Concept Development of Steering Column

Concept development of steering column

Accommodating business commuters in a level four autonomous car

Konceptframtagning av styrkolonn En styrkolonn anpassad för pendlare i en klass fyra autonom bil

Victor Wetterlind

Faculty of Health, Science and Technology Degree Project for Bachelor of Science in Innovation and Design Engineering 22.5 ECTS Supervisor: Jakob Trischler Examiner: Leo de Vin Gothenburg 2018-06-18 MSGC12

Page is intentionally left blank

Abstract

This thesis reports on a collaborative concept development with Volvo Car Corporation. The problem underlying the concept development was to innovate a steering device for a level-four autonomous car. Specifically: How can the steering wheel and its mount be designed to give the driver more room when the car can drive itself?

The product development process was combined with a hybrid strategy view, both an in-side-out and outside-in approach. The thesis is written by the project leader Victor Wetterlind for his bachelor’s thesis in Innovation and design engineering at Karlstad University. This with supervision from postdoctoral researcher within innovation, Jakob Trischler and examiner, professor in manufacturing engineering, Leo de Vin. The thesis corresponds to 22.5 hp and belongs to the faculty of health, science and technology.

Along the project, analysis of field tests, research on related subjects, discussions with experts and lead-users were held. Concepts were created with both individual and group-based methods. The project has used computer aided design as a tool to test concepts along the evaluation phase. 2-D and 3-D models were used to perceived size, proportion and design as well as for digitally verifying kinematics and function. After several evaluation iterations and concept refinement, a concept recommendation was done to the company in the shape of a presentation and 3D- model.

Sammanfattning

Denna rapport behandlar ett konceptutvecklingsprojekt gjort i samarbete med Volvo Car Corporation. Examensarbetet går ut på att lösa ett problem åt uppdragsgivaren; hur kan ratten och dess ingående delar konstrueras för att ge föraren mer plats när bilen kör sig själv och på så sätt ge föraren mer plats. Konceptet är anpassat för att passa ett fordon klassat som en nivå 4 (av 5) autonom bil av Society of Automotive Engineers. Vilket innebär att bilen kan köra autonomt med under särskilda förutsättningar.

Koncepten togs fram med produktutvecklingsprocessen och en hybrid-approach, delvis outside-in och delvis inside-out. Examensarbetet är skrivit av projektledaren Victor Wetterlind som är student på Karlstads universitet och läser högskoleingenjörsprogrammet innovationsteknik och design. Programmet tillhör fakulteten för hälsa, natur- och teknikvetenskap. Projektledaren har fått vägledning av postdoktorala forskaren inom service-design och innovation, Jakob Trischler. Examinator i kursen är Leo de Vin, professor i tillverkningsteknik. Kursen är på 22.5 HP.

Utmed projektet har analyser av användarstudier gjorts, påläsning av relaterade ämnen, diskussioner med experter samt lead-users. Koncept togs fram med både individuella- samt gruppmetoder. Utvecklingen har till stor del varit datorstödd. Test av funktion och kinematik gjordes både i 2-D och 3-D. Datorstödd design användes även för att få insyn i storlek, design och proportioner av komponenter. Efter konceptutvärderingen rekommenderades ett koncept till företaget via en presentation och en 3D-model.

Table of Contents

1 Introduction ...... 6

1.1 Background ...... 6 1.2 Preliminary problem statement ...... 7 1.3 Delimitation ...... 8 1.4 Purpose ...... 8 1.5 Goal ...... 8 1.6 Project structure ...... 9 2 Method ...... 11

2.1 Project plan ...... 11 2.2 Feasibility study ...... 13 2.3 User study ...... 13 2.4 Product specification ...... 15 2.5 Concept generation ...... 16 2.6 Concept evaluation ...... 20 2.7 Layout construction ...... 23 2.8 Concept recommendation ...... 24 3 Result ...... 26

3.1 Project plan ...... 26 3.2 Feasibility study ...... 26 3.3 User study ...... 34 3.4 Product specification ...... 35 3.5 Concept generation ...... 37 3.6 Concept evaluation ...... 41 3.7 Layout Construction ...... 48 3.8 Concept recommendation ...... 56 4 Discussion ...... 59

