iihs.org

Front crash prevention and autonomous emergencybraking - Addendum Global NCAP Annual Meeting Brasilia, BrasilNovember 15-17, 2015Adrian Lund,President, IIHS & HLDI

AEB test comparisonEuro NCAP, IIHS, NHTSA

IIHS Euro NCAP NHTSA

Test name FCP CCRs City

CCRs Inter-Urban

CCRmInter-Urban

CCRbInter-Urban

Stopped POV

Slower Moving POV

Decelerating POV

False Positive

System tested AEB only

AEB only

AEB & FCW

AEB & FCW

AEB & FCW AEB AEB AEB AEB

Test vehicle speed (km/h) 20,40 10-50* 30-80* 30-80* 50 40.2 40.2, 72.4 56.3, 40.2 40.2, 72.4

Target EVT EVT EVT EVT EVT SSV SSV SSV STP

Target vehicle speed (km/h) 0 0 0 20 50 0 16.1, 32.2 56.3, 40.2 n/a

Target vehicle decal (m/s2) n/a n/a n/a 0 2, 6 n/a n/a 3 n/a

Headway (m) n/a n/a n/a n/a 12, 40 n/a n/a 13.8, 100 n/a

Number of test runs** 5 1 1 1 1 8 8 8 8

*Speed is increased by 10 km/h if collision is avoided and by 5 km/h to identify collision point**IIHS uses average of 5 runs for rating. NHTSA requires 7 of 8 runs to satisfy requirement.

NHTSA Accelerates Implementation of Automatic Emergency Braking

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has announced that it will add automatic emergency braking (also known as AEB) to its 5-Star rating system as a recommended technology for the 2018 model year…

… "We're putting the brakes on rear-end crashes," said NHTSA Administrator Mark Rosekind.

- Consumer Reports November 8, 2015

AEB test comparisonEuro NCAP, IIHS, NHTSA

IIHS Euro NCAP NHTSA

Test name FCP CCRs City

CCRs Inter-Urban

CCRmInter-Urban

CCRbInter-Urban

Stopped POV

Slower Moving POV

Decelerating POV

False Positive

System tested AEB only

AEB only

AEB & FCW

AEB & FCW

AEB & FCW AEB AEB AEB AEB

Test vehicle speed (km/h) 20,40 10-50* 30-80* 30-80* 50 40.2 40.2, 72.4 56.3 40.2, 72.4

Target EVT EVT EVT EVT EVT SSV SSV SSV STP

Target vehicle speed (km/h) 0 0 0 20 50 0 16.1, 32.2 56.3 n/a

Target vehicle decal (m/s2) n/a n/a n/a 0 2, 6 n/a n/a 3 n/a

Headway (m) n/a n/a n/a n/a 12, 40 n/a n/a 13.8 n/a

Number of test runs** 5 1 1 1 1 8 8 8 8

*Speed is increased by 10 km/h if collision is avoided and by 5 km/h to identify collision point**IIHS uses average of 5 runs for rating. NHTSA requires 5 of 7 runs to satisfy requirement.

AEB test ComparisonTargets

EVT: Euro NCAP Vehicle Target SSV: Strikeable Surrogate Vehicle

STP: Steel trench plate

3D car target harmonizationEuro NCAP, IIHS, and NHTSA

Euro NCAP, IIHS, and NHTSA are trying to harmonize on a three dimensional car target

Leading candidate is Soft Car 360 from Dynamic Research, Inc.

Pedestrian target harmonizationEuro NCAP, IIHS, and NHTSA

Euro NCAP, IIHS, and NHTSA are trying to harmonize on a pedestrian target

Euro NCAP and IIHS currently use articulating dummy from 4a (child and adult)

NHTSA is evaluating several options – non-articulating 4a (adult and child)

– articulating TASI with radar skin (adult and child)

– Non-articulating foam mannequin (adult and child)

– Articulating foam mannequin (adult only)

iihs.org

More information and links to our YouTube channeland Twitter feed at iihs.org

AEB Test ComparisonNHTSA Proposed Requirement

Stopped lead

vehicle

Slower lead vehicle

Decelerating lead vehicle

Test vehicle speed (km/h) 40 40 72 40 56

Target vehicle speed (km/h 0 16 32 40 56

Required speed reduction (km/h) ≥15.8 No

impact ≥15.8 ≥15.8 ≥16.9

AEB Test ComparisonEuroNCAP Adult Protection Assessment - Points

Test Speed (km/h)

