle
lateral displacement
1.83 m
(1.52 m)
yaw rate ψ
t
35 % 20 %
100 %
ψPeak
t = 1.07 s t0 t0 + 1 s t0 + 1.75 s 27
Legal & NCAP Requirements
SafetyWissen.com Wissen
dcorridor
dlateral
Theoretical Collision Point
Bicycle line of Bicycle
Line D
Line A
Line B
Line C
movement starting
position dc
db
da
dd
dbicycle
lcorridor
Test Cases
Test vbicycle vvehicle dlateral da db dc dd dbicycle lcorridor dcor- Impact Turn
case [km/h] [km/h] [m] [m] [m] [m] [m] [m] [m] ridor Position Radius
[m] [m] [m]
1 20 10 15.8 15 26.1 6 5
2 20 10 1.25 44.4 22 15 38.4 0 10
3 20 20 38.3 38.8 - vehicle 6 25
4 10 20 43.5 15 37.2 65 80 width + 0 25
22.2
5 10 10 19.8 19.8 - 1m 0 5
4.25
6 14.7 28 6 10
20 10 44.4 15
7 17.7 34 3 10
The techical service may select different test cases if deemed justified.
Criteria
Blind spot information signal activated before vehicle has reached line C but not before it has reached line D
No signal required if the relative longitudinal distance between bicyle and the front right corner of the is more than 30 m
to the rear or 7 m to the front
For vehicle speeds up to 5 km/h the it is satisfactory if information signal is issued @ 1.4 s TTC.
Criteria
7.77 m 2m
2.75 m Blind spot information signal activated at the
20 km/h latest at the Last Point of Information (LPI) (2
LPI
m / 7.77 m)
Bicycle line of
movement
Bicycle at
speed
5 km/h
44.44 m
1.15 m
28
Legal & NCAP Requirements
Wissen SafetyWissen.com
Turn at intersection
TTC ≤ 1.7 s
v0 = 30 km/h v =0 km/h
braking to ≥ 16 km/h
False Positive Tests
Maximum relative Impact Speed (km/h) for Car to Car and Car to Pedestrian Scenarios
Relative Speed M1 vehicles N1 vehicles
(km/h) Maximum Mass Mass in running order Maximum Mass Mass in running order
10 0 0 0 0
15 0 0 0 0
20 0 0 0 0
25 0 0 0 0
30 0 0 0 0
32 0 0 0 0
35 0 0 0 0
38 0 0 0 0
40 0 0 10 0
42 10 0 15 0
45 15 15 25 15
50 25 25 30 25
55 30 30 35 30
60 35 35 40 35
Maximum relative Impact Speed (km/h) for in Car to Bicycle Scenario
Relative Speed M1 vehicles N1 vehicles
(km/h) Maximum mass Mass in running order Maximum mass Mass in running order
20 0 0 0 0
25 0 0 0 0
30 0 0 0 0
35 0 0 0 0
36 0 0 0 0
38 0 0 15 0
40 10 10 25 0
45 25 25 30 25
50 30 30 35 30
55 35 35 40 35
60 40 40 45 40
For relative speeds between the listed values, the maximum relative impact speed assigned to the next higher relative speed
shall apply. For masses above the mass in running order, the maximum relative impact speed assigned to the maximum mass
shall apply.
Test Speeds
Car to Car
Stationary Moving
M1 N1 M1 N1
max. mass running order max. mass running order max. mass running order max. mass running order
Speed 1 20 20 20 20 30 60 30 30
Speed 2 40 42 38 42 60 60 58 60
Speed 3 60 60 60 60
Car to Pedestrian Car to Cyclist
M1 N1 M1 N1
max. mass running order max. mass running order max. mass running order max. mass running order
Speed 1 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20
Speed 2 40 42 38 42 38 40 36 40
Speed 3 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60
All scenario tests will be performed two times. If one of the two test runs fails, the test may be repeated once. The
scenario is accounted as passed the required performance is met in two test runs. The number of failed test runs
within one category shall not exceed 10 % for Car to Car and Car to Pedestrian tests and 20 % for Car to Bicycle tests.
The technical service may test any other speeds within the speed range of the respective scenario..
30
Legal & NCAP Requirements
Wissen SafetyWissen.com
A CSMS is expected to have processes established which will identify new threats and develop defensive measures. UN R155 sets
out criteria for what a CSMS must be able to do and how this is checked. However, UN R155 leaves open how the CSMS should
be designed and there are also no suggested solutions as to which cyber threats can be defended against and how.
The wireless communication of the vehicle with its environment, e.g., with the manufacturer's update servers, for hazard
warnings via a Car2x communication or for a keyless function.
The security of the update process to prevent the import of manipulated software.
Interventions by vehicle occupants that allow actions by attackers through deception (comparable to email phishing on a
PC)
Security and protection of programs and data against manipulation as well as spying out of data
Inadequate protection using unsuitable cryptographic methods or methods that were still considered secure at the time of
development but lose their protective effect over the years due to technical progress, for example short cryptographic keys.
Part B describes types of attacks and measures to defend against them, and Part C deals with securing against attacks from
insiders or on the manufacturers' backend servers.
Guidance
ISO/SAE 21434 is intended to serve as a guideline for the implementation of UN R155 and to set a standard in the vehicle indus-
try. To help vehicle manufacturers prepare for the assessment, the VDA has published the volume "Automotive Cyber Security
Management System Audit".
31
Legal & NCAP Requirements
SafetyWissen.com Wissen
Proof of a functioning Software Update Management System (SUMS) is required of manufacturers if they
wish to place vehicles on the market (within the meaning of the legal term placing on the market),
want to carry out updates of software in its vehicles even after they have been approved for public road traffic,
want to update the software of components relevant for registration.
The regulation then requires that the manufacturer has established a SUMS and can demonstrate this to the approval authority
or a testing institute accredited by the approval authority. ISO 24089 "Road vehicles - Software update engineering" is currently
being developed to describe in more detail measures suitable for the industry.
Purpose
The purpose of a SUMS is to ensure that an update of software functions that were relevant for type approval (for example,
exhaust, brakes, engine control) are developed and validated so that they continue to operate in compliance with the law after
the update. To this end, UN R156 requires that updates be "safe and secure", without elaborating further. The exact details
should be determined by each manufacturer and their SUMS should ensure that the abstract expectations of UN R156 are met.
In automotive engineering, the English terms safe and secure refer primarily to the following points:
Safe means security against malfunctions of the software itself (bugs). In the automotive industry, the consideration of
functional safety in accordance with ISO 26262 has become particularly common here. Dangerous malfunctions would be,
for example, an airbag deployment without reason or self-acceleration due to an error in the engine control system.
Secure means tamper-proof during the update process and can be considered, for example, using cyber security methods
(according to ISO 21434). For example, the update mechanism should prevent the import of malware as well as tuning
software.
UN R156 also considers the case where an update fails. In this case, the software must still function properly as before the update
or assume a safe state.
Proof
A SUMS consists of processes and methods to safely distribute software updates to a specific type of vehicle. R156 does not
describe exactly what a SUMS should look like. Rather, it is about manufacturers developing a systematic approach to developing
and distributing updates, i.e., defining processes for how software updates are developed, tested and distributed.
For a company to be able to demonstrate that an effective SUMS has been implemented includes:
A certificate, which must be presented to the approval authority when a new vehicle type is type-approved.
The assessment is carried out by the approval authority or an approved independent testing institute.
After every 3 years the certificate has to be renewed by an assessment.
After the end of production of the vehicle type, the SUMS for this type shall be deregistered.
Proof of this SUMS must be provided for each type approval.
32
Legal & NCAP Requirements
Wissen SafetyWissen.com
Lane Keeping
VUT stays within lane and maintains stable position
test duration ≥ 5 min.
passenger car and PTW as lead/other vehicle
lead vehicle swerving in lane
other vehicle driving close beside in adjacent lane
Collision Avoidance
VUT avoids collisions with other road users or objects
with stationary targets
passenger car
PTW
pedestrian
pedestrian crossing the lane @ 5 km/h
blocked lane
target partially within lane
multiple consecutive obstacles
on curved section of the road
Lane changing
VUT does not cause an unreasonable risk to safety of occu-
pants and other road users during a lane change, is capable
of correctly performing lane changes, and is able to assess
the criticality of the situation before starting the lane change
Test
with different vehicles (car, PTW) approaching from the rear
in a scenario where a lane change is possible and executed
in a scenario where a lane change is not possible due to a
vehicle approaching from the rear
with an equally fast vehicle following behind in the adjacent
lane, preventing a lane change
with a vehicle driving beside in the adjacent lane preventing
a lane change
in a scenario where a lane change during a minimum-risk-
manoeuvre is possible and executed
in a scenario where the VUT reacts to another vehicle that
starts changing into the same space within the target lane,
to avoid a potential risk of collision
Avoid emergency manoeuvre before a passable object
in the lane
VUT is not initiating an emergency manoeuvre due to a
passable object in the lane Scenario pictures for illustrative purposes only. Pictures do not cover
without/with lead vehicle (car, PTW) in the lane all applicable scenarios.
34
Legal & NCAP Requirements
Wissen SafetyWissen.com
M1 M2 M3 N1 N2 N3
NT 7/2024 NT 7/2024
AEB VRU UN R152-02
NR 7/2026 NR 7/2026
NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022
AEB Car-to-Car UN R152-00
NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024
NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022
VRU Collision Warning UN R159
NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024
NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022
Blind Spot System UN R151
NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024
NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022
ELK EU 2021/646
NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024
NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022
ISA EU 2021/1958
NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024
Drowsiness Detection & NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022
EU 2021/1341
Warning NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024
Advanced Driver Distraction NT 7/2024 NT 7/2024 NT 7/2024 NT 7/2024 NT 7/2024 NT 7/2024
Warning NR 7/2026 NR 7/2026 NR 7/2026 NR 7/2026 NR 7/2026 NR 7/2026
NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022
Event Data Recorders EDR EU 2022/545
NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024
NT = New Types (Date for refusal to grant EU type-approval of vehicles, that do not meet the requirements)
NR = New Registrations (Date for the prohibition of the registration of vehicles, that do not meet the requirements)
Advertisement
Active
Safety
Testing
35
Legal & NCAP Requirements
SafetyWissen.com Wissen
Solid Line
Requirements
Warning by at least two warning means out of visual, acoustic and haptic; or one warning means out of haptic and
acoustic, with spatial indication about the direction of unintended drift of the vehicle.
Warning indication at the latest when the DLTM (DistanceTo Lane Marking) = - 0.3 m
Solid Line:
36
Legal & NCAP Requirements
Wissen SafetyWissen.com
Specific test procedures and technical requirements for the type-approval of motor vehicles with regard to
their driver drowsiness and attention warning systems
The DDAW is defined as a system that assesses the driver’s alertness through vehicle systems analysis and, where needed,
provides a warning to the driver. In particular, DDAW must detect or recognise the driving and/or steering pattern symptomatic
of a driver exhibiting reduced alertness due to fatigue, and interact with and alert the driver via the vehicle’s human-machine
interface.
DDAW regulation entered into force in September 2021. It shall apply for new types vehicle from 6 July 2022 and for new cars
vehicle from 6 July 2024.
Technical Requirements
Environmental Conditions
The DDAW system shall operate effectively during the day and night. At a minimum, the DDAW system shall work effectively on
a multi-lane divided road, with or without a central divide, when lane markings are visible on both sides of the lane.
Test procedures for validation of driver drowsiness and attention warning (DDAW) systems
Manufacturers shall carry out validation testing to ensure that DDAW systems are able to monitor driver drowsiness in a manner
which is accurate, robust and scientifically valid.
Testing requirements
Validation testing shall take place using human participants. Alternatively the data used for the validation shall derive from
behaviour data collected with human participants. The validation testing can be carried out in a real-world road environment
or in a simulator. If validation testing is performed in a simulator, the manufacturer shall document its limitations with regard to
real-world open road testing for the purpose of testing the DDAW system.
Test sample
The minimum sample size of participants shall be 10 participants. The participants shall correspond to the targeted demography
37
Legal & NCAP Requirements
SafetyWissen.com Wissen
for the vehicle. None of the 10 participants of the minimum sample size shall be involved in the development of DDAW system.
Each test participant shall generate at least 1 true positive or 1 false negative event. The total number, obtained by the sum of
true positive events and false negative events, shall be equal to or higher than 10. It is allowed to run more than one test per
participant in order to acquire more data for a given participant. At a minimum, the system shall be tested in the day and night
conditions.
Measuring drowsiness
The participant’s level of drowsiness shall be measured using the KSS. Participants shall be trained on the KSS before they apply it
as part of the DDAW system validation testing. Measurements shall be obtained during the testing at intervals of approximately
5 minutes. Any warning from the DDAW system shall be treated as a true positive event if the participant previous or next rating
is at a KSS level of 7 or above. Manufacturers may use an alternative measurement(s) to validate a DDAW system. If alternative
measurements to KSS are used to validate a DDAW system, the manufacture shall state the threshold being used and provide
evidence detailing the equivalency between the threshold and a KSS level of 8.
Test results
Test data shall only be discarded by the manufacturer before any statistical analysis is conducted in any of the following cases:
(a) there is an error in carrying out the testing procedure;
(b) the participant’s KSS ratings are deemed unreliable;
(c) insufficient data is collected for a participant.
The manufacturer shall document any errors that occur during testing shall be documented as part of the evidence in the docu-
mentation package.
Acceptance criteria
A DDAW system shall be deemed effective by the technical services if the following requirement (a) or (b) is satisfied:
(a) the average sensitivity is above 40 % (Sensitivity calculated from the average of the sensitivity of all participants)
(b) the lower bound from the 90 % confidence interval of the sensitivity results shall be above 20 %.
Procedures for assessment of technical documentation and verification testing by the approval authorities and
technical services
The technical service shall assess the capability of the test protocol, proposed by the manufacturer, to detect a drowsy driving
event. The technical service shall also perform the test based on the proposed protocol.
The test shall be accounted as passed as soon as the DDAW system provides a warning for a drowsy driver.
If the test fails to provide a warning for a drowsy driver, the technical service may repeat it up to two times.
The root cause of any failed test run shall be analysed by the technical service and the analysis shall be annexed to the test
report.