5 Conclusions ...... 62

6 Acknowledgment ...... 63

7 References ...... 64

Appendix

Appendix 1: Project plan pg. I

Appendix 2: Individual brainsketches pg. XII

Appendix 3: Morphological analysis of steering wheel pg. XIV

Appendix 4: Group brainstorming results pg. XV

Appendix 5: Brainstorming with new restrictions pg. XVI

Appendix 6: Result from 6-5-3 method pg. XVIII

1 Introduction

This project aims to develop concepts and evaluate them for Volvo Car Corporation on behalf of the steering department and with guidance from Johan Svensson and Daniel Krstic. The project is done as a bachelor’s thesis (course name MSGC12) for the programme of innovation and design engineering at Karlstads University at the faculty of technology and science. The project’s extent is 22.5 ETSC. The supervisor is Jakob Trischler and examiner Leo de Vin.

1.1 Background This chapter will introduce the reader to the thesis and its background. This to have the reader understand how, why and under what circumstances the thesis were written. The company the thesis is done for is also presented.

Volvo Cars are Sweden’s leading car manufacturer and a very established and well- known company in the car business. Their product portfolio contains premium segment cars in three categories – Sedan (S90 and S60), estate (V90, V60 and V40) and SUV (XC90, XC60 and XC40).

Volvo has its roots in Sweden but are now established in about 100 countries around the globe. It is a truly international company with an employee number of around 31 000. With a global market share of 1-2% they are a relatively small automotive company. Their leading market (in % of total sales) are China (17%) followed by USA (15%) and Sweden (13%). (Volvo Car Corporation, 2017)

It is a time of change in the transport industry as car and truck manufacturers are releasing more and more electrified and smart vehicles. Volvo are of the belief in continuously increased electrification and smartification of vehicles; autonomous cars (independent/self-governing) are not very far away.

If autonomous or partly-autonomous cars become the norm, the existing steering wheel will be in excess in terms of its size and central position in the drivers’ seat. Thus, Volvo is looking in to how the future may play out. Specifically, Volvo among other car manufactures are investigating a technology called Steer-By-Wire (SbW). SbW allows for an electrical connection (non-mechanical) between the steering wheel and steering gear, thus allowing for new design and construction opportunities.

The level of autonomy is usually talked about in terms of SAE definitions (from their international standard J3016). This thesis will focus on a steering aid that suits the needs of a level 4 automated vehicle. Wired UK (Burgees, 2017) posted a report about automation and wrote the following about level 4 automated vehicles:

“SAE describes this as having "driving mode-specific performance by an automated driving system of all aspects of the dynamic driving task, even if a human driver does not respond appropriately to a request to intervene". Put more simply, if something goes wrong, the car can handle it itself.”

Volvo want the student to generate concepts and evaluate these in a methodical way and co-develop two strong concepts before making a recommendation and presenting a technical solution.

1.2 Preliminary problem statement For this subchapter the preliminary problem statement is specified and motivated. Combined with background on why it is important and interesting for the company.

The steering wheel is nowadays always within a certain operating range because of the mechanical connection to the wheels. When this requirement is of excess and the level of automation has risen among car manufactures the steering wheel may not be used as much as it is today.

This is an area that is yet to be further discovered and explored. Volvo wants to see what opportunities this technology might bring as to how the steering wheel may evolve and would like to know the following.

“How may a steering device for a level 4 automated car be designed?”

The project is about finding a solution for a steering device that mounts on the steering column (for human driving) that does not intrude as much on the driver’s personal space when the car is put in autopilot. Thus allowing the driver to carry out tasks that cannot be done while “manually” driving; reading a newspaper, working on a laptop or eating for example. This because of both safety reason as well as lack of room.

To alight with Volvo’s vision the primary target group is business commuters. They are workers that usually drive their car back and forth to work alone. This problem

statement will be confronted with the method presented in Produktutveckling (Johannesson, et al., 2013) which follows the steps in Figure 1. During the project users with experience from autonomous-driving will give feedback to get user input into the project. Still the company’s technical knowledge was taken into consideration. This way the project follows a hybrid strategy; inside-out and partly outside-in design approach.