CityStopped lead vehicle (CCRs)

AEB Points10 115 220 225 230 235 240 145 150 1

Total Points 14

AEB Test ComparisonEuroNCAP Adult Protection Assessment - Scoring

Preconditions for AEB scoring:– AEB points only awarded if front whiplash score is 1.5 points or Good

– Full avoidance required up to and including 20 km/h

Human Machine Interface– Prerequisite: AEB system needs to be default ON at the start of every

journey

– Scoring: System earns 2 points if deactivation of the system can not be possible with a single push of a button

Scoring based on normalized scores from AEB and HMI

AEB Test ComparisonEuroNCAP Adult Protection Assessment - Scoring Calculate the score for each test speed

Calculate the normalized AEB score by dividing the sum of the points at each test speed by the total available points (14)

Calculate the normalized HMI score

Calculate the AEB City score with the normalized HMI and AEB scores

𝑆𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒 𝑡𝑒𝑠𝑡 𝑠𝑝𝑒𝑒𝑑 = ൬𝑇𝑒𝑠𝑡 𝑆𝑝𝑒𝑒𝑑− 𝐼𝑚𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑡 𝑆𝑝𝑒𝑒𝑑𝑇𝑒𝑠𝑡 𝑆𝑝𝑒𝑒𝑑 ൰ × 𝑃𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑠𝑡 𝑠𝑝𝑒𝑒𝑑

𝑁𝑜𝑟𝑚𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑧𝑒𝑑 𝐴𝐸𝐵 𝑆𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒= ∑(𝑆𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑠𝑡 𝑠𝑝𝑒𝑒𝑑)14

𝐴𝐸𝐵 𝐶𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒= ሺ𝑁𝑜𝑟𝑚𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑧𝑒𝑑 𝐴𝐸𝐵 𝑆𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒 × 2.5ሻ + (𝑁𝑜𝑟𝑚𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑧𝑒𝑑 𝐻𝑀𝐼 𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒 × 0.5)

𝑁𝑜𝑟𝑚𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑧𝑒𝑑 𝐻𝑀𝐼 𝑆𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒= 𝐻𝑀𝐼𝑝𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑠2

AEB Test ComparisonEuroNCAP Safety Assist Assessment - Points

Test Speed (km/h)

Inter-urbanStopped lead

vehicle (CCRs)Slower lead vehicle

(CCRm)Decelerating lead vehicle (CCRb)

FCW AEB FCW AEB FCW AEB

30 2 - - 1 - -35 2 - - 1 - -

40 2 - - 1 - -

45 2 - - 1 - -

50 3 - 1 1 4 x 1 4 x 1

55 2 - 1 1 - -

60 1 - 1 1 - -

65 1 - 2 2 - -

70 1 - 2 2 - -

75 1 - 2 - - -

80 1 - 2 - - -

Total Points 18 - 11 11 4 4

AEB Test ComparisonEuroNCAP Safety Assist Assessment - Scoring

Preconditions for AEB/FCW scoring:

– Systems must operate up to speeds of at least 80 km/h

Human Machine Interface

– Prerequisite: AEB and/or FCW system needs to be default ON at the start of every journey and the FCW system needs to be loud and clear

– Scoring (calculated by dividing points achieved by 4):

Deactivating AEB and/or FCW system (2 point): Deactivation of the AEB/FCW system should not be possible with the single push of a button

Supplementary Warning for FCW system (1 point): In addition to a required audiovisual warning, a more sophisticated warning like head-up display, belt jerk, brake jerk or any other haptic feed back is awarded

Reversible pre-tensioning of the belt in the pre-crash phase (1 point): When the system detects a critical situation that can possible lead to a crash, the belt can already be pre-tensioned to prepare for the oncoming impact

Scoring based on normalized scores from AEB, FCW, and HMI

AEB Test ComparisonEuroNCAP Safety Assist Assessment – Scoring Calculate the score for each test speed (both AEB and FCW)

Calculate the normalized AEB and FCW score for all scenarios (CCRs, CCRm, and CCRb) by dividing the sum of the points at each test speed by the total points available

Calculate the AEB and FCW score by averaging the normalized scores

Calculate the normalized HMI score

Calculate the AEB Inter-urban score (out of a possible 3 points)

