general safety regulation acea discussion paper renzo cicilloni director safety paris, 24-26 june...

General Safety Regulation

ACEA discussion paper

Renzo Cicilloni

Director Safety

Paris, 24-26 June 2009

AEBS/LDWS-01-11

• Focus of the EU Road traffic safety policy: Halving the number of road traffic fatalities by 2010 (from 2001)

• CARS 21– Vehicle related regulation

concentration of 50 pieces of legislation into one single directive(simplification of type approval regulation)

– Technical Requirements focused on UN-ECE only(replaces the “dual system” EU / UN-ECE)

• “General Safety Regulation” for Europe proposes the mandatory equipment of commercial vehicles with safety- and assistance-systems, e.g.:

Lane Departure Warning SystemsAutomated Emergency Braking Systems

General Safety Regulation – Legislative Framwork

“General Safety Regulation”

Article 10

Advanced vehicle systems

1. Subject to the exemption or derogations established in accordance with Article

15(3)(a), vehicles in categories M2, M3, N2 and N3 shall be equipped with an

Advanced Emergency Braking System which shall meet the requirements of this

Regulation and its implementing measures .

2. Subject to the exemptions or derogations established in accordance with

Article 15(3)(a), vehicles in categories M2, M3, N2 and N3 shall be equipped with a

Lane Departure Warning System which shall meet the requirements of this

Regulation and its implementing measures .

ACEA will contribute to define safety aspects and definition of technical requirements

General Safety Regulation – ACEA

Segment

Vehicle PicCharacteristicsGVW range

[t]Power

range [kW]

Comment2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

New Type First Registration

11/13 NT 11/15 FRAEBS and LDWS all CV >3,5t and city buses/coaches (N2, N3, M2, M3)

Scope to be clarified within the framework of a cost-benefit analysis

Regulation

Scope to be clarified within the framework of a cost-benefit analysis.Technical requirements for the systems shall be defined until end 2011.

European Commission started Working Party on GSR.Legislative process in Geneva will start soon, OICA participating.

Automated Emergency Braking Systems, Lane Departure Warning Systems EC -

directive

Assessment of the eSafety HDV WG for vehicles >12t still the most advanced and reliable all over Europe.

Database weak for all other commercial vehicle categories.

Database for cost/benefit analysis of Safety Systems for Trucks and Buses/Coaches

• eSafety WG Accident Causation evaluation:

• eSafety HDV WG results reflects common position of all major OEM of Trucks and Buses/Coaches on necessity of AEBS systems for trucks > 12t.

General Remarks - Database

2 step approach for a proper impact assessment

• As the Accidentology database is weak, a proper impact assessment could be covered by a 2 step (Pareto) approach:

Step 1: evaluate AEBS/LDWS by use case (drowsiness-> highway application), vehicle category (highway trucks), number of vehicles sold, average mileages,

vehicle categories to be equipped with priority, exemptions from mandatory installations,

system performance level, system constraints necessary to address use case

Step 2: the remaining vehicle categories will be investigated by the Commission (incl. a proper cost/benefit analysis) and can be subject to an amendment to

the regulation).

Assessment of the eSafety HDV WG for vehicles >12t still the most advanced and reliable all over Europe.

Database weak for all other commercial vehicle categories.

General Remarks – Impact Assessment

High potential for the improvement of safety for N3 14-16t.Indication for N2 as well.

Consideration of typical uses cases crucial.

Relative numbers to mileage

New registrations in Germany 2007N2 and N3

0

500.000.000

1.000.000.000

1.500.000.000

2.000.000.000

2.500.000.000

3.000.000.000

3.500.000.000

4.000.000.000

4.500.000.000

5.000.000.000

3501

to 4000

4001

to 5000

5001

to 6000

6001

to 7000

7001

to 7500

7501

to 8000

8001

to 9000

9001

to10

000

1000

1to

1200

0

1200

1to

1400

0

1400

1to

1600

0

1600

1to

1800

0

1800

1to

2000

0

2000

1to

2200

0

2200

1to

2400

0

2400

1to

2600

0

Gross vehicle weight (kg)

mile

age

x nu

mbe

r of

veh

icle

s (k

m)

N2, 3,5t to 12t N3, > 12t

Yearly mileage (approx.)> 12t 135.000 km7 - 12t 60.000 km< 7t 17.000 km

2.

1.

3.