Initial product specifications from employee requires the product to:

- Mount on existing steering column - Give driver more space when in AD-mode - Not take airbag into consideration

1.3 Delimitation Due to short timeframe and lack of deeper knowledge within electricity, programming and mechatronics this will be left out of consideration. Choice of material will not be chosen to leave room for optimizing regarding price, weight etc.. Safety is very important for the company but not in focus in this project, nor is dimensioning the components.

1.4 Purpose The purpose of the project is to let the project leader run a larger project unaccompanied, to allow usage of the methods and tools learned during the authors time at University. Another purpose is to allow the student to used previous experience and knowledge from Formula student and kinematics experience from suspension geometry analysis and apply in a non-related field and build confidence in the field.

From the company’s view, the purpose is to gain new insights and point of views from a student whose knowledge and experience in steering development are non- existent.

1.5 Goals The project has as a goal to deliver a SbW-technology based concept. This in the shape of a 3D-model. The author should also hold a presentation for both the university and the company. A university exhibition is also mandatory, additionally an

opposition (critical peer-review) has to be done. The project leader is expected to deliver a technical solution for his chosen concept and if time allows also produce a functioning prototype to validate function.

The result is to be delivered the 18 of June 2018. The individual goal for the author if this thesis is to fulfil the criteria’s listed in Course PM (se appendix 1) in order to achieve a pass in the course and collect a bachelors’ thesis diploma.

1.6 Project structure The design product development methodology used for this project is from Produktutveckling (Johannesson, et al., 2013) and follows figure 1. It is an iterative process since information and knowledge broadens along the project.

Feasibility Product Concept Concept Layout Detail study specification generation evaluation construction construction

Figure 1. The process for reaching the project goal according to Produktutveckling (Johannesson, et al., 2013), it is an itterativ process.

This process is a common way to solve product development projects. In his book Mechanical Design Engineering Handbook, Childs (2014) recommends a similar approach, he does not however think it is as iterative as Johannesson, et al. (2013) does, see figure 2. Having a clear and structured way of working is essential and have many benefits (Rowe, 2015).

Specificati Detailed Manu- Market Conceptua Market on l design design facture

Figure 2, the process of product development according to Mechanical design engineering handbook (Childs, 2014).

Both Childs (2014) and Johannesson, et al. (2013) start with researching the demand followed by the creation of a product specification. This specification contains all the necessary information about the finished product, what it should be able to do and optional features which will add value to the finished product. This specification is then used as a reference when comparing concepts and for evaluation of how well the finished product reaches its purpose. During the conceptual design, solutions that fulfill the product specification is created by concept generation methods. The

concepts are then narrowed down to more and more detailed ideas during the detailed design. Design is an iterative process since one continuously evaluates and modifies concepts according to the product specification and as new ideas come up (Childs, 2014).

2 Method

This chapter describes the methods used in the project in a logical order under subchapters to facilitate reading. The methods are also reviewed and explained.

2.1 Project plan Drafting a project plan has many benefits, this is true for not just large and complex projects but for small ones as well. According to Johannesson et al. (2013), the project plan forces the project leader to specify the content and tasks, delegating responsibility as well as creating clear goals for the people involved.

This is similar to Rowe (2015) describing the benefits of having a clear methodology set when working on a project. Benefits brought up among many are a) the involvement of stakeholders and creation of expectations, as well as b) managing risks in an efficient way. Moreover, the creation of a time plan is essential for a project and according to Rowe (2015), a Gantt schedule is an effective way of structuring the project. This is both in regard to time but also for sorting out what methods to use and in what order. Rowe (2015) however suggests that most importantly, the product plan helps narrow the scope and obtain project requirements. Both authors, Johannesson, et al. and Rowe, have an equivalent idea of the product development process and the way of achieving the project goal.

In the current thesis, the project plan starts with a brief overview of the company and background about the problem which the project aims to solve. It also contains a narrow problem statement and more background about the underlying issues. Information about the approach that is to be used to solve the problem is also briefly stated.