38
Legal & NCAP Latest info about
Seminar
this course
Potomac Alliance, a Washington-based international regulatory affairs consultancy. In his client advisory role,
Mr. Creamer is regularly involved with meetings of the UN World Forum for the Harmonization of Vehicle
Regulations (WP.29). Previously, he has held positions with the US International Trade Commission and the
Motor & Equipment Manufacturers Association (representing the US automotive supplier industry), as the
representative of the US auto parts industry in Japan, and with TRW Inc. (a leading global automotive safety
systems supplier).
18.-19.10.2022 183/3989 Alzenau 2 Days 1.340,- EUR till 20.09.2022, thereafter 1.590,- EUR
25.-28.04.2023 183/4084 Online 4 Days 1.340,- EUR till 28.03.2023, thereafter 1.650,- EUR
39
Latest info about Legal & NCAP
Seminar
this course
Obviously a safety related recall of a mass product may have Functional Safety)
Product liability and advertisement / public relations of
severe or even existence-threatening consequences.
companies
Quality management and its relevance from a product
Consequently, manufacturers must ensure faultlessness
throughout their organization. Amongst others, questions liability point of view
Product liability in the supply chain
may raise like:
Consequences of new technologies, liability in the area of
Who in the company is responsible for product safety?
Is your entire organization set up to avoid safety-related
driver assistance systems and autonomous vehicles
Instructions, warnings
errors or to reduce the risk?
Risk minimization within the organization, prevention
Is compliance with product liability ensured throughout
Preventive product safety measures during product
the company?
In the case of allegations, can targeted and
development
Product observation and resulting consequences
comprehensive evidence be quickly provided?
Documentation, conclusive evidence
How can unwarranted claims be averted?
Insurance of product liability risk
What can be learned from the product liability cases,
Recall decision and processing
which are particularly well received by the public?
Manager of Reliability & Conformity of Production at ZF TRW Automotive GmbH. He has many years of expe-
rience in the field of safety, reliability and product liability in the automotive sector. Since September 2015
he has retired and is still active as a freelance consultant. He specializes in the area of restraint systems for
vehicle occupant protection and supports his clients in the areas of reliability, safety planning and methods of
verification and litigation support.
20.-23.02.2023 116/4095 Online 4 Days 1.340,- EUR till 23.01.2023, thereafter 1.650,- EUR
23.-24.10.2023 116/4096 Alzenau 2 Days 1.340,- EUR till 25.09.2023, thereafter 1.650,- EUR
40
Legal & NCAP Requirements
Event
NEW
SAFETYTESTING
SAFETYUPDATE
DATE 23.-25.05.2023
Facts
HOMEPAGE www.carhs.de/safetyweek
However, especially in times of the current crisis, it has become all the more clear that
mobility must be regarded as one of the most fundamental basic needs, and mobility for
all means that we must work on vehicle automation with full commitment.
HOMEPAGE www.carhs.de/safetyweek
LANGUAGE
42
Legal & NCAP Requirements
Event
NEW
The concept is familiar: To keep software up-to-date you regularly make an update. The
same is true for automotive safety engineering: To keep yourself up-to-date you have
to attend the SafetyUpDate on a regular basis. Here you get a comprehensive overview
of all relevant news in automotive safety.
HOMEPAGE www.carhs.de/safetyweek
Challenge Topics
Expect discussions on innovations from the following fields:
Full scale crash testing and advanced sled simulation for
battery-electric vehicles
Measuring technologies, data acquisition and ATDs for
DATE 23.05.2023
Facts
HOMEPAGE www.carhs.de/safetytesting
LANGUAGE
44
iMAR Navigation GmbH
Im Reihersbruch 3
D-66386 St.Ingbert
+49 6894 9657 0
[email protected]
Your Experts
for Test Track
Instrumentation
and Automation
iSWACO-ARGUS
Manufacturer independent Swarm Control for
increasingly complex Scenario-Based Testing
www.imar-navigation.de
Legal & NCAP Requirements
SafetyWissen.com Wissen
Euro NCAP
U.S. NCAP IIHS Latin NCAP
ANCAP
SBR Seat Belt rear seat w/ occupant front front
Reminder detection rear rear
OSM / DSM Occu- distratction
pant/Driver Status fatique
Monitoring unresponsivenes
ABS Anti-Lock Braking
System
ESC Electronic Stability
Moose test
Control
MCB Multi Collision
part of the AOP rating
Brake
SAS Speed Assistance Speed Limit Inform. Manual Speed Ass.
Systems Speed Control Speed Control
LSS Lane Support LDW
LDW
Systems LKA LDW
LKA
ELK LKS
RED
ELK PTW
BSM Blind Spot Car BSW
Motorcycle
Monitoring Motorcycle BSI
AEB Car to Car rear (stat./mov./brake.)
rear (stat./mov./brake.)
turn across path
intersection rear (stationary) rear (stat./mov./brake.)
crossing
head on
head on
AEB Pedestrian crossing
crossing crossing
longitudinal crossing
longitudinal longitudinal
turn across path
AEB Cyclist crossing
longitudinal tba
turn across path
AEB PTW rear
tba
turn across path
AEB Reverse Pedestrian (stat./mov.) child (stationary)
Emergency Call part of the AOP rating e-Call
Rear View Monitor
46
Legal & NCAP Requirements
Wissen SafetyWissen.com
UN R13h
Optional systems
LKA
LDW (optional LKA
systems) ELK LDW
LDW curve
Motorcycle Optional systems
rear (stat./mov.)
rear (stat./mov.)
rear (stat./mov.) turn across path rear (stat./mov./brake.) rear (stat./mov./brake.)
junction
crossing
crossing
crossing
longitudinal crossing crossing
longitudinal
turn across path
crossing
crossing crossing crossing
longitudinal
longitudinal longitudinal longitudinal
turn across path
crossing
turn across path
Pedestrian
47
Latest info about Legal & NCAP
Seminar
this course
Udo Steininger (TÜV SÜD Rail GmbH) is Chief Expert Automotive Safety at TÜV SÜD Rail GmbH. He
Instructor
has been involved in the safety of complex human-machine systems for over 35 years. After studying physics
at the Technical University of Dresden, he worked for 5 years in reactor safety research. Since 1991, he has
been working at TÜV SÜD on the topics of risk, reliability and safety in various fields of application - first in
industry, then in railroads and, for the last 20 years, in the field of motor vehicles. For the past 15 years, he
has specialized in assisted and automated driving. Initially, the focus of his work was on safety assessment
during development, testing of vehicles and vehicle systems, and safety driver training. He currently supports
manufacturers, suppliers and mobility service providers in the market introduction of systems for automated
driving and related services. He is active in the DIN Automotive Standards Committee (ISO 26262 and ISO
21448) and is a member of the Safety - Methods and Processes - Advisory Board of the VDI Society for Vehicle
and Transport Technology (FVT). Udo Steininger was a lecturer at the Munich University of Applied Sciences
for many years and is a guest lecturer at the Chair of Automotive Engineering at the Technical University of
Munich. His column on the current status and development of automated driving appears regularly in carhs'
SafetyNews.
23.-24.02.2023 198/4091 Online 2 Days 790,- EUR till 26.01.2023, thereafter 980,- EUR
14.06.2023 198/4085 Alzenau 1 Day 790,- EUR till 17.05.2023, thereafter 980,- EUR
48
Legal & NCAP Latest info about
Seminar
this course
Direktor and Professor Andre Seeck (German Federal Highway Research Institute)
Instructor
is head of the division "Vehicle Technology" with the German Federal Highway Research Institute (BASt). In
this position he is responsible for the preparation of European Safety Regulations. Furthermore he represents
the German Federal Ministry for Digital and Transport in the Board of Directors of Euro NCAP and he is the
chairman of the strategy group on automated driving and of the rating system. These positions enable him to
gain deep insight into current and future developments in vehicle safety. In 2017 NHTSA awarded him the U.
S. Government Special Award of Appreciation.
07.-10.02.2023 164/4086 Online 4 Days 1.340,- EUR till 10.01.2023, thereafter 1.650,- EUR
26.-27.06.2023 164/4087 Alzenau 2 Days 1.340,- EUR till 29.05.2023, thereafter 1.650,- EUR
14.-15.09.2023 164/4088 Alzenau 2 Days 1.340,- EUR till 17.08.2023, thereafter 1.650,- EUR
06.-10.11.2023 164/4090 Online 5 Days 1.340,- EUR till 09.10.2023, thereafter 1.650,- EUR
49
Legal & NCAP Requirements
SafetyWissen.com Wissen
CPTA-Farside: v = 5 km/h
v0 = 10|15|20 km/h
Adult, VUT Turning, Farside
/ Nearside, Same / Op-
posite Direction, Impact at 50 %
50 % of the Vehicle Width
(CPTA-Farside / Nearside)
CPTA-Nearside: v = 5 km/h
v 0 = 10 km/h
Prerequistes for Scoring:
The AEB system must be default ON at the start of every journey.
The AEB system must operate from speeds ≥ 10 km/h in the CPNA-75 day + night, must be able to detect pedestrians
walking as slow as 3 km/h and reduce speed in the CPNA-75 scenario at 20 km/h.
The system may not automatically switch off at a speed < 80 km/h.
The score of the pedestrian impact tests (legforms & head) must be ≥ 18 points.
In CPRA/CPRC the system may not release the brakes after an intervention, unless the threat (EPT) has left the vehicle path
or in case of a positive action by the driver. If the VUT is fitted as standard with a rear-view camera, the brakes may be
released after 1.5 s
50
Scoring Table: points available per test speed
v0 CPTA CPTA
Scenario CPFA CPNA CPNCO CPLA CPLA Farside Nearside
CPRA
(km/h)
Opposite / Same Station-
configuration 50 % 25 % 75 % 25 % 75 % 50 % 50 % 25 % Moving
direction ary
light conditions day night day night day night day & night day day
function assessed AEB AEB AEB AEB AEB FCW AEB AEB AEB
4 1 1
8 1 1
10 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
15 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
20 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
25 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
30 2 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1
35 3 2 3 3 2 2 3 2 2
40 3 2 3 3 2 2 3 2 2
45 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
50 2 3 2 2 3 3 2 3 3 3
55 2 3 2 2 3 3 2 3 3 3
60 1 2 1 1 2 2 1 2 2 2
65 1
70 1
Euro NCAP / ANCAP AEB VRU-Pedestrian
75 1
80 1
30 day / 30 4 Opposite /
max. total scenario score (1) 20 20 40 40 20 20 4
Legal & NCAP Requirements
pass / fail: Points are awarded if Forward Collision Warning >0 0 0.25 0.25 0.50 0.50 0.75
(FCW) is issued @ TTC ≥ 1.7 s, or if the manufacturer demon- > 10 0 0 0.25 0.25 0.50
Test Protocol 4.2
> 20 0 0 0.25
valid from 2023
> 30 0
51
provides appropriate support to avoid the collision
Legal & NCAP Requirements
SafetyWissen.com Wissen
Cyclist, Unobstructed,
Farside, Impact at 50 % of the 50 %
Vehicle Width
(CBFA-50)
v0 = 10 km/h ... 60 km/h v = 20 km/h
Cyclist, Unobstructed,
Nearside, Impact at 50 % of 50 %
the Vehicle Width
(CBNA-50)
v0 = 10 km/h ... 60 km/h v = 15 km/h
Cyclist, Obstructed,
Nearside, Impact at 50 % of 50 %
the Vehicle Width
(CBNAO-50)
v0 = 10 km/h ... 60 km/h v = 10 km/h
CBTA-Farside: v = 15 km/h
v0 = 10 / 15 / 20 km/h
Cyclist, VUT turning, Farside,
Nearside, Impact at 50 % of
the Vehicle Width
(CBTA-Nearside / Farside)
CBTA-Nearside
v0 = 10 km/h
D
Cyclist, Obstructed, Dooring
(CBDA)
v = 15 km/h operate door handle @ D = 7 m
52
LEADING PARTNER
for ADAS
development, testing
& validation services
(km/h)
configuration 50 % 50 % 50 % 50% 25 % farside nearside dooring
light conditions day
function assessed AEB AEB AEB AEB FCW AEB AEB visual
!
10 1 1 1 1 1 information
15 1 1 1 1 TTC ≥ 2.3 s
20 1 1 1 1 0.25
25 1 1 1 1
Assessment Protocol 11.2
warning
30 1 1 1 1
TTC ≥ 1.7 s
35 1 1 1 2
40 1 1 1 2 0.25
45 1 1 1 3
Legal & NCAP Requirements
door
50 1 1 1 3 3
retention
Euro NCAP / ANCAP AEB VRU-Cyclist
55 1 1 1 3 3
60 1 1 1 1 1 0.25
65 1
70 1 all doors
75 1
Wissen
80 1 0.25
max. total scenario score (1) 11 11 11 27 4 1
normalized scores (2) actual score / (1)
scenario points (3) 2 1 1 2 2 1
AEB Cyclist total points Σ (2)·(3) max. 9 points
Scoring method:
SafetyWissen.com
score = Points according to AEB VRU Points table AEB VRU Test Speed (km/h)
Points table 10 15 20 25 30 35 - 60
pass / fail: Points are awarded if impact is avoided 0 1 1 1 1 1 1
Impact Speed
pass / fail: Points are awarded if Forward Collision Warning >0 0 0.25 0.25 0.50 0.50 0.75
(FCW) is issued @ TTC ≥ 1.7 s, or if the manufacturer demon-
(Relative)
> 10 0 0 0.25 0.25 0.50
(km/h)
strates that their ESS (Emergency Steering Support) system > 20 0 0 0.25
> 30 0
provides appropriate support to avoid the collision
54
Legal & NCAP Requirements
Wissen SafetyWissen.com
Motorcycle, stationary,
Unobstructed, Longitudinal, 50 %
Impact at 50 % of the Vehicle
Width (CMRs)
v0 = 10 km/h ... 60 km/h in 5 km/h steps v = 0 km/h
d0
Motorcycle, braking,
Unobstructed, Longitudinal, Im- 25 %
pact at 25 % of the Vehicle Width
(CMRb)
v0 = 50 km/h d0 = 12m v 0 = 50 km/h, a= -4 m/s²
v0 = 50 km/h d0 = 40m v0 = 50 km/h, a= -4 m/s²
v = ① 60 km/h / ② 80 km/h
daylight testing
Prerequisites for Scoring:
The AEB system must be default ON at the start of every journey. It may not be possible to switch off the system with a
momentary single push on a button.