Relative numbers to mileage


0

500.000.000

1.000.000.000

1.500.000.000

2.000.000.000

2.500.000.000

3.000.000.000

3.500.000.000

4.000.000.000

4.500.000.000

5.000.000.000

3501

to 4000

4001

to 5000

5001

to 6000

6001

to 7000

7001

to 7500

7501

to 8000

8001

to 9000

9001

to10

000

1000

1to

1200

0

1200

1to

1400

0

1400

1to

1600

0

1600

1to

1800

0

1800

1to

2000

0

2000

1to

2200

0

2200

1to

2400

0

2400

1to

2600

0


mile

age

x nu

mbe

r of

veh

icle

s (k

m)

N2, 3,5t to 12t N3, > 12t


2.

1.

3.


0

500.000.000

1.000.000.000

1.500.000.000

2.000.000.000

2.500.000.000

3.000.000.000

3.500.000.000

4.000.000.000

4.500.000.000

5.000.000.000

3501

to 4000

4001

to 5000

5001

to 6000

6001

to 7000

7001

to 7500

7501

to 8000

8001

to 9000

9001

to10

000

1000

1to

1200

0

1200

1to

1400

0

1400

1to

1600

0

1600

1to

1800

0

1800

1to

2000

0

2000

1to

2200

0

2200

1to

2400

0

2400

1to

2600

0


mile

age

x nu

mbe

r of

veh

icle

s (k

m)

N2, 3,5t to 12t N3, > 12t


2.

1.

3.

Absolute numbers

New registrations Germany 2007N2 and N3

0

5 000

10 000

15 000

20 000

25 000

30 000

Gross vehicle weight

Num

ber of

veh

icle

s

Number 403 3 948 1 313 1 357 15 405 717 505 8 151 314 1 068 29 8 764 5 405 371 11

3501to

4000

4001to

5000

5001to

6000

6001to

7000

7001to

7500

7501to

8000

8001to

9000

9001to

10000

10001to

12000

12001to

14000

14001to

16000

16001to

18000

18001to

20000

20001to

22000

22001to

24000

24001to

26000

3.

1.

2.

Absolute numbers


0

5 000

10 000

15 000

20 000

25 000

30 000


Num

ber of

veh

icle

s

Number 403 3 948 1 313 1 357 15 405 717 505 8 151 314 1 068 29 8 764 5 405 371 11

3501to

4000

4001to

5000

5001to

6000

6001to

7000

7001to

7500

7501to

8000

8001to

9000

9001to

10000

10001to

12000

12001to

14000

14001to

16000

16001to

18000

18001to

20000

20001to

22000

22001to

24000

24001to

26000

3.

1.

2.


0

5 000

10 000

15 000

20 000

25 000

30 000


Num

ber of

veh

icle

s

Number 403 3 948 1 313 1 357 15 405 717 505 8 151 314 1 068 29 8 764 5 405 371 11

3501to

4000

4001to

5000

5001to

6000

6001to

7000

7001to

7500

7501to

8000

8001to

9000

9001to

10000

10001to

12000

12001to

14000

14001to

16000

16001to

18000

18001to

20000

20001to

22000

22001to

24000

24001to

26000

3.

1.

2.

If the Accidentology database is weak, the risk of an accident can be derived from vehicle categories, the number of vehicles in that categories in the market and the mileage these vehicles are covering and taking typical use cases into account:

priorities for equipment

General Safety Regulation – Potential Benefit (example N2, N3)

LDWS could be widespread available for trucks and buses/coaches by 2013

Some vehicles are operated in a complex urban traffic environment that is not covered by existing LDWS by now and/or the benefit is limited potential exemptions for city buses, vehicles for public services (e.g. garbage trucks), special vehicles (e.g. fire brigade)

Scope of application

Mandatory fitment as from end 2013 desirable from safety point of viewfor highway traffic

Available for Trucks and Coaches

Lane Guard systems

Introduction after 7 years of intensive development AEBS currently only available

for Mercedes vehicles AEBS currently only available

for tractor/semitrailer combination and coach

Target: system performance: accident reduction for use case highway traffic

Additional research requiredstationary obstacles

Scope of application Available for Trucks and Coaches

Accident reduction desirable for traffic scenarios with huge potential.Widespread mandatory fitment not justifiable and not feasible from end 2013.Premature mandatory fitment could probably lead to more severe accidents.

Automated Emergency Braking

UN/ECE vehicle categories may not be sole criteria for classification.A proper cost/benefit analysis must also be based on use cases.

System performance levels and definition of technical requirements integral

part of a cost/benefit analysis.

Step 1 (example):

Step 2 (example):

Exemptions (examples:

Off-Roader, 8x4 vehicles…

Mandatory equipment (LDWS) for N3, M3 but only long distance (delay necessary for AEBS)

In depth cost/benefit analysis for M3 city bus, M2, N2

The different steps – discussions to be started

European Automobile Manufacturers Association www.acea.be

Thank you!

general safety regulation acea discussion paper renzo cicilloni director safety paris, 24-26 june...

Documents