Delimitations are also specified to further refine the project’s direction and will help the project members when in doubt. Delimitations are important according to Produktutveckling (2013) because they clearly define the project and act as support when decisions are made. Goal and purpose combined with a delivery deadline are also brought up to clearly show the objective of the project and to clarify what is to be delivered and why. A project organization structure was formed to clearly specify who has what responsibility and who is involved. This includes their name, contact information, and purpose. In this way, project members can contact each other when needed.

A project model is included to show the critical path. The project model split the projects into five phases which all have milestones, gates, due dates and a responsible person. All phases of the project plan have to be done in order to deliver a result, hence called the critical path. All phases contain different methods and processes and these are shown in a work breakdown structure (WBS), see figure 3. This figure is a preliminary breakdown of methods to use for each phase and is an additional way of structuring and investigating how one should complete the project. It also lets one see the whole picture as well as being of great help when creating a time schedule.

Project

Phase X Phase Y ....

Methods used Methods used during Phase X during Phase Y

......

Figure 3. Example of work breakdown structure (WBS).

Decreasing the chance of failure is important. By doing a risk evaluation the project members have an opportunity to early foresee and predict possible obstacles. This way one can hopefully prevent the scenarios from happening at all. When knowledge of possible problems is present the project can be planned accordingly or extra resources can be put in. If they do happen there is a suggested solution to the problem. The risk evaluation is done subjectively by rating the scenarios probability and consequence from one to five (1-5). The risk is the consequence times the probability (R = C*P).

Document handling is important during a long project when many documents and updates are frequent. To make sure the most recent document is being used and to allow traceability a document version system is presented. To complement the project model a Gantt time schedule is in the project plan as well. The Gantt chart has clear dates that are used for guidance for how long each phase should take.

The sections below describe in detail how the product development process has been applied to the project.

2.2 Feasibility study Like Childs (2014), Rowe (2015) and Johannesson, et al. (2013) all suggest, the project should start with research. The research involved understanding the current steering solution and Steer-by-Wire technology. This includes key questions such as what are its pros and cons and how does it work?

Other aspects were also looked in to as to how the steering wheel designed today and what is its adjustment range is. The safety aspect of the steering column, testing of steering wheels and how far away autonomous cars are were also answered.

2.2.1 Technology scouting Many automotive companies do research and projects on autonomous driving and therefore many companies have published their visions and future ideas. Concepts were browsed for on the internet for inspiration and for eventual future benchmarking. Its purpose was to bring out new points of views and ways of thinking about autonomous driving, which can be beneficial for understanding how the technology of automated cars may be used.

2.2.2 Catalogue method The catalogue method is a common way to find inspiration for solutions in the current field or in relative fields, subjects or just for design inspiration. The methods were done individually by the project leader.

2.3 User study The steering wheel and its design are closely connected to the mechanism. The mechanism is mounted on the steering wheel and one of the functions it has is to transmit torque. It gives the steering wheel design restrictions in terms of shape, layout and interfaces. Understanding the problem at hands that need to be solved is important.

2.3.1 dUX-team Group discussions with people from the driver User Experience (dUX) team at Volvo Cars Corporation (VCC) was conducted to get direct user input on sitting in an autonomous car and input on what they have found from their tests. The meeting had six participants, two of whom had held field tests, two Master thesis students in ergonomics and two persons from the mechanical steering department.

Talking with a research team within the field of autonomous driving is a well- considered choice. The method is supported by Eric von Hippel (1986). According to him, many innovations come from leading-edge users. They are users that are pushing technology because of self-beneficial purpose or pure interest. They have a strong need for products that market is not yet ready for in months or years. He says that because of the lead users’ familiarity with the product their input should be highly valued. They often try to fill the needs they feel the product lacks and therefore many good solutions have come from this kind of users. This is why the dUX team was selected to participate and give input.

The dUX team do research on what people expect and want from an autonomous car. This includes field studies on the road and observations of how people react when sitting in a car that drives itself. Observations is an excellent way according to Childs (2014), who argues that in surveys and questioners people tend to be unable to express their true feeling or thoughts. By observing how people act and listen to their spontaneous comments is therefore very valuable. Video recordings from field tests were analyzed.

Not using common people for the discussion is a well-considered choice since their knowledge and experience of the product and situation can be difficult to understand. According to von Hippel (1986), input from non-lead users have a limitation regarding their solution thinking since the solutions are constrained to their own real-world experience. Therefore, lead users who are on the cutting-edge in using immature technology and products will have more relevant solutions.

During the session, problems mentioned from the test subjects as well as the future role of the steering wheel in a car was discussed. This provided insights into how current steering wheel prototypes are used and what feedback or complaints users had. In addition, linked with a key requirement of the current product, the discussions focused on how fast people need to be able to recover control of the steering device.

2.4 Product specification The product specification was created systematically with the help of an Olsson matrix (see Table 1) which is an excellent tool of getting various aspects into a product specification (Johannesson, et al., 2013). The table is modified to suit the application better. In the original table, there are five life cycle phases. Since this is a product that is a part of a larger and more complex system a life cycle phase which contains selling, distribution etc. is not considered.

Table 1. Lifecycles and influencing aspects of products according to Olsson (Johannesson, et al., 2013).

Aspect Lifecycle phase Process Environment Human Economy Creation (development, construction 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 Production (manuf., assembly, etc.) 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 Usage (installation, user, service quality check etc.) 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 Elimination (recycling, disposal etc.)etc.) 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4

The different cells (1.1- 4.4) were completed and assessed to find important criteria’s the product should have. That list was supplemented with product criterions that came up during discussions, technology scouting and criteria from Volvo Cars Corporation. The creation of a product specification, especially for new products is an iterative process. It is very difficult to cover all aspects in the begging of the project and it is not uncommon that important criterions are discovered in later phases of the project (Childs, 2014).

The Olsson matrix is a scaled down way to produce a product specification. According to Childs (2014), one should follow table 2 in order to cover more aspects and reach a more complete specification. This is especially important in new designs. He also mentions the weight of involving people who possess deep knowledge of the subject. This is supported by von Hippel (1986) who stresses the importance of involving lead users in the product development process if one want to achieve radical innovation.

Table 2. The design core: aspects that should go into a design specification according to Pugh, this to cover as many aspects as possible and reach a complete design specification as quickly as possible (Childs, 2014).

The design core Quality Competition Maintenance Weight Market Politics constraints Manufacturing Disposal Company Packaging Shipping Size facility constraints Processes Customer Timescales Product cost Performance Life in service Installation Aesthetics Standard Ergonomics Materials Product specifications lifespan Quantity Documentation Company Legal Safety Testing liability Packing Environment Patents Storage Shell life Reliability

2.5 Concept generation Since product development is an iterative process, several different methods were used to keep the idea creation interesting for the participants. The concepts were named by either a number (1, 2, 3...), a letter (a, b, c…) or by Greek numbers (I, II, III…) depending on what method they were created in.

To search and find as many possible solutions four methods were used. Participants were mainly engineers from Volvo’s steering department.

2.5.1 Brainsketching Alongside feasibility study and product specification, spontaneous ideas were constantly sketched down and notes of ideas were documented. This method is a type of individual brain sketching (Dhillon, 2006).

2.5.2 Morphological analysis Morphological analysis is a commonly used method for breaking down a product into smaller subcategories. It can be used for solution solving or system analysis among many other areas.

The most important task during concept generation is to focus on meeting functional musts. They are the cornerstones of the product and it will not work its desired way if they are not met. To do this in a structured way, the functional musts were broken

down into more solution-neutral and open criterions. A way of doing this is with a morphological analysis, see figure 4. Its advantage is that it looks in the total solution space, without feasibility in mind. This may bring out solutions from totally different fields. It is an effective way to generate many different and sometimes innovative solutions to parts of the system that can, later on, be combined to a radically new product.

The main idea is to be specific in what the subfunction should do, but be abstract and open about how it is achieved. This to allow for a wide range of solutions. By doing this for all the functional musts one creates a solid foundation as well as creating a clear structure for each subfunction. This clearly shows what has to be done in terms of functions to create the complete product (Johannesson, et al., 2013).

Product

Subfunction 1 Subfunction 2 Subfunction 3

Solution 1.1 Solution 2.1 Solution 3.1

Solution 1.X Solution 2.X Solution 3.X

Figure 4. Morphological chart of a product with its sub-functions and their solutions (Johannesson, et al., 2013). Note that one can also list the sub-functions and their solutions in a table.

This method is also supported by George (2012). He suggests that one should abstract the product specification and perform a functional decomposition and identify sub- functions which one then create solutions for and then combines. In fact, George and Johannesson et al. (2013) and Childs (2014) all stress on the importance of creating many sub-function solutions. However, a limitation of the morphological matrix is the combination options. Usually, the matrix creates a very large number of variants where many of them will be physical incompatible. One cannot combine all sub systems due to physical restrictions (George, 2012). Thus, George (2012) suggests three different approaches when combining the sub-functions:

1. A systematic combination of all means (a full factorial approach) 2. Random combination of means 3. Intelligent combination of means

The systematic approach means that one generates all possible concepts in order to then choose the most optimal concept. This has a major flaw, there will be a very large number of concepts where of many will be unrealistic. Therefore, this method will increase workload when sorting these out. A system of 10 functions with 5 solutions to each function means 510 (10 million) possible concepts.

In contrast, the random approach combines a random solution from each subfunction. This has the advantage that strange combinations that arise forces the designer to really think and imagine how such solution may look and work. While this opens the opportunity for interesting designs. A big disadvantage is the chance that clever and good combinations may be missed.

Finally, the intelligent combination approach is a hybrid of the other two approaches. It uses strategies to identify different combinations. These strategies are usually from mathematical models that check compatibility between sub-function solutions or some other benchmark or geometry (George, 2012).

The method used for this project is the random combination of means (number 2 in list above). This is because combining all possible working structures would require a very large amount of time and give many irrelevant concepts. In turn, doing an intelligent evaluation would require a lot of time as well as data for the different sub- solutions, which is beyond the scope of this project.

Coming up with solutions to the sub-functions was done with the help of brainstorming. A type of individual brainstorming where ideas were built on each other. Brainstorming can be done both in groups or individually (Childs, 2014). The list of solutions was constantly built on until a concept was chosen. It acted as a solution database that help create concepts. No truly morphological concepts were created but its solutions were used for inspiration.

2.5.3 Brainstorming A group of eight engineers (concept engineers, lead engineers, an assessment leader and a mechanic) from Volvo’s mechanical steering department were invited to attend

an idea generation session to tap the knowledge and creative power of a multidisciplinary group. Brainstorming is a commonly used creativity method within engineering sectors. Ideal conditions for the group is if there are people with different background, age as well as expertise. The purpose of the method is to create many concepts, focus when brainstorming is on quantity and not quality. Having up to 10 people is beneficial because ideas that arise during the session can spark a new idea for someone else in the group, the ideas build on each other (Dhillon, 2006).

In the current project, the session was prepared with paper, sticky notes and a presentation and introduction to the topic. In the beginning of the session, the group was introduced to the problem. This included background information on the topic of autonomous cars and where Volvo sees themselves in the future. An abstract frame was also given; major restrictions and limitations. The session then continued with discussions where we in group talked about solutions and sketched them down together, some of the participants drew sketched individually and later presented to the group.

When speed was low creativity boosters were used. This could be a picture of a competitor’s concept or a solution from the Brainsketching phase. The generated ideas were all numbered and given a name on a whiteboard. This method where a group collectively sketch ideas is usually referred to as group brainstorming (Dhillon, 2006). Finally, discussions regarding the different solutions were held with focus on pros and cons and the feasibility of the individual concepts.

After the brainstorming session, a meeting with the supervisor at Volvo was held and a new decision was taken. Specifically, it was concluded that the steering wheel may not have to fit on the steering column, which was one of the limiting restrictions given in the beginning of the project. Accordingly, a new brainstorming session, as well as individual Brainsketching with the new degrees of design freedom, was held with three participants. This strengthens Childs (2014), Johannesson, et al. (2013) and Dhillon’s (2006) theory that the design process is iterative.

2.5.4 6-3-5 method To get more ideas regarding the new degrees of design freedom, three engineers were invited to generate ideas. To create many concepts the 6-3-5 method was used.

In the original method six people are attend an idea generation session. To start with