The system may not automatically switch off at a speed < 80 km/h.
The score of the pedestrian impact tests (legforms & head) must be ≥ 18 points.
55
Scoring Table: points available per test speed
valid from 2023
v0 Sce- CM CM
(km/h) nario CMRs CMRb CMFtap CMRs CMRb oncom. overtaking
configuration 50 % 25 % 25 % 30 45 25 % 25 % 72 60 80
12 m 40 m km/h km/h 60 km/h 50 % 12 m 40 m km/h km/h km/h
!
40 1 1
45 1 1
Euro NCAP / ANCAP AEB / LSS PTW
50 1 1 1 1 1 1 11
55 1 1
60 1 1
72 2 11
max. total scenario score (1) 11 2 9 7 2 2 2
Wissen
Impact Speed
pass / fail: Points are awarded if Forward Collision Warning (FCW) is >0 0 0.25 0.25 0.50 0.50 0.75
(Relative)
issued @ TTC ≥ 1.7 s. > 10 0 0 0.25 0.25 0.50
(km/h)
1 Intentional 0.5 points + unintentional 0.5 points. > 20 0 0 0.25
> 30 0
56
ACTIVE SAFETY | UFOmicro
EURO NCAP APPROVED TEST PLATFORM
humaneticsatd.com
Legal & NCAP Requirements
Event
NEW
The Roadmap 2025 systematically expands and updates all areas of the Euro NCAP rating.
After a series of new and changed assessment procedures had already been implemented in 2020,
many innovations are scheduled for 2023. Meanwhile the next Roadmap (2030) is currently under
development. At the Euro NCAP UpDate, experts from the respective working groups provide
detailed information on the current status of these new procedures.
Find out the current state of discussion on the upcoming protocols and roadmaps.
Take advantage of the discussion with the experts active in the Euro NCAP working groups.
Contents
Roadmap 2025 Who should attend?
New requirements for 2023 The Euro NCAP UpDate is suited for
New requirements for 2025 everyone who wants to be prepared
Roadmap 2030 for Euro NCAP's upcoming requirements.
Status of the new Roadmap
#TestingAutomation
Assessment of automated driving functions
Virtual Testing
Occupant Monitoring
Field reports on the current test procedures
DATE 13.-14.12.2022
Facts
HOMEPAGE www.carhs.de/euroncap
LANGUAGE English
PRICE 1.490,- EUR till 15.11.2022, thereafter 1.750,- EUR, ONLINE 990,- EUR
58
Legal & NCAP Requirements
Wissen SafetyWissen.com
AEB Car-to-Car
!
Test Protocol 4.1
valid from 2023
Prerequisites for Scoring in AEB Car-to-Car:
AEB system needs to be default ON at the start of every journey and de-activation should not be possible with a single push
on a button
AEB and/or FCW must be operational up to speeds of at least 130 km/h, excluding stationary targets
performance in CCRm scenario at v0 = 130 km/h / vtarget = 70 km/h must be within one colour band difference from a test
at v0 = 80 km/h / vtarget = 20 km/h
audible component of FCW needs to be loud and clear
for CCRs only: Whiplash score for front seat must be at least “good”, full avoidance must be achieved for speeds ≤ 20 km/h
in all overlap situations
Car-to-Car Rear
CCRs*: Approach to stationary
Target with ± 50 % / ± 75 % /
100 % Overlap
AEB + FCW v0 = 10 km/h ... 80 km/h in 5 km/h steps v = 0 km/h
CCRm*: Approach to slower
AEB CCR
Target with ± 50 % / ± 75 % /
100 % Overlap
AEB v0 = 30 km/h ... 80 km/h in 5 km/h steps v = 20 km/h
CCRb*: d0
Approach to braking Target
100 % Overlap v0 = 50 km/h d0 = 12 m v0 = 50 km/h, a = -2 m/s²
AEB v0 = 50 km/h d0 = 40 m v0 = 50 km/h, a = -2 m/s²
* CCR: Car-to-Car Rear; s: stationary;
m: moving; b: braking
v0 = 50 km/h d0 = 12 m v0 = 50 km/h, a = -6 m/s²
v0 = 50 km/h d0 = 40 m v0 = 50 km/h, a = -6 m/s²
Scoring Table: Points Points
remaining impact speed available remaining relative impact speed available
vimpact (km/h) CCRs CCRb v relative impact (km/h) CCRm
v0 (km/h)
AEB FCW AEB AEB
10 0 >0 1
15 0 >0 2
20 0 >0 2
25 <5 < 15 ≥ 15 2
30 <5 < 15 < 25 ≥ 25 2 <5 ≥5 1
35 <5 < 15 < 25 ≥ 25 2 <5 ≥5 1
40 <5 < 15 < 25 < 35 ≥ 35 1 <5 < 15 ≥ 15 1
45 <5 < 15 < 25 < 35 ≥ 35 1 <5 < 15 ≥ 15 1
50 <5 < 15 < 30 < 40 ≥ 40 1 1x4 < 5 < 15 < 25 ≥ 25 1
55 <5 < 15 < 30 < 45 ≥ 45 1 < 5 < 15 < 25 ≥ 25 1
60 <5 < 20 < 35 < 50 ≥ 50 1 < 5 < 15 < 25 < 35 ≥ 35 1
65 <5 < 20 < 40 < 55 ≥ 55 1 < 5 < 15 < 25 < 35 ≥ 35 2
70 <5 < 20 < 40 < 60 ≥ 60 1 < 5 < 15 < 30 < 40 ≥ 40 2
75 <5 < 25 < 45 < 65 ≥ 65 1 < 5 < 15 < 30 < 45 ≥ 45 2
80 <5 < 25 < 50 < 70 ≥ 70 1 < 5 < 20 < 35 < 50 ≥ 50 2
Grid point score 1.0 0.75 0.5 0.25 0 ∑=14 ∑=6 ∑=4 1.0 0.75 0.5 0.25 0 ∑=15
Scenario points 1.0 0.5 1.0 1.0
59
Legal & NCAP Requirements
SafetyWissen.com Wissen
For each test speed 5 grid points representing the 5 overlap scenarios (-75 %, -50 %, 100 %, +50 %, +75 %) are evaluated.
The score per test speed v0 for AEB and FCW is calculated as ∑ grid point scores1 x points available / 6
The score per scenario and system (AEB/FCW) is calculated as ∑ score per test speed v0 / ∑ points available
The score per system (AEB/FCW) is the average score per scenario of that system. The score per system is multiplied with
1.0 scenario points for AEB and 0.5 scenario points for FCW.
Where FCW does not result in full avoidance in the - 50 % overlap2 grid points, the manufacturer can alternatively demonstrate
that their EES (Emergency Steering Support) system functions to avoid the collision.
Manufacturers are expected to provide a prediction of the grid point scores. This predicted score per system is multiplied with
the correction factor resulting from 10 verification tests for that system conducted by Euro NCAP3:
Correction factor = actual tested score / predicted score
1
where the score of the 100 % overlap grid point is double counted
2
+ 50 % overlap for RHD vehicles
3
plus up to 10 additional tests sponsored by the manufacturer
v = 20 - 60 km/h
GVT
in 10 km/h steps
AEB CCCscp
60
Legal & NCAP Requirements
Wissen SafetyWissen.com
GVT
AEB CCFho
v0 = 50 / 70 km/h v = 50 / 70 km/h
CCFhol: Front head on lane
change GVT
AEB
v0 = 50 / 70 km/h v = 50 / 70 km/h
61
Legal & NCAP Requirements
SafetyWissen.com Wissen
62
Speed and Position.
Anywhere.
Industry leading suppliers of GNSS, Inertial Navigation
and Indoor Positioning solutions.
VBOX systems are used by vehicle and tyre manufacturers around the world
for testing and validating a vehicle’s performance, handling and safety
systems in any location.
Extend AV and ADAS testing to the open road with mobile RTK
solutions.
vboxautomotive.co.uk
Legal & NCAP Requirements
SafetyWissen.com Wissen
Dashed Line
LDW
v0 = 72 km/h v0 = 72 km/h
Blind Spot Monitoring v = 80 km/h
Fully Marked Lane
EMT or real motorcycle
v = 80 km/h
v0 = 72 km/h v0 = 72 km/h
v0 = 72 km/h, vlat = 0.2 - 0.6 m/s in 0.1 m/s steps, R = 1200 m v = 72 km/h
v0 = 72 km/h, vlat = 0.2 - 0.6 m/s in 0.1 m/s steps, R = 1200 m (unintentional)
v0 = 72 km/h, vlat = 0.5 - 0.7 m/s in 0.1 m/s steps, R = 800 m (intentional)
Lane Support Systems (LSS) DTLE1 Points
Human Machine Lane Departure Warning (LDW) > -0.2 m 0.50
0.502
Interface (HMI) Blind Spot Monitoring (BSM) - 0.50
Lane Keep Assist Dashed Line single line > -0.3 m 0.25
0.50
(LKA) Solid Line single line > -0.3 m 0.25
Centerline Road edge
Road Edge no line no line > -0.1 m 0.25
Emergency Lane dashed no line > -0.1 m 0.25
2.00
Keeping (ELK) Solid Line fully marked lane > -0.3 m 0.50
Oncoming Vehicle fully marked lane 0.50
Overtaking Vehicle fully marked lane 0.50
Distance To Lane Edge
1
2
max. HMI score limited to 0.50 points
65
Legal & NCAP Requirements
SafetyWissen.com Wissen
Distraction Movement
Inattention Type Warning Intervention Sub Total Total Points
Scenario Type
Owl 0.03 0.03 0.06
Away from road /
Lizard 0.03 0.03 0.06
Long non driving task
Body Lean 0.03 0.03 0.06 0.30
Distraction
Owl 0.03 0.03 0.06
Driving task
Lizard 0.03 0.03 0.06
Away from road / Owl 0.03 0.03 0.06
non driving task Lizard 0.03 0.03 0.06
Short
Distraction Owl 0.03 0.03 0.06
Distraction Driving task 0.30
(VATS) Lizard 0.03 0.03 0.06
Away from road
Lizard 0.03 0.03 0.06
(multi-location)
Phone Use Owl +
0.05 0.10 0.15
Detection - Basic Lizard
Phone Use Phone Use 0.30
Detection - Ad- Lizard 0.05 0.10 0.15
vanced
Drowsy 0.25 0.10 0.35 0.35
Fatigue Microsleep 0.20 0.10 0.30 0.30
Sleep 0.05 0.20 0.25 0.25
Unresponsive Driver 0.20 0.20 0.20
Driver State Monitoring Total 2.00
66
NEW
Stuttgart 470 km
heart of Europe!
SAFETYWISSEN.com
Know anything you need,
any�me, anywhere!
www.safetywissen.com
Latest info about Legal & NCAP
Seminar
this course
already been decided. For customers who need precisely Pole Side Impact
Far Side
these facts, the compact seminar is the ideal way to acquire
Whiplash
or refresh their knowledge. For all those who want to know Rescue, Extrication & Safety
more, understand the background and take a valuable look Child Occupant Protection
behind the scenes of the consumer protection agencies, we Dynamic Tests
recommend our detailed seminar on consumer protection Child Seat Installation
tests. Vehicle Based Assessment
The Euro NCAP compact seminar summarizes the test config- Child Presence Detection
VRU Protection
urations, assessment criteria and modifiers for all Euro NCAP
Leg Impact
assessment categories (Adult Occupant, Child Occupant, VRU, Upper leg Impact
Safety Assist) and shows how the overall rating is calculated Head Impact
from the individual assessment. AEB VRU
The course focuses on the requirements that are currently Safety Assist
in place. It also provides an outlook on the changes already Occupant Status Monitoring
Ralf Reuter (carhs.training gmbh) studied mechanical engineering and business administration at
Instructor
the technical universities of Darmstadt and Eindhoven. Since 1997 he has worked for carhs in various manage-
ment positions. He deals with vehicle safety issues intensively, in particular with the latest developments in
rules and regulations as well as consumer testing. As he is in charge of the SafetyWissen which has been
published by carhs for many years, he keeps his knowledge up-to-date and profits from the inputs of carhs'
trainer and expert network.
29.09.2022 111/3936 Alzenau 1 Day 790,- EUR till 01.09.2022, thereafter 940,- EUR
07.-08.12.2022 111/3937 Online 2 Days 740,- EUR till 09.11.2022, thereafter 940,- EUR
68
Legal & NCAP Requirements
Wissen SafetyWissen.com
IIHS AEB / Front Crash Prevention Test AEB Test Protocol, V. I, Oct 2013
l = 3.05 m d = 9.14 m
v 0 = 20 km/h v = 0 km/h
v 0 = 40 km/h v = 0 km/h
Assessment:
20 km/h Test 40 km/h Test FCW
Speed reduction < 8 km/h 8 - 14 km/h ≥ 15 km/h < 8 km/h 8 - 14 km/h 15 - 34 km/h ≥ 35 km/h
Points 0 1 2 0 1 2 3 1
Rating Scheme:
Points
1 2-4 >5
Rating BASIC ADVANCED SUPERIOR
IIHS Test Scenarios for AEB Pedestrian Pedestrian AEB Test Protocol, V. III DRAFT
Adult, Nearside, Impact at
25 % of the Vehicle Width
(CPNA-25) day + night
AEB
v 0 = 20 / 40 km/h v = 5 km/h
Child, Obstruction, Nearside,
Impact at 50 % of the Vehicle
Width (CPNC-50) day
AEB 1m 1m
v 0 = 20 / 40 km/h v = 5 km/h
Adult, Longitudinal, Impact
at 25 % of the Vehicle Width
(CPLA-25) day + night
AEB FCW (@ 60 km/h only)
v 0 = 40 / 60 km/h v = 0 km/h
Speed reduction [km/h] 0 ... 8 9 ... 18 19 ... 28 29 ... 38 39 ... 48 49 ... 58 59 ... 61
Points 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
1.0 points are awarded if a FCW is given ≥ 2.1 s time to collision in the CPLA-2560 km/h scenario
Daytime Scoring
Overall Score = 0.7 · ( CPNA-2520 + CPNA-2540 + CPNC-5020 + CPNC-5040) + 0.3 · (CPLA-2540 + CPLA-2560 + FCW60)
Nightime Scoring
Points are awarded for both scenarios (CPNA/CPLA) at both speeds with low and high beams. For vehicles with high beam assist,
individual scores are multiplied by two based on the activation speed of the high beam assist (low beam scores below the activa-
tion speed and high beam scores above the activation speed.
Overalls Score = (2 · (CPNA-2520 LOW + CPNA-2540 LOW + CPNA-2520 HIGH + CPNA-2540 HIGH) + CPLA-2540 LOW + CPLA-2560 LOW
+ FCW60 LOW + CPLA-2540 HIGH + CPLA-2560 HIGH + FCW60 HIGH) / 6
Overall score <1 <3 <5 ≥5
Rating Scale
No Credit Basic Advanced Superior
69
Legal & NCAP Requirements
SafetyWissen.com Wissen
Requirements
d0
LVD (Lead Vehicle Decelerating)
Approach to braking target v 0 = 45 mph (72.4 km/h) d0 = 89.4 ft (30 m) v 0 = 45 mph (72.4 km/h).
± 8.2 ft (2.5 m) a = -0.3 g
Requirements
70
Legal & NCAP Requirements
Wissen SafetyWissen.com
Child, 20 ft (6.096 m) -2 ft
behind rearmost point 0
of bumper @ 0/+2/-2 +2 ft
ft from centerline 20 ft
Dummy
4a Euro NCAP Pedestrian - Child Dummy static
Test Procedure*
Place the direction selector in reverse while maintaining full pressure on the brake pedal.
Release the vehicle’s brake pedal and allow the vehicle to coast backward while maintaining the vehicle’s centerline within
+/- 1 inch of the longitudinal line marked on the ground.
Allow the vehicle to coast until the rear automatic braking feature intervenes by automatically engaging the service brakes
bring the vehicle to a stop or until the vehicle strikes the test object. Once either of these two outcomes occurs, the
vehicle’s brake pedal should be depressed to end the test trial. Every effort must be made to safely conduct this test. If
testing indoors, proper ventilation must be provided. No personnel shall be located to the rear of a test vehicle at any time
during the test trial.
Requirements*
A positive test outcome would involve the vehicle coming to a stop before it reaches the location of the test object and with
no physical contact with the test object for each of the three test object locations assessed.
* Please note: The rear automatic brake test is part of the planned U.S. NCAP upgrade. The test procedure and requirements are based
on “Rear Automatic Braking Feature Confirmation Test Procedure (Working Draft), December 2015”. Docket NHTSA-2015-0119.
I N P H Y S I C S W E T R U S T
71
Legal & NCAP Requirements
SafetyWissen.com Wissen
Proposals to add
LKS, BSD, BSI and
PAEB
Pedestrian protection
impact tests
(head-to-hood, Proposals to
upper leg-to-hood use THOR-50M and
2022
headlamp beam
switching and rear
automatic braking for Proposals to
pedestrians update Monroney
label
revise 5-star rating
system
2024
2031 2030 2029 2028 2027 2026 2025
72
Legal & NCAP Requirements
Wissen SafetyWissen.com
AEB Pedestrian
Adult, Farside, Impact at 50 % of the
50 %
Vehicle Width
(CPFA-50)
v0 = 20 - 60 km/h v = 8 km/h
(CPNCO-50)
v0 = 20 - 60 km/h v = 5 km/h
AEB Cyclist
Cyclist,
Nearside, Impact at 50 % of the 50 %
Vehicle Width
(CBNA-50)
v0 = 20 km/h ... 60 km/h v = 15 km/h
AEB + FCW
v0 = 10 - 60 km/h v = 0 km/h
74
Legal & NCAP Requirements
Wissen SafetyWissen.com
FCW v0 = 50 / 60 / 70 / 80 km/h
CCRm*: Approach to slower
target with ± 50 % / 100 %
overlap
AEB + FCW AEB v0 = 30 / 40 / 50 km/h v = 20 km/h
* CCR: Car-to-Car Rear; s: stationary; m: moving FCW v0 = 60 / 70 / 80 km/h
11 Points
Adult, Farside, Impact at 25
& 50 % of the Vehicle Width
(CPFA-25 Day & Night / 50 Day)
AEB v 0 = 20 / 30 /40 / 50 / 60 km/h v = 6.5 km/h
Adult, Nearside, Impact at 25
& 75 % of the Vehicle Width
(CPNA-25/75)
AEB v 0 = 20 / 30 /40 / 50 / 60 km/h v = 5 km/h
75
Legal & NCAP Requirements
SafetyWissen.com Wissen
3 Points
Requirement AEB Car-to-Car AEB Car-to- AEB Car-to-
Pedestrian Two-wheeler
de-activation not possible with a single push on a button
HMI
6 Points
ESC System must meet the requirements of GB/T 30677-2014. Performance test report issued by a qualified third
party institution must be submitted to C-NCAP. Alternatively the test report can be based on GTR 8, UN R13H (R140) or
ESC
8 Points
Optional ADAS Systems: Lane Departure Warning: 2 points, Speed Assistance System: 2 points, Blind Spot Detection
(Car-to-Car): 2 points, Blind Spot Detection (Car-to-Two-wheeler): 3 points
Opt
10 Points
Total 10 Points Headlights - Weight 20 %
76
Legal & NCAP Requirements
Wissen SafetyWissen.com
Crossing
Longitudinal
Reverse
Scooter crossing
Cycle longitudinal
Curve LDW
Dooring
Driver Monitoring
77
Legal & NCAP Requirements
SafetyWissen.com Wissen
78
Safety
Testing
Services
& More...
www.digauto.biz
Check our website for
cutomized ICV testing
equipment & solutions
Comprehensive engineering services in NCAP, customized ADAS and ICV function testings
Authorized Dealer
& ADAS Service
Center China
Legal & NCAP Requirements
SafetyWissen.com Wissen
DATE 01.-02.12.2022
Facts
HOMEPAGE www.carhs.de/safetysummit
-3.5 m
v0 = 60 / 65 / 70 km/h
Scenario B 6m 19.5 m 30.5 m 44 m 50 m
ESC 4m
0m 1m
-3m
v0 = 60 / 65 / 70 km/h
82
Legal & NCAP Requirements
Wissen SafetyWissen.com
Dlat
BSD
Dlat
83
Legal & NCAP Requirements
SafetyWissen.com Wissen
CCRs*:
Approach to stationary target v 0=30 km/h ... 80 km/h v=0 km/h
CCRm*:
Approach to slower target v 0=30 km/h ... 80 km/h v=20 km/h
d0
CCRb*:
Approach to braking target v 0=50 km/h d0=12 m v 0=50 km/h, a=-2 m/s²
v 0=50 km/h d0=40 m v 0=50 km/h, a=-2 m/s²
* CCR: Car-To-Car Rear; s: standing; v 0=50 km/h d0=12 m v 0=50 km/h, a=-6 m/s²
m: moving; b: braking
v 0=50 km/h d0=40 m v 0=50 km/h, a=-6 m/s²
stationary target (CCRs) slower target (CCRm) braking target
v0 (km/h) Points for FCW Points for AEB Points for FCW (CCRb)
30 2 1 -
AEB Inter-Urban
35 2 1 -
40 2 1 -
45 2 1 -
50 3 1 1 1 point each
for AEB and
55 2 1 1
for FCW per
60 1 1 1 scenario
65 1 2 2
70 1 2 2
75 1 - 2
80 1 - 2
Ʃ 18 11 11 2x4
Preconditions for HMI points: AEB and/or FCW system are default ON at the start of every
journey and the FCW alert (if available) is loud and clear.
Systems that can not be de-activated with a single push on a button are awarded 2 Points
HMI Assessment
Supplementary warning for the FCW system (e.g. head-up display, belt jerk, brake jerk): 1
Point
Reversible pre-tensioning of the belt in the pre-crash phase: 1 Point
To be eligible for scoring points in AEB Inter-Urban, the AEB and/or FCW system must operate up to speeds of at least 80
km/h at least.
The AEBscore (respectively FCWscore) is the average score from all the scenarios.
For systems that only offer the AEB function, the results of tests at all speeds (covering AEB and FCW) are used to calcu-
late separate normalized AEB and FCW scores for each scenario. Where AEB and FCW test speeds are overlapping, the
test result of AEB is duplicated for FCW.
The total AEB Inter-Urban score results from the following weighting of the normalized scores (%):
AEB Inter-Urban = FCWscore x 3.0 + AEBscore x 4.5 + HMIscore x 1.5
This results in a maximum total score of 9 points for AEB Inter-Urban, which is part of the Safety Assist assessment.
84
Legal & NCAP Requirements
Wissen SafetyWissen.com
85
ADASCompanion_136x96mm_2022_Ausgabe1_EN-new.indd 1 29.07.2022 12:08:23
Processes & Standards
Wissen
Status:
Version number: V5.0
Release Date: Aug. 2009
Link
https://www.acea.auto/files/20090831_Code_of_Practice_ADAS.pdf
86
Processes & Standards
Wissen
ASAM OpenSCENARIO®
Overview
ASAM OpenSCENARIO defines a file format for the description of the dynamic content of driving and traffic simulators. The
primary use-case of OpenSCENARIO is to describe complex, synchronized maneuvers that involve multiple entities like vehicles,
pedestrians and other traffic participants. The description of a maneuver may be based on driver actions (e.g. performing a lane
change) or on trajectories (e.g. derived from a recorded driving maneuver). Other content, such as the description of the ego
vehicle, driver appearance, pedestrians, traffic and environment conditions, is included in the standard as well.
The standard describes vehicle maneuvers in a storyboard, which is subdivided in stories, acts and sequences. A story can
describe the driving maneuvers of one single vehicle or specify the dynamic behavior of several entities (e.g. vehicles perform a
lane change once they reach a specific position). Stories consist of acts, which are triggered when a specific condition is met, such
as exceeding a defined speed, reaching a defined distance to a vehicle ahead or going off-road. By using the notion of sequences,
the standard allows to define the maneuvers of multiple vehicles in response to that. The maneuver of one car could be a lane
change, overtaking another car or driving in a traffic jam while creating a corridor for emergency vehicles. The detailed driving
behavior of the vehicle is described via events (i.e. when does it happen?) and actions (i.e. what happens?). Actions may be
related to one vehicle and can include speed changes, lane changes or drive to a specified position. Routes and trajectories can
be defined that the vehicle shall follow. Actions may also be related to the environment and can include the change of a traffic
light or the occurrence of a traffic jam.
Maneuvers, actions, trajectories and other elements can be organized in catalogs and can be parameterized. Additionally, com-
plete scenario descriptions support parameterization, which allows test automation without the need to create a large amount
of scenario files.
The data for maneuver descriptions in ASAM OpenSCENARIO is organized in a hierarchical structure and serialized in an XML
file format. The schema is provided with the standard. The XML file can be easily validated, edited, imported and exported by
simulation tools and content editors. The format is technology and vendor independent.
Maneuver descriptions are an essential part in an effort to test, validate and certify the safety of driver assistance systems
and autonomous driving cars. The industry, certification agencies and government authorities jointly work on the definition
of maneuver libraries, which can be used to ensure the safe operation of such systems. A publicly developed and vendor-inde-
pendent standard, such as ASAM OpenSCENARIO, is well suited for this purpose. However, despite the clear and unambiguous
maneuver descriptions through a standardized format, it is common understanding that simulation results will not necessarily
be the same on different simulators.
The standard is used together with road network descriptions from ASAM OpenDRIVE and can use road surface profiles from
ASAM OpenCRG. The three standards complement each other and cover the static and dynamic content of in-the-loop vehicle
simulation applications.
Status:
Current Version: ASAM OpenSCENARIO 2.0.0
Release Date: 20 July 2022
Domain: Simulation
Link
https://www.asam.net/standards/detail/openscenario/
87
Processes & Standards
Wissen
ASAM OSI®
Overview
ASAM OSI (Open Simulation Interface) provides easy and straightforward compatibility between automated driving functions
and the variety of driving simulation frameworks available. It allows users to connect any sensor, via a standardized interface, to
any automated driving function and to any driving simulator tooling. It simplifies integration and thus significantly strengthens
the accessibility and usefulness of virtual testing.
ASAM OSI started as a generic data exchange interface compliant with the ISO 23150 logic interface for the environmental
perception of automated driving functions in virtual scenarios. In tandem with packaging specifications, such as the ASAM OSI
Sensor Model Packaging (OSMP) specification, the standard provides solutions for simulation model data exchange across dif-
ferent implementations.
ASAM OSI contains an object-based environment description using the message format of the protocol buffer library developed
and maintained by Google. It defines top-level messages that are used to exchange data between separate models. Top-level
messages define the GroundTruth interface, the SensorData interface, and, since V3.0.0, the SensorView/Sensor-View configura-
tion interfaces and the FeatureData interface. The GroundTruth interface provides an exact view on the simulated objects in a
global coordinate system, the ground truth world coordinate system. The FeatureData interface provides a list of simple features
in the reference frame of the respective sensor of a vehicle for environmental perception. It is generated from a GroundTruth
message and may serve as input for a sensor model that simulates object detection or feature fusion of multiple sensors.
ASAM OSI also defines interfaces for traffic participant models. The TrafficCommand interface makes it possible to send com-
mands to traffic participant models. The TrafficUpdate interface makes it possible to receive the updated state from traffic par-
ticipant models. The following figure shows the interfaces of a generic traffic participant.
Traffic participant models may use other ASAM OSI interfaces internally, for example to model autonomous vehicles. The follow-
ing figure shows a more advanced use case for traffic participants.
Status:
Current Version: ASAM OSI 3.5.0
Release Date: 29 July 2022
Domain: Simulation
Link
https://www.asam.net/standards/detail/osi/
88
Processes & Standards
Wissen
ASAM OpenODD®
Overview
ASAM OpenODD (Operational Design Domain) is still a very young standardization initiative within the ASAM Simulation domain.
The aim is to provide a format that is capable of representing a defined Operational Design Domain for connected automated
vehicles (CAV).
An Operational Design Domain Definition (ODD) should be valid throughout the entire operating life of a vehicle and is part of its
safety and operational concept. The ODD is used for the functional specification of connected automated vehicles. It specifies
what environment parameters (static and dynamic) the CAV must be able to manage. They include all types of traffic participants,
the weather conditions, the infrastructure, the location, the time of day and everything else that can have an impact on the
driving situation.
The goal of the ASAM OpenODD concept project was to create a machine-interpretable format to represent the ODD specifica-
tion. With this format an ODD description becomes exchangeable, comparable and processable. This new format will enable for
example the following use case:
A city defines an ODD for its inner city, using the ASAM OpenODD format. Now car manufactures can compare vehicle
ODDs, defined in ASAM OpenODD, to their vehicle to find out if it is allowed to drive in this specific inner city. The advantage
for homologation bodies will be that they can define ODDs against which they can check the vehicle’s ODD.
A second use case which will support the development of ADAS and AD systems is the use of the ODD to define the
testcases that are necessary to validate the vehicle. There can be obvious limitations e.g. if the vehicle is not capable of
speeds above 50 km/h, therefore highway tests are not necessary. This application of an ODD will help to focus the limited
validation resources on the really needed scenarios.
The ODD must be represented so it can easily be used for simulation and other machine processed environments. The content
of ASAM OpenODD will be derived from an abstract „Vehicle ODD“, that provides the information in a usable manner. For the
purpose of using an abstract vehicle ODD description (represented in ASAM OpenODD) for simulations and post-processing the
format must fulfil the following requirements:
searchability
exchangeability
extensibility
machine readability
measurability and verification
human readability / constrained natural language
Status:
Current Version: Concept
Release Date: 01 Oct 2021
Domain: Simulation
Link
https://www.asam.net/standards/detail/openodd/
89
Processes & Standards
Wissen
ASAM OpenDRIVE®
Overview
The ASAM OpenDRIVE format provides a common base for describing road networks with extensible markup language (XML)
syntax, using the file extension xodr. The data that is stored in an ASAM OpenDRIVE file describes the geometry of roads, lanes
and objects, such as roadmarks on the road, as well as features along the roads, like signals. The road networks that are described
in the ASAM OpenDRIVE file can either be synthetic or based on real data.
The main purpose of ASAM OpenDRIVE is to provide a road network description that can be fed into simulations to develop
and validate ADAS and AD features. With the help of ASAM OpenDRIVE, these road network descriptions can be exchanged
between different simulators. Providing a standardized format for road descriptions also enables the industry to reduce the cost
of creating and converting these files for their development and testing purposes. Road data may be manually created from road
network editors, conversion of map data, or originate from converted scans of real-world roads.
Nodes
The format is organized in nodes that can be extended with user defined data. This facilitates a high degree of specialization
for individual applications (usually simulations) while maintaining the interoperability that is required for the exchange of data
between different applications.
Reference Line
The ASAM OpenDRIVE road network is modelled along the reference line, which is the core piece of every road. Roads, lanes, incl.
their elevation profiles are all attached to the reference line.
Elements of ASAM OpenDRIVE
Objects representing features, such as signals, can be placed by using either the reference line or the global coordinate system,
the road network is placed in. This can be seen in the above image. The reference line (blue line in the middle) is in the center
of the road, the lanes (blue and light green) are attached to this reference line. The signs next to the road are placed in the s/t-
coordinate system.
In ASAM OpenDRIVE several roads form a road network and can be connected. ASAM OpenDRIVE can be seen as a construction
kit of different road sections. The overall road network is composed of individual sections interconnected with each other.
Market Relevance
ASAM OpenDRIVE is a well established standard for the description of road networks. It is already in use by many well-known
manufacturers and companies developing ADAS and AD functions or performing high-accuracy kinematic surveying worldwide.
It is being used for road and rail networks.
Status:
Current Version: ASAM OpenDRIVE 1.7.0
Release Date: 03 Aug 2021
Domain: Simulation
Link
https://www.asam.net/standards/detail/opendrive/
90
ASAM
INTERNATIONAL
CONFERENCE
TOWARDS AD
CERTIFICATION
Integrated development and
testing based on standards
www.asam.net
Processes & Standards
Wissen
Overview
BSI is recognised as the UK National Standards Body (NSB) by the UK Government. This status is formally codified in the Memo-
randum of Understanding (MoU) between the United Kingdom Government and the British Standards Institution in respect of
its activities as the United Kingdom’s National Standards Body.
The following is an overview of standards in the area of ADAS/ADS that go beyond the ISO Standards (BS ISO …..) to which BSI
adheres to.
Connected automotive
Connected and automated ecosystems. Impact of
vehicles – Vocabulary security on safety. Code of
Published on: 31 March 2022 practice
Published on: 31 Dec 2018
Link
https://www.bsigroup.com/en-GB/CAV
92
Processes & Standards
Wissen
This standard applies to road vehicles. For a set of scenarios, a minimum set of assumptions regarding reasonably foreseeable
behaviors of other road users are defined that shall be considered in the development of safety-related models for automated
driving systems (ADS).
This standard further defines a list of attributes common to contributed safety-related models and methods to help verify
whether a safety-related model takes the minimum set of assumptions into consideration. An informative annex instantiates
several examples of how the proposed minimum set of assumptions could be employed in ADS development. Sources of uncer-
tainty, such as prediction or perception errors, are out of scope to this standard. This standard does not guarantee the safety of
the overall system in all scenarios.
Government and Industry alike need an open, transparent, and technology-neutral standard that provides guidance useful for
evaluating the performance of an ADS. This guidance consists of a minimum set of assumptions with bounds on reasonably
foreseeable behaviors of other road users used in the development of safety-related models.
Status
Date of Publication: 22 April 2022
Link
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9761121
Source: IEEE Standard for Assumptions in Safety-Related Models for Automated Driving Systems,” in IEEE Std 2846-2022 , vol.,
no., pp.1-59, 22 April 2022, doi: 10.1109/IEEESTD.2022.9761121
93
Processes & Standards
Wissen
ISO 21448:2022
Road vehicles — Safety of the Intended Functionality (SOTIF)
Overview
The ISO 21448:2022 standard provides a framework and guidance on measures to ensure the safety of the intended functional-
ity (SOTIF), which is defined as the absence of unreasonable risk due to a hazard caused by functional insufficiencies, i.e.:
This document provides guidance on the applicable design, verification and validation measures, as well as activities during the
operation phase, that are needed to achieve and maintain the SOTIF.
The standard is applicable to intended functionalities where proper situational awareness is essential to safety and where such
situational awareness is derived from complex sensors and processing algorithms, especially functionalities of emergency inter-
vention systems and systems having levels of driving automation from 1 to 5 according to SAE J3016
This document is applicable to intended functionalities that include one or more E/E systems installed in series production road
vehicles, excluding mopeds.
Reasonably foreseeable misuse is in the scope of this document. In addition, operation or assistance of a vehicle by a remote
user or communication with a back office that can affect vehicle decision making is in scope of this document when it can lead
to safety hazards.
This document is not intended for functions of existing systems for which well-established and well-trusted design, verification
and validation (V&V) measures exist (e.g. dynamic stability control systems, airbags).
Status:
Published on 2022-06
Link
https://www.iso.org/standard/77490.html
Source: www.iso.org
94
Processes & Standards
Wissen
Overview
ISO 26262 is an international standard for functional safety of electrical and/or electronic systems that are installed in serial
production road vehicles (excluding mopeds), defined by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) in 2011, and
revised in 2018.
Functional safety features form an integral part of each automotive product development phase, ranging from the specification,
to design, implementation, integration, verification, validation, and production release. The standard ISO 26262 is an adaptation
of the Functional Safety standard IEC 61508 for Automotive Electric/Electronic Systems. ISO 26262 defines functional safety for
automotive equipment applicable throughout the lifecycle of all automotive electronic and electrical safety-related systems.
The first edition (ISO 26262:2011), published on 11 November 2011, was limited to electrical and/or electronic systems installed
in "series production passenger cars" with a maximum gross weight of 3,500 kg. The second edition (ISO 26262:2018), published
in December 2018, extended the scope from passenger cars to all road vehicles except mopeds.
The standard aims to address possible hazards caused by the malfunctioning behaviour of electronic and electrical systems in
vehicles. Although entitled "Road vehicles – Functional safety" the standard relates to the functional safety of Electrical and
Electronic systems as well as that of systems as a whole or of their mechanical subsystems.
Like its parent standard, IEC 61508, ISO 26262 is a risk-based safety standard, where the risk of hazardous operational situations
is qualitatively assessed and safety measures are defined to avoid or control systematic failures and to detect or control random
hardware failures, or mitigate their effects.
Goals of ISO 26262:
Provides an automotive safety lifecycle (management, development, production, operation, service, decommissioning) and
supports tailoring the necessary activities during these lifecycle phases.
Covers functional safety aspects of the entire development process (including such activities as requirements specification,
design, implementation, integration, verification, validation, and configuration).
Provides an automotive-specific risk-based approach for determining risk classes (Automotive Safety Integrity Levels, ASILs).
Uses ASILs for specifying the item's necessary safety requirements for achieving an acceptable residual risk.
Provides requirements for validation and confirmation measures to ensure a sufficient and acceptable level of safety is
being achieved.
Parts of ISO 26262
ISO 26262:2018 consists of twelve parts, ten normative parts (parts 1 to 9 and 12) and two guidelines (parts 10 and 11):
1. Vocabulary
2. Management of functional safety
3. Concept phase
4. Product development at the system level
5. Product development at the hardware level
6. Product development at the software level
7. Production, operation, service and decommissioning
8. Supporting processes
9. Automotive Safety Integrity Level (ASIL)-oriented and safety-oriented analysis
10. Guidelines on ISO 26262
11. Guidelines on application of ISO 26262 to semiconductors
12. Adaptation of ISO 26262 for motorcycles
Status
Published 2018-12
Link
https://www.iso.org/standard/68383.html
Source: www.iso.org
95
Processes & Standards
Wissen
ISO/CD TS 22133
Road vehicles — Test object monitoring and control for active
safety and automated/autonomous vehicle testing
Overview
The standard specifies requirements, procedures, and message formats for the controlling and monitoring of test targets, used
for the testing of active safety functions and autonomous vehicles. The standard specifies functionality and messaging for the
monitoring and controlling of test objects by a control center facilitating an interoperable test object environment. The standard
does not specify the internal architecture of the test object and control center nor does it specify how the testing of the vehicles
shall be performed.
The testing of collision avoidance systems, active safety functions, and more advanced autonomous functions in vehicles requires
testing on proving grounds. The purpose is to expose the vehicle under test to potentially dangerous traffic situations in a safe
manner. The evaluation is done during development, and in voluntary and mandatory test procedures.
To orchestrate these traffic scenarios, various impactable targets representing traffic actors have to be controlled. The number
of controlled targets may be one or many depending on the required traffic scenario. Multiple requirements are important, such
as safety, position and speed precision, and logging capabilities.
The standard specifies requirements, functionality, and a protocol allowing for multi-vendor target carrier systems to be con-
trolled according to the required traffic scenario, to report expected information for logging purposes and other functions
required.
ISO 22133 consists of the following parts, under the general title “Road Vehicles – Test Object Monitoring and Control for Active
Safety and Automated/Autonomous Vehicle Testing”:
Status:
Under Development
Link
https://www.iso.org/standard/78970.html
Source: www.iso.org
96
Processes & Standards
Wissen
ISO 22078:2020 Intelligent transport systems — Bicyclist detection and collision mitigation systems (BDCMS) — Per-
formance requirements and test procedures
ISO/AWI TS 22726-1 Intelligent transport systems — Dynamic data and map database specification for connected and
automated driving system applications — Part 1: Architecture and logical data model for harmoniza-
tion of static map data
ISO/AWI TS 22726-2 Intelligent transport systems — Dynamic data and map database specification for connected and
automated driving system applications — Part 2: Logical data model of dynamic data
ISO 22733-1:2021 Road vehicles — Test method to evaluate the performance of autonomous emergency braking
systems — Part 1: Car-to-car
ISO 22733-1 Road vehicles — Test method to evaluate the performance of autonomous emergency braking
systems — Part 1: Car-to-car
ISO/CD 22733-2 Road vehicles — Test method to evaluate the performance of autonomous emergency braking
systems — Part 2: Car to pedestrian
ISO 22735:2021 Road vehicles — Test method to evaluate the performance of lane-keeping assistance systems
ISO/SAE PAS Taxonomy and definitions for terms related to driving automation systems for on-road motor ve-
22736:2021 hicles
ISO 22737:2021 Intelligent transport systems — Low-speed automated driving (LSAD) systems for predefined routes
— Performance requirements, system requirements and performance test procedures
ISO/TR 23049:2018 Road Vehicles — Ergonomic aspects of external visual communication from automated vehicles
to other road users
ISO/DIS 23375 Intelligent transport systems — Collision Evasive Lateral Manoeuvre Systems (CELM) — Require-
ments and test procedures
ISO 23376:2021 Intelligent transport systems — Vehicle-to-vehicle intersection collision warning systems (VVICW)
— Performance requirements and test procedures
ISO/AWI 23793-1 Intelligent transport systems — Minimal Risk Maneuver (MRM) for automated driving — Part 1:
Framework, straight-stop and in-lane stop
ISO/DIS 24089 Road vehicles — Software update engineering
ISO 26684:2015 Intelligent transport systems (ITS) — Cooperative intersection signal information and violation
warning systems (CIWS) — Performance requirements and test procedures
ISO/FDIS 34501 Road vehicles — Test scenarios for automated driving systems — Vocabulary
ISO/FDIS 34502 Road vehicles — Test scenarios for automated driving systems - Scenario based safety evaluation
framework
ISO/FDIS 34503 Road Vehicles — Test scenarios for automated driving systems — Taxonomy for operational design
domain
ISO/CD 34504 Road vehicles — Test scenarios for automated driving systems - Scenario categorization
98
Processes & Standards
Wissen
This includes traditional vehicle manufacturers as well as other entities involved with manufacturing, designing, supplying,
testing, selling, operating, or deploying ADSs, including equipment designers and suppliers; entities that outfit any vehicle with
automated capabilities or equipment for testing, for commercial sale, and/or for use on public roadways; transit companies;
automated fleet operators; “driverless” taxi companies; and any other individual or entity that offers services utilizing ADS tech-
nology (referred to collectively as “entities” or “industry”).
This Voluntary Guidance applies to the design aspects of motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment under NHTSA’s juris-
diction, including low-speed vehicles, motorcycles, passenger vehicles, medium-duty vehicles, and heavy-duty CMVs such as
large trucks and buses. These entities are subject to NHTSA’s defect, recall, and enforcement authority. For entities seeking to
request regulatory action (e.g., petition for exemption or interpretation) from NHTSA, an informational resource is available on
the Agency’s website at https://www.nhtsa.gov/technology-innovation/automated-vehicles-safety, along with other associated
references and resources.
Interstate motor carrier operations and CMV drivers fall under the jurisdiction of FMCSA and are not within the scope of this
Voluntary Guidance. Currently, per the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs), a trained commercial driver must
be behind the wheel at all times, regardless of any automated driving technologies available on the CMV, unless a petition for a
waiver or exemption has been granted. For more information regarding CMV operations and automated driving technologies,
including guidance on FMCSA’s petition process, see www.fmcsa.dot.gov.
This Voluntary Guidance focuses on vehicles that incorporate SAE Automation Levels 3 through 5 – Automated Driving Systems
(ADSs). ADSs may include systems for which there is no human driver or for which the human driver can give control to the ADS
and would not be expected to perform any driving-related tasks for a period of time. It is an entity’s responsibility to determine
its system’s automation level in conformity with SAE International’s published definitions.
The purpose of this Voluntary Guidance is to help designers of ADSs analyze, identify, and resolve safety considerations prior
to deployment using their own, industry, and other best practices. It outlines 12 safety elements, which the Agency believes
represent the consensus across the industry, that are generally considered to be the most salient design aspects to consider
and address when developing, testing, and deploying ADSs on public roadways. Within each safety design element, entities are
encouraged to consider and document their use of industry standards, best practices, company policies, or other methods they
have employed to provide for increased system safety in real-world conditions. The 12 safety design elements apply to both ADS
original equipment and to replacement equipment or updates (including software updates/ upgrades) to ADSs.
This Voluntary Guidance provides recommendations and suggestions for industry’s consideration and discussion. This Guid-
ance is entirely voluntary, with no compliance requirement or enforcement mechanism. The sole purpose of this Guidance is
to support the industry as it develops best practices in the design, development, testing, and deployment of automated vehicle
technologies.
Status
Version: September 12, 2017
DOT HS 812 442
Link
https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/13069a-ads2.0_090617_v9a_tag.pdf
99
Processes & Standards
Wissen
Processes & Standards
Wissen SafetyWissen.com
UL 4600 - Standard for Safety for the Evaluation
UPDATE of Autonomous
Products
UL 4600 - Standard for Safety for the Evaluation of Autonomous
Overview
Products
The standard’s scope includes safety principles and processes for evaluating autonomous products with no human driver super-
vision, e.g. fully autonomous vehicles.
Overview
The standard’s
The standard usesscope includes safety
a goal-based principles
approach whichand processes
prescribes for evaluating
topics that mustautonomous
be addressedproducts with
in creating no human
a safety case.driver supervi-
It is intended
sion, e.g. fully
to address autonomous
changes vehicles.
required from traditional safety practices to accommodate autonomy, such as lack of human operator to
take fault mitigation actions.
The standard uses a goal-based approach which prescribes topics that must be addressed in creating a safety case. It is intended
to address changes
Traditional requiredin
safety standards from traditional
contrast safety
describe thepractices
process toto achieve
accommodate
safety. autonomy, such as lack of human operator to take
fault mitigation actions.
Traditional
The standard safety standards
include safety in contrast
case describerisk
construction, theanalysis,
processsafety
to achieve safety.
relevant aspects of design process, testing, tool qualification,
The standard
autonomy include data
validation, safetyintegrity,
case construction,
human-machine risk analysis, safety
interaction relevant
(for aspectslife
non-drivers), ofcycle
design process,metrics
concerns, testing,and
toolconformance
qualification,
autonomy validation, data integrity, human-machine interaction (for non-drivers), life cycle concerns, metrics and conformance
assessment.
assessment.
UL 4600 is technology neutral, meaning that it does not mandate the use of any specific technology in creating the autonomous
UL 4600and
system, is technology neutral,
it also permits meaning
design process that it does not mandate the use of any specific technology in creating the autonomous
flexibility.
system, and it also permits design process flexibility.
Also UL 4600
Also UL 4600 does
does not
not define
define performance
performance or or pass/fail
pass/fail criteria
criteria for
for safety,
safety, nor
nor does
doesititcover
coverroad
roadtesting
testingor
oracceptable
acceptableriskrisklevels.
levels.
Furthermore, the
Furthermore, the Standard
Standard does
doesnot
notset
setforth
forthrequirements
requirementsfor forethical
ethicalproduct
productrelease
releasedecisions
decisionsororany
anyethical
ethicalaspects
aspectsofofproduct
prod-
behavior.
uct behavior.
The standard include the concept of Safety Performance Indicators (SPI) which are metrics like KPI’s but specific to safety. In
addition UL4600
The standard includes
includes thefeedback
concept loops thatPerformance
of Safety allow to manage and improve
Indicators imperfections
(SPI) which are metrics that
likewere
KPI’snot
butconsidered
specific to in the first
safety. In
design
additionofUL4600
the safety case. feedback loops that allow to manage and improve imperfections that were not considered in the first
includes
Compliance
design of thewith
safetyULcase.
4600 permits (but does not require conformance to) other safety standards such as ISO 26262, ISO/PAS
21448, IEC 61508, MIL STD 882, etc., as well as security standards where such conformity is demonstrated.
Compliance with UL 4600 permits (but does not require conformance to) other safety standards such as ISO 26262, IEC 61508,
UL4600 is suited
MIL-STD-882, forasself-certification
etc., well as security and assessment
standards whereby third
such parties. is demonstrated.
conformity
CLAIM
100
Scenarios & Databases
Wissen
System
Data Plausibilization &
Implementation & Scenario Catalogue Quality Assurance
Operation
101
Scenarios & Databases
Wissen
Layer 1 - Road Network and Traffic Guidance Objects Layer 5 - Environmental Conditions
Examples: Examples:
Roads including shoulders, sidewalks, parking spaces etc. (Artificial) Illumination
Traffic signs and traffic lights Road conditions (dry, wet, icy etc.)
Wind
30
102
Scenarios & Databases
Wissen
Scenario Databases
A scenario database is a structured and curated collection of relevent traffic scenarios for ADS development, validation and
certification. The Pegasus project has provided a first data model. Typically the databases will be accessible via standardized
interfaces like OpenScenario.
The following table provides and overview of publically accessible databases.
Name Description Available Scenarios Link
SafetyPoolTM The Scenario Database contains over 250,000 https://www.safetypool.ai/
a diverse set of curated scenarios database
generated from multiple sources such
as expert knowledge, accident database
and naturalistic data.
Scenarios are organized and tagged
based on their specific Operational
Design Domain following the BSI PAS
1883 ODD Taxonomy and the ASAM
Open ODD standard (under develop-
ment).
Waymo Open The Waymo Open Dataset is composed over 100,000 https://waymo.com/open/
Dataset of two datasets - the perception dataset
with high resolution sensor data and
labels for 2,030 segments, and the
motion dataset with object trajectories
and corresponding 3D maps for 103,354
segments.
CAICV - SOTIF Shared library of Chinese SOTIF over 1,800 http://www.scstsv.tech/home
Scenario Library scenarios for supporting of test and
verification.
MOOVE/MOSAR A structured library as common 30 functional, 130 https://mosar.irt-systemx.fr
reference, with open export format to logical, over 2.5
initialize the combinatory for exhaustive million concrete
simulation. The „ADScene scenarios scenarios
library” is supported by French govern-
ment as French scenarios library for
AD&ADAS safety validation.
SAKURA Scenario The SAKURA project is a large-scale unkonwn https://www.sakura-prj.go.jp/
Database coordinated initiative funded by the project_info/tabid84.html
Japanes Ministry of Economy, Trade and
Industry (METI) that aims at harmonizing
data collection, developing research
methodologies and coordinating
standardization of activities through joint
efforts with vehicle manufacturers and
traffic research institutions.
levelXdata Real- Different datasets from different 346 ALKS https:// www.levelxdata.com
World Scenario countries with different infrastructure scenarios: 37 Lead
Data (city, highway, traffic circle, etc.) each Vehicle Brake, 136
with x-hundred scenarios, ALKS scenario Cut-In, 51 Swerv-
datasets extracted from highD data. ing Lead Vehicle,
122 Swerving Side
Vehicle
103
Safety Assurance
Wissen
(longitudinal distance)
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 = 𝜇𝜇𝜇𝜇 + � 𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌 + − �� � 𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌 + ��
2 2𝛼𝛼𝛼𝛼1.𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙,𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 2 2𝛼𝛼𝛼𝛼2,𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙,𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
cr
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
1
= �𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟 𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌 + 𝛼𝛼𝛼𝛼𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌2 +
2
(𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟 + 𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌𝛼𝛼𝛼𝛼𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 )2
2𝛼𝛼𝛼𝛼𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
− cf
𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓2
2𝛼𝛼𝛼𝛼𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
�
Links
https://arxiv.org/abs/1708.06374 https://github.com/intel/ad-rss-lib
104
Safety Assurance
Wissen
▪ Positive Risk Balance is an additional aspect to be considered in the development of automated driving systems which is in
The
response to ethical considerations of governments in Europe.
Safety of the
Functional Safety Cybersecurity Scenario Based Development Ethical Aspects
intended functionality
The concept of the positive risk balance has to be considered during the entire product development cycle: in system design,
requirements definition, safety assessment and field monitoring.
The Risk Balance quantifies the positive and negative effects of a technology:
Potential positive effects: Potential negative effects:
Avoidance of collisions New collisions
Mitigation of collisions More critical situations
Avoidance of critical driving conditions False behaviour of the technology
The Risk Balance is a quantifiying approach. Therefore the boundary conditions and tools have to defined properly.
1. Which accidents should be considered?
2. What is the right metric?
3. Which accidents statistics should be used?
4. Safety Factors have to be considered
Virtual assessment methods are used for assessing the risk balance before and during the development. Once a car is in produc-
tion, field monitoring is used to increase confidence and validate the results.
References
Fahrenkrog, F., Drees, L., Raisch, F. Positive Risikobilanz: Methodisches Vorgehen und deren Rolle in der Entwicklung,
Auto[nom|Mobil, Würzburg, May 2022.
Kauffmann, N., Fahrenkrog, F., Drees, L. et al. Positive risk balance: a comprehensive framework to ensure vehicle safety. Ethics
Inf Technol 24, 15 (2022).
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-022-09625-2
https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10676-022-09625-2.pdf
105
Verification & Validation
Wissen
Validation of ADAS/ADS functionality and safety is a key part of the development of such systems. The V-Model illustrated a
popular systems development life cycle and positions the main validation activities in the development process.
Validation technologies can be categorized into virtual and physical elements which fade into each other using x-in-the-loop
approaches. The following figure shows the relevance of such technologies in the validation of ADAS/ADS systems.
Figure 2: Virtual and Real Test Environments (Souce: Shanghai Digauto Automobile Technology)
MIL/SIL | Model-/Software-in-the-Loop
An approach which allows quick algorithmic development without involving dedicated hardware. Usually, this level of develop-
ment involves high-level abstraction software frameworks running on general-purpose computing systems.
HIL | Hardware-In-the-Loop
An approach which involves the final hardware of a specific vehicle sub-system running the final software with input and output
connected to a simulation environment to perform virtual testing. HIL testing provides a way of replicating sensors, actuators
and mechanical components in a way that connects all the I/O of the Electronic Control Units (ECU) being tested, long before the
final system is integrated.
VIL | Vehicle-In-the-Loop
A fusion environment of a real testing vehicle in the real-world and a virtual environment. It can reflect vehicle dynamics at the
same level as the real-world and it can be operated on a vehicle test bed or on a test track.
106
Verification & Validation
Wissen
New Assessment/Test Method for Automated Driving (NATM) Guidelines for Validating Automated Driving System
(ADS)
The guidelines were prepared by the Informal Working Group (IWG) on Validation Methods for Automated Driving (VMAD).
They have been submitted to the World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations (WP.29) for information at its June
2022 session, subject to confirmation by Working Party on Automated/Autonomous and Connected Vehicles (GRVA) at its May
2022 session.
In the following some of the key concepts of these guidelines are explained.
It is recommended to use a five pillar approach plus a scenario catalogue for the validation of ADS safety
(a) A scenario catalogue, consisting of descriptions of real-world driving situations that may occur during a given trip, will be a
tool used by the NATM-pillars to systematically validate the safety of an ADS;
(b) Simulation/virtual testing which uses different types of simulation toolchains to assess the compliance of an ADS with the
safety requirements on a wide range of virtual scenarios including some which would be extremely difficult if not impossible to
test in real-world settings. The aspect of credibility of simulation/virtual testing is included in this topic;
(c) Track testing uses a closed-access testing ground with various scenario elements to test the capabilities and functioning of
an ADS;
(d) Real world testing uses public roads to test and evaluate the performance of ADS related to its capacity to drive in real traffic
conditions;
(e) Audit/assessment procedures which establish how manufacturers will be required to demonstrate to safety authorities
using documentation, their simulation, test-track, and/or real-world testing of the capabilities of an ADS. The audit will validate
that hazards and risks relevant for the system have been identified and that a consistent safety- by-design concept has been put
in place. The audit will also verify that robust processes/ mechanisms/strategies (i.e., safety management system) are in place to
ensure the ADS meets the relevant safety requirements throughout the vehicle lifecycle. It shall also assess the complementarity
between the different pillars of the assessment and the overall scenario coverage;
(f) In-service monitoring and reporting addresses the in-service safety of the ADS after its placing on the market. It relies on
the collection of fleet data in the field to assess whether the ADS continues to be safe when operated on the road. This data
collection can also be used to fuel the common scenario database with new scenarios from the field and to allow the whole ADS
community to learn from major ADS accidents/ incidents.
NATM
Audit
Test
Methods Real World Tests In-service
Monitoring &
Reporting
Track Tests
Simulation
Virtual Tool
Assessment
ODD Scenarios
Figure 3: Relationship between VMAD Pillars, Scenarios and FRAV Safety Requirements
107
Verification & Validation
Wissen
The only way to evaluate both performance and safety of automated and autonomous functions and systems in the infinite
space of traffic situations or scenarios is virtual simulation.
A complete simulation toolchain to cover the full workflow of ADAS/ADS validation consists of many diverse elements which
today are either individual software packages or combinations of software packages. Such a generalized workflow is shown here:
Real-World Datasets
Virtual Environment
Generation
Scenario Selection
Generation of
Concrete Scenarios
Simulation of
Concrete Scenarios
There are now numerous software packages to cover the workflows come from diverse organisations:
Proving grounds are key components in the validation, verification, inspection and homologation of ADAS and ADS equipped
vehicles. Currently all legal and consumer assessments require physical tests to validate the functions.
Furthermore proving grounds play an important role in validating simulation models and in testing for robustness of the func-
tions.
ADAS and ADS functions pose new requirements to the design of proving grounds. Those requirements range from space, type
of road, surface, evenness to lighting and communication equipment. In addition the safety and security of running tests at high
velocity and together with robots has be ensured.
The number of proving grounds for ADAS/ADS testing has increased significantly over the last years and there is more growth
anticipated. Also the technical equipment of the proving grounds is further enhanced. Future editions of the ADAS/ADS Compan-
ion will provide overviews of the worldwide proving grounds.
Besides the Vehicle-Under-Test (VUT), proving ground use multiple surrogates to simulate stationary and moving traffic par-
ticipants. Those are representing humans, animals, two-wheelers and cars. The moving surrogate are positioned on robotic
platforms to be moved at trajectories and at speeds coming from requirements and/or scenario databases. GNSS is used to
syncronize the trajectories of VUTs and surrogates.
Images: 4activeSystems
109
Verification & Validation
Event
NEW
At The ADAS Experience, the framework relevant for the development will be
presented: Requirements, technical principles, development and release meth-
ods on the Theory Day in the conference hotel, followed by hands-on experience
on the test track on the Demo Day. Various test scenarios will be performed and
examples of how the test technology is best used, will be shown live in the differ-
ent test setups.
VENUE Klettwitz
HOMEPAGE www.carhs.de/adas
LANGUAGE English
110
Verification & Validation Latest info about
Seminar
this course
and Mechanical Engineering at the Technical University of Vienna. After his dissertation on the simulation of
special satellite formations for the European Space Agency, he began his professional career in crash simula-
tion at BMW. After further years as a consultant for stochastic simulation at EASI Engineering GmbH (today
carhs), he founded ANDATA in 2004, where he is responsible for development and research as managing
partner. Since 2009 he has also been co-owner of Automotive Safety Technologies GmbH in Gaimersheim. His
professional interests are founded in effective and efficient development, validation and assessment meth-
ods for complex, safety-critical systems. In particular, he has been working for more than 20 years on the
development and combined application of methods from the fields of artificial intelligence, machine learning,
advanced simulation methods, scenario-based approaches and according process models in the virtual devel-
opment of vehicles and autonomous robots. His current activities are the development and implementation
of cooperative, networked, automated driving strategies for effective traffic automation.
27.-28.10.2022 186/3971 Alzenau 2 Days 1.340,- EUR till 29.09.2022, thereafter 1.590,- EUR
13.-16.03.2023 186/4082 Online 4 Days 1.340,- EUR till 13.02.2023, thereafter 1.650,- EUR
111
Latest info about Verification & Validation
Seminar
this course
and Mechanical Engineering at the Technical University of Vienna. After his dissertation on the simulation of
special satellite formations for the European Space Agency, he began his professional career in crash simula-
tion at BMW. After further years as a consultant for stochastic simulation at EASI Engineering GmbH (today
carhs), he founded ANDATA in 2004, where he is responsible for development and research as managing
partner. Since 2009 he has also been co-owner of Automotive Safety Technologies GmbH in Gaimersheim. His
professional interests are founded in effective and efficient development, validation and assessment meth-
ods for complex, safety-critical systems. In particular, he has been working for more than 20 years on the
development and combined application of methods from the fields of artificial intelligence, machine learning,
advanced simulation methods, scenario-based approaches and according process models in the virtual devel-
opment of vehicles and autonomous robots. His current activities are the development and implementation
of cooperative, networked, automated driving strategies for effective traffic automation.
07.-08.11.2022 187/3973 Alzenau 2 Days 1.340,- EUR till 10.10.2022, thereafter 1.590,- EUR
11.-14.04.2023 187/4083 Online 4 Days 1.340,- EUR till 14.03.2023, thereafter 1.650,- EUR
112
Verification & Validation
Event
NEW
DATE 25.-26.04.2023
Facts
HOMEPAGE www.carhs.de/grandchallenge
LANGUAGE
PRICE 990,- EUR till 28.03.2023, thereafter 1.280,- EUR, ONLINE 840,- EUR
113
Latest info about Verification & Validation
Seminar
this course
Prof. Dr. Karin Brolin (Lightness by Design AB) has worked in the field of impact biomechanics
Instructor
throughout her career. Karin Brolin earned her PhD in 2002 at the Royal Institute of Technology, and since
then she has worked in both academia and industry on the topic of human body injury mechanisms and toler-
ances. The past ten years she led a research group focusing on human body simulations for traffic safety and
injury prevention, as Professor in Computational Impact Biomechanics at Chalmers University of Technology.
Since 2019 Dr. Brolin has worked as an independent consultant and researcher.
28.11.-01.12.2022 193/4070 online 4 Days 1.340,- EUR till 31.10.2022, thereafter 1.590,- EUR
114
Verification & Validation
Event
NEW
Conference Topics
Biomechanical Research Image: Wiesbaden Congress & Marketing GmbH
DATE 16.-17.11.2022
Facts
HOMEPAGE www.carhs.de/humo
LANGUAGE English
PRICE 1.490,- EUR till 19.10.2022, thereafter 1.750,- EUR, ONLINE 990,- EUR
115
Life Cycle Management
Wissen
validation in operation
(e.g. field monitoring, periodic technical inspection)
experiments
design
test rig /
principles
proving ground
requirements on
performance and simulation
operation
Figure 1 illustrates the approval process of CAV’s schematically. The left branch describes the requirements that connected and
automated systems have to fulfil. With the introduction of first regulations on automated driving systems, it is already apparent
today that constraint regulations with specific technical requirements will be replaced by generic, functional and technology-
neutral requirements for the vehicles and traffic systems. This enables the approval of innovative technologies, but also requires
an extensive evaluation of the performance of the systems.
As illustrated with the right branch, a prospective safety and risk assessment is necessary before a CAV can be approved. Lately,
a multi-pillar approach has been established that includes e.g. virtual (scenario-based) analyses to prove an increase in safety
potential with the corresponding driving function. In addition, auditing of a safety-compliant development process as well as
experimental verifications on test rigs, closed test areas and in real traffic are part of the assessment and approval process [1].
Although there are many novel developments concerning virtual testing and despite extensive and state-of-the-art safety analy-
ses – performed by the manufacturers, the technical services and the authorities – it seems impossible to represent completely
the complexity of all possible traffic scenarios and environmental conditions. Furthermore, future changes in road traffic regula-
tions cannot be assessed when approving connected and automated vehicles today. Additionally, it is not possible to assess
future adaptations to changing traffic conditions at the time of approval. Moreover, deterioration due to degradation, wear,
tampering or damage as well as modifications due to regularly (over-the-air) software updates cannot be comprehensively deter-
mined at the time of approval, i.e. at the beginning of the product life cycle. Hence, a validation in operation as a retrospective
safety assessment is vital to ensure road safety (as well as compliance with other requirements such as ethical, environmental
or security behaviour). Therefore, in-service monitoring and reporting (ISMR) performed by the manufacturers themselves is
mandatory to apply for a type-approval of the automated driving system (ADS) of fully automated vehicles according to the
Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/1426 [2].
In addition to ISMR performed by the vehicle manufacturers themselves, the validation of the performance of connected and
116
Life Cycle Management
Wissen
automated vehicles should be performed by neutral, sovereign bodies as this supports a trusted third party principle and com-
plies with the market and field surveillance tasks of many countries. For example, the Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/1426
requires that the manufacturer must enable the transport service operator to provide the type-approval authorities, market
surveillance authorities or other authorities designated by the Member States with the selected vehicle data.
evaluation by the
authorities /
sovereign
public bodies
requirement
not fulfilled
evaluation of ADS
deactivation of
driving function
Dynamic determination of
minimum requirements
for CAV inactive
Figure 2 illustrated the field monitoring approach [3, 4, 5]. For implementation of a working process, driving and environmental
data (without reference to persons) must be recorded, transmitted and evaluated. If safety-relevant anomalies are detected, in
worst case, the deactivation of the corresponding automated driving functions can be initiated by the authorities. To reactivate
the functionalities, measures (such as hardware upgrades or software updates) can be demanded from the manufacturers.
This disruptive approach of a dynamic vehicle approval is comparable to an ordered recall by the authorities in case of safety-rel-
evant issues. Moreover, the procedure corresponds with regulatory law for human drivers. If a driver has committed an adminis-
trative offence, a driving ban can be imposed. In addition, a retraining can be demanded to obtain the drivers license. Transferred
to a technical system – that is responsible for the Dynamic Driving Task (DDT) – e.g. a software update can be demanded.
The left cycle of figure 2 illustrates the development of an adaptive assessment standard. Based on minimum requirements for
the performance of selected automated driving functions, the performance of the driving task must be evaluated by appropri-
ate algorithms. For this purpose, generally applicable, unambiguous and objective evaluation criteria and methods must be
developed for validating the automated driving functions. On the one hand, criteria can be derived from provisions (e.g. UNECE
or national traffic regulations), that are usually underlying changes. On the other hand, the normal driving behaviour of a good
human driver can be used as an initial evaluation benchmark. Therefore, a comprehensive analysis of real driving data is essential.
Only if nominal driving behaviour can be described comprehensively, incidents in driving behaviour can be detected and evalu-
ated.
Further development of periodic roadworthiness tests
The implementation of the periodic technical inspection (PTI) still contributes significantly to guarantee road safety of vehicles.
However, a PTI that focuses exclusively on mechanical components of the vehicle will no longer meet the safety requirements
of modern road traffic. It must be ensured that a proper and professional inspection of the performance and functionality of
connected and automated vehicle is carried out by a neutral third party to assure a high level of safety throughout the vehicle's
life cycle. Therefore, today's test content has to be extended and further developed.
One part is to test the performance and functionality of safety relevant driving systems digitally by the electronic vehicle inter-
117
Life Cycle Management
Wissen
face. This includes to verify the conformity and integrity of software (as an elementary component of electronically controlled
vehicle systems) during the PTI. Thus, it becomes important to make in-vehicle data available, not only for mobility services,
but also for sovereign tasks. Self-determined and independent access to safety-relevant data and diagnostic functions in the
vehicle for administrative and sovereign tasks are the necessary basis for the definition of universally valid, unambiguous and
objective evaluation criteria and methods for independent roadworthiness testing during the whole vehicle life cycle. Neutral
and independent access to mobility and vehicle data (via OBD / Over-the-air vehicle interfaces) must be ensured and adapted to
the technical state of the art of the vehicles.
In addition to static and electronic condition tests, vehicle tests within the scope of PTI are becoming more dynamic. In particular
scenario-based test methods offer the possibility to test the reaction of a vehicle to a specific input by using an appropriate
representation of the traffic environment. The development of PTI-capable targets, as known from development projects, and
the implementation at inspection sites could be an effective solution to evaluate the performance and functionality of connected
and automated driving functions.
References
[1] United Nations, World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations, 184th session, Geneva, 22-24 June 2021: New
Assessment/Test Method for Automated Driving (NATM). ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2021/61,
Url: https://unece.org/sites/default/files/2021-04/ECE-TRANS-WP29-2021-61e.pdf.
[2] Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/1426 of 5 August 2022 laying down rules for the application of Regulation
(EU) 2019/2144 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards uniform procedures and technical specifications for
the type-approval of the automated driving system (ADS) of fully automated vehicles.
Url: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2022/1426/oj.
[3] Höpping, K.; Bönninger, J. (2020). Approval of automated vehicles. In Proceedings SafetyWeek 2020: Auto[nom]Mobil, Würz-
burg, Germany, 1-3 September 2020.
[4] Höpping, K.; Bönninger, J.; Prokop, G.; Mai, M. (2021). Driver’s license for automated vehicles – towards representative test
scenarios. In Proceedings SafetyWeek 2021: Auto[nom]Mobil, Würzburg, Germany, 1-2 September 2021.
[5] F. Blüthner, K. Höpping, T. Böhme, J. Bönninger und D. Bönninger, „A Federated Telematics System for access to in-vehicle
data – a trustworthy basis for field monitoring of automated vehicles,“ in 27th ITS World Congress, Hamburg, 2021.
SafetyWissen by courtesy of Dr. Kristian Höpping and Dr. Jürgen Bönninger, FSD Fahrzeugsystemdaten GmbH, Dresden,
Germany
118
SAFETY SafetyWissen
WISSEN SafetyWissen.com
Important Abbreviations
119
SafetyWissen SAFETY
SafetyWissen.com WISSEN
Important Abbreviations
I R
Radar Radio Detection and Ranging
IHC Intelligent Headlight Control
RCTA Rear Cross Traffic Alert
ISA Intelligent Speed Assistance
RMF Risk Mitigation Function
ISM Intelligent Speed Management
RSS Responsibility-Sensitive Safety
ITS Intelligent Transport Systems
RTA Ready To Assist
J
S
JA Junction Assist
SA Safety Assist (Euro NCAP)
JNCAP Japan New Car Assessment Program
SAS Speed Assistance System
K SAT Safety Assist Technology
SLD Speed Limitation Device
KNCAP Korean New Car Assessment Program SLIF Speed Limit Information Function
SOTIF Safety Of The Intended Functionality
L
SSR Speed Sign Recognition
LDP Lane Departure Prevention SUMS Software Update Management System
LDWS Lane Departure Warning System
LIDAR Light Detection and Ranging T
LKAS Lane Keeping Assist System TA Type Approval
LKD Lane Keeping Device TCMV Technical Committee - Motor Vehicles (EU)
LKS Lane Keeping System/Support TOR Takeover Request
LSS Lane Support System TRT Total Reaction/Response Time
TTB Time to Brake
M
TTC Time to Collision
MCB Multi Collision Brake TTD Time to Decision
ML Machine Learning TTS Time to Steer
MRC Minimal Risk Condition
MRM Minimum Risk Maneuver U
MSA Manual Speed Assist U.S. NCAP United States New Car Assessment Program
UIC User-In-Charge
N
UN United Nations
NCAP New Car Assessment Program
NHTSA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration V
(USA) V2I Vehicle-to-Infrastructure
NUIC Non-User-In-Charge V2V Vehicle-to-Vehicle
V2X Vehicle-to-Everything
O
VAN Vehicle Area Network
ODD Operational Design Domain VATS Visual Attention Time Sharing
OEDR Object and Event Detection and Response VDC Vehicle Dynamics Control
OSM Occupant Status Monitoring VLOS Visual Line-Of-Sight
OTA Over-The-Air VRU Vulnerable Road User
VUT Vehicle under test
P
PAEB Pedestrian Automatic Emergency Braking
PBC Peak Braking Coefficient
PDC Park Distance Control
120
carhs.training gmbh
General Terms for the Participation in Seminars and Events i
Subject and Scope of Application able information and data. We cannot accept any liability for the content of the
These General Terms and Conditions (AGB) apply exclusively to participation in statements, for information and data or for the success of the training. We are
seminars and events organized and held by carhs.training GmbH (hereinafter not liable for loss of or damage to items brought to seminars or events unless
referred to as carhs.training), Siemensstraße 12, 63755 Alzenau, Germany. the loss or damage to these items is due to intentional or grossly negligent
General terms and conditions or other general contractual conditions of the conduct by our employees or other vicarious agents. We would therefore ask
customer or third parties are not valid, even if carhs.training does not expressly you not to leave any valuables or important materials in the conference room
object to them in individual cases. during breaks. We do not guarantee that the products, processes and names
Registration mentioned in seminars, events and documents are free of property rights.
You can register for the seminar, for the event directly via our webpage www. Copyrights
carhs.de, or send us the completed and signed registration page, which is The materials handed out within the context of our seminars and events are pro-
attached to each invitation, by mail, fax or e-mail. By signing the written regis- tected by copyright and may not be reproduced or commercially used, even in
tration or sending the e-mail/internet registration, the participant accepts the part, without the consent of carhs.training GmbH and the respective instructors.
conditions of participation. Your registration data will be stored for internal Image Recordings
purposes. carhs.training is entitled, within the framework of the seminar, the event, to cre-
Registration Confirmation / Invoice ate, reproduce, broadcast or have created, reproduce or have broadcast, make
You will receive a written registration confirmation and an invoice immediately available to the public or have made available to the public, as well as to use
after receipt of your registration. Invoices are due for payment 30 days after the or have used in any other way in audio-visual media, image recordings of the
invoice is issued, but no later than 7 days before the start of the seminar, before participants that go beyond the reproduction of an event of current events (right
the start of the event without deductions. We reserve the right to exclude par- to one's own image) without remuneration.
ticipants from the seminar if payment is not made in time. Partner Seminars and Events
Participation Fee At the seminars, events of our partner companies BGS - Böhme und Gehring
The participation fee for a seminar, an event is per person plus VAT and includes GmbH, Verkehrsunfallforschung an der TU Dresden GmbH and Vogel Communi-
training material, certificate of participation, food and drinks during breaks and cations Group GmbH & Co. KG we only act as a broker and forward your registra-
lunch. Since the place of performance for seminars and events held in Germany tion to the respective provider. Your contractual partner becomes the respective
is Germany (§ 3a Abs. 3 Nr. 3 lit. a German UStG), participants from abroad must seminar or event provider. Their conditions of participation apply exclusively.
also pay VAT (but it may be possible to apply to the German Federal Central Validity of the Conditions of Participation
Tax Office for a refund of VAT). Participation in our seminars and events only For all seminar bookings, event bookings (with the exception of partner semi-
temporarily does not entitle to a reduction of the participation fee. If you would nars, partner events) these terms and conditions of participation apply exclu-
like to book a larger number of seminar days and/or event days within a year, it is sively. Deviating terms and conditions of our clients shall not apply even if the
advisable to conclude a framework agreement. Please contact us in this regard! client refers to his own terms and conditions in the course of correspondence
Discount for Participants from Universities and Public Research Institu- required due to the contractual relationship.
tions Written Form, Validity of German Law and Place of Jurisdiction
We grant participants from universities and public research institutions a dis- 1. All agreements made at the time of the conclusion of the contract or there-
count of 40 % on the respective seminar prices, event prices. after, which deviate from the provisions of these AGB, must be in writing to be
Number of Participants legally effective. This also applies to a cancellation or waiver of the written form
The number of participants is limited in order to guarantee an efficient execution requirement. For the compliance with the written form it is also sufficient to
of the seminars, the events. Registrations will be considered in the order in which send it by fax or e-mail.
they are received. Early registration is therefore recommended. For registrations 2. The present AGB and all individual contracts concluded between carhs.train-
beyond this date, we will try to offer an alternative date. ing and the customer are subject exclusively to the laws of the Federal Republic
Cancellation of Germany, excluding the UN Convention on Contracts for the International
1. Cancellation of the registration up to 4 weeks before the seminar is free of Sale of Goods (CISG).
charge. For cancellations up to 2 weeks before the start of the seminar we have 3. If the customer is a merchant, legal entity under public law, or special fund
to charge a flat rate of 100 Euro. If a cancellation is made after this date or if under public law, or has no general place of jurisdiction in Germany, the exclu-
the participant does not appear at the seminar, the fee is to be paid in full. In sive place of jurisdiction is the headquarters of carhs.training.
this case, the participant has the right to participate in the next seminar without
further costs. Imprint
2. For the conferences and events listed under the heading "Events", the follow-
ing deviating cancellation conditions apply: Cancellation of registration up to 4 Published by
weeks before the start of the event is free of charge. Cancellation up to 2 weeks carhs.training gmbh, Siemensstrasse 12, D-63755 Alzenau, Germany
prior to the start of the event will be charged half the participation fee. If the Tel. +49 (0) 6023-9640-60, Fax +49 (0) 6023-9640-70
cancellation is made after this date or if the participant does not appear at the Managing Directors: Constantin Hoffmann, Rainer Hoffmann
event, the fee is payable in full. Commercial Register: Aschaffenburg HRB 9961
121
carhs.training gmbh
i
Index Driver Assistance 111
Driver State Monitoring 66
A
ACSF 12, 24
E
Active Safety 19 Edge Case 12
ADAS 110 ELKS 36
ADS 12 Emergency Lane Keeping 64, 65
Advertisers Directory 124 Emergency Steering Support 51, 54, 60
AEB 26, 29, 50, 52, 55, 56, 59, 60, 61, 64, 69, 74, 75, 76, 78, Engel, Benjamin 9
84, 85 ESC 19, 27, 65
AEBS 12, 26, 29 ESF 12, 24
AES 12, 78 ESS 12
ALKS 12, 33 EU 2021/646 36
ANCAP 46 Euro NCAP 49
Artificial Intelligence 111
F
ASAM 87, 88, 89, 90
FCW 78
ASEAN NCAP 46
FMVSS 22, 39
ASIL 95
FMVSS 126 27
Automated Driving 23, 42, 48, 111
Forward Collision Warning 70
Automation Modes 18
Front Crash Prevention 69
Auto[nom]Mobil 42
Functional Safety 95
B G
BASt 16
General Safety Regulation 35
Biomechanics 114
General Terms 121
Blind Spot 28
Golowko, Kai 9
Bönninger, Jürgen 118
GRVA 20
Brolin, Karin 114
GTR 20, 22
C GTR 8 27
CAE Grand Challenge 113
H
Calendar 125
HIL 13, 106
CDCF 12
Höpping, Kristian 118
China 81
Human Body Models 114
C-NCAP 46, 49, 75
Human Modeling 115
C-NCAP Active Safety Roadmap 2025 77
Crash Imminent Braking 70, 72 I
Creamer, John 9, 22, 23, 39 IEEE Standard 2846 93
CSF 12, 24 IIHS 46, 49, 69
CSMS 12 Imprint 121
Cyber Security 31 Inhouse Seminars 11
Injury Mechanisms 114
D
ISO 21448:2022 94
Data-based Development 112
ISO 26262 40, 95
DCAS 12
ISO/CD TS 22133 96
DDAW 12
i-VISTA 78
DDT 12
Definitions 12 J
DIL 12 JNCAP 46, 74
122
carhs.training gmbh
i
K SafetyTesting Challenge 44
Kinsky, Thomas 22 SafetyUpDate 43
KNCAP 46, 73 SafetyWeek 41
Kompass, Klaus 9 Scenario 12
Koopman, Philip 18 Scenario-based Development 112
Kuhn, Andreas 9, 111, 112 Scenario Databases 103
Schlenkrich, Michael 9
L Seat Belt Reminder 66, 82
Lane Departure Warning 36, 64, 80 Seeck, Andre 49
Lane Keep Assist 64, 76, 82 Self-Certification 39
Latin NCAP 46, 85 SIL 13
Lohrmann, Hans-Georg 40 Simulation 108
Sine with Dwell 27
M Slowly-Increasing-Steer 27
Machine Learning 111 Software Updates 32
MIL 13 SOTIF 48, 94
Motor Vehicle Classification 15 Speed Assist Systems 66, 82
MRM 13 Steininger, Udo 9, 48
Müller, Gerd 19 SUMS 32
N T
NCAP 46, 49 Testing 44
New Energy Vehicles 81 Turn Across Path 60
NHTSA 16, 39
U
O UL 4600 100
ODD 13 UNECE 14, 20
OpenSCENARIO 87 UN R79 24
UN R131 26
P UN R140 27
PEGASUS 102 UN R151 28
Policies 23 UN R152 29
Positive Risk Balance 48, 105 UN R155 31
Product Liability 39, 40 UN R156 32
Proving Ground 109 UN R157 33
PTW 55 UN Regulations 14, 22
R U.S. NCAP 46, 70, 71, 72
Rear Automatic Braking 71 V
Regulations 22 Validation 106, 108, 112
Reuter, Ralf 68 Vehicle Classification 14
RMF 13 VIL 13, 106
Roadmap 2030 58 VRU 50, 52
RSS 104
W
S Wang, Hong 9
SAE 16 WP:29 20
SAE J3016 17
SafetyExpo 41
123
carhs.training gmbh
i
Advertisers Directory
ASAM e. V. Humanetics
page 91 page 57
124
Seminar Calendar 2022/23
October 2022 November 2022 December 2022
04.-05.10.2022 Online carhs.de 07.11.2022 Alzenau carhs.de 05.-08.12.2022 Online carhs.de
Material Models of Metals for Crash Simulation Design for Additive Manufacturing Robust Design- Vehicle Development under Uncertainty
05.-06.10.2022 Alzenau carhs.de 07.-08.11.2022 Alzenau p. 112 07.-08.12.2022 Online p. 68
Side Impact- Requirements and Development Strategies Scenario-, Simulation- and Data-based Development, ... Euro NCAP - Compact
05.-06.10.2022 Wuerzburg carhs.de 07.-10.11.2022 Online carhs.de 13.-14.12.2022 Hanau p. 58
Automobil Industrie Lightweight Summit Introduction to the Python Programming Language
06.-07.10.2022 Online carhs.de 09.-10.11.2022 Alzenau p. 40
Design and Simulation of Vehicle Vibration Product Liability in the Automobile Industry
06.-07.10.2022 Online carhs.de 09.-10.11.2022 Alzenau carhs.de
Basics of Additive Manufacturing (3D-Printing) Introduction to Passive Safety of Vehicles Miss a Topic?
07.10.2022 Alzenau carhs.de 11.11.2022 Alzenau carhs.de We are always happy to receive suggesti-
Head Impact on Vehicle Interiors: FMVSS 201 and UN R21 Early Increase of Design Maturity of Restraint System Components ons for new seminar or conference topics
10.-11.10.2022 Alzenau carhs.de 14.11.2022 Alzenau carhs.de in the areas of automotive CAE and vehicle
Structural Optimization in Automotive Design Pedestrian Protection- Development Strategies safety.
10.-13.10.2022 Online carhs.de 14.-15.11.2022 Gaimersheim carhs.de Get in touch with [email protected]
Introduction to Data Acquisition in Safety Testing Development of Frontal Restraint Systems
13.-14.10.2022 Alzenau p. 49 14.-17.11.2022 Online carhs.de
NCAP - New Car Assessment Programs Python based Machine Learning with Automotive Applications
17.10.2022 Alzenau carhs.de 15.-16.11.2022 Alzenau p. 22
Workshop Pedestrian Protection and Low Speed Crash International Safety and Crash-Test Regulations
18.10.2022 Gaimersheim carhs.de 16.-17.11.2022 Wiesbaden p. 71
Development of Frontal Restraint Systems- Advanced
18.-19.10.2022 Alzenau p. 39
Vehicle Safety under Self-Certification
18.-19.10.2022 Landsberg am Lech carhs.de 17.-18.11.2022 Online carhs.de
Euro NCAP Passive Safety Workshop Design for Durability - Lightweight Car Bodies and Fatigue
19.10.2022 Alzenau carhs.de 21.11.2022 Alzenau carhs.de
Ejection Mitigation FMVSS 226 Rear Seat Occupant Protection in Frontal Impact
19.-20.10.2022 Online carhs.de 21.-24.11.2022 Online carhs.de
Modeling of Joints in Crash Simulation Crashworthy and Lightweight Car Body Design
20.10.2022 Alzenau p. 23 23.11.2022 Alzenau carhs.de
Briefing on the Worldwide Status of Automated Vehicle Policies Passenger Cars in Low-Speed Crashes
20.-21.10.2022 Alzenau carhs.de 24.11.2022 Alzenau carhs.de
Advanced Seminar Additive Manufacturing (3D printing) Static Vehicle Safety Tests in Automotive Development
24.-25.10.2022 Online carhs.de 28.-29.11.2022 Alzenau carhs.de
Safety of Commercial Vehicles Crash Safety of Hybrid and Electric Vehicles
27.-28.10.2022 Alzenau p. 111 28.11.-01.12.2022 Online p. 114
Introduction to Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning Introduction to Impact Biomechanics and Human Body Models
30.11.2022 Alzenau p. 19
Introduction to Active Safety of Vehicles
25.-28.04.2023 Online p. 39
Vehicle Safety under Self-Certification: Principles, Obligations,
Enforcement, and Remedies
Stay up-to-date:
Find the latest seminar & conference program at www.carhs.de
ADAS/ADS
COMPANION
Learn more at
www.carhs.de/media
Market leader in certified technologies, targets & platforms