𝑆𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒 𝑡𝑒𝑠𝑡 𝑠𝑝𝑒𝑒𝑑 = ൬𝑇𝑒𝑠𝑡 𝑆𝑝𝑒𝑒𝑑− 𝐼𝑚𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑡 𝑆𝑝𝑒𝑒𝑑𝑇𝑒𝑠𝑡 𝑆𝑝𝑒𝑒𝑑 ൰ × 𝑃𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑠𝑡 𝑠𝑝𝑒𝑒𝑑

𝑁𝑜𝑟𝑚𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑧𝑒𝑑 𝐻𝑀𝐼 𝑆𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒= 𝐻𝑀𝐼𝑝𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑠4

𝐴𝐸𝐵 𝐼𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟− 𝑢𝑟𝑏𝑎𝑛 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒= ሺ𝐴𝐸𝐵 𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒 × 1.5ሻ+ሺ𝐹𝐶𝑊 𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒 × 1.0ሻ+ሺ𝐻𝑀𝐼 𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒 × 0.5ሻ

𝐴𝐸𝐵/𝐹𝐶𝑊 𝑆𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒= σ𝑁𝑜𝑟𝑚𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑧𝑒𝑑 𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑆𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑜𝑠

𝑁𝑜𝑟𝑚𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑧𝑒𝑑 𝐴𝐸𝐵 𝑜𝑟 𝐹𝐶𝑊 𝑆𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒 = σ𝐴𝐸𝐵 𝑜𝑟 𝐹𝐶𝑊 𝑃𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑠 𝑅𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑑𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝐴𝑣𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝐴𝐸𝐵 𝑜𝑟 𝐹𝐶𝑊 𝑃𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑠

Ten manufacturers have committed to making automatic braking standard on new vehiclesJoint IIHS & NHTSA announcement, September 11, 2015

All major auto manufacturers are now represented in the AEB standard fitment working groupLate January target for agreement

Automaker working group for standard fitment of autonomous emergency braking (AEB)Work plan

Document what is known about the benefits of AEB Choose a test protocol (or a group of protocols) from existing test

protocols that can be used to verify the presence of the AEB functionality

Determine what would constitute standardization of AEB– e.g. define the classes of vehicle to which AEB functionality would apply

– e.g. by setting a minimum percent of a manufacturer’s fleet)

Agree a timeframe for implementation of AEB functionality across the light vehicle fleet

Front crash preventionSummary of claim reductions

Forward collision warning (FCW) is beneficial Autobraking combined with FCW is better

Acura Collision Mitigation Brake System

Mercedes-Benz Distronic Plus

Low-speed collision prevention is also better than FCWVolvo City Safety

Autobrake systems with greater capability than those HLDIstudied are now available

Subaru EyeSight

Volvo Collision Warning with Full Auto Brake and Pedestrian Detection

Front crash prevention testsPoints awarded based on speed reduction targets

20 km/h test 40 km/h test

speed reduction (km/h) points speed reduction

(km/h) points

less than 8 0 less than 8 0

8 to 15 1 8 to 15 1

16 or more 2 16 to 35 2

36 or more 3

1 point awarded to vehicles that meet NHTSA FCW NCAP requirement

Front crash prevention rating system

No forward collision warning (FCW) or autobrake; OR autobrake systems that fail minimum IIHS criteria

FCW; OR moderate speed reduction in either 20 or 40 km/h braking test

FCW and moderate speed reduction in either 20 or 40 km/h braking test; OR moderate speed reductions in both tests; OR major speed reduction in one test

FCW and major speed reduction in 40 km/h braking test; OR FCW with at least moderate speed reductions in both tests; OR major speed reductions in both tests

Front crash prevention ratings

vehicles without forward collision warning or autobrake; or vehicles equipped with a system that doesn’t meet NHTSA or IIHS criteria

vehicles earning 1 point for forward collision warningor 1 point in either 20 or 40 km/h test

vehicles with autobrake that achieve 2-4 points for forward collision warning and/or performance in autobraking tests

vehicles with autobrake that achieve 5-6 points for forward collision warning and/or performance in autobraking tests

Front crash prevention ratings2013 – 2015 models (as of October 2015)

Not qualified/not available

Basic Advanced Superior0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

137

39

11 10

113

51

2819

81

56

3933

2013 2014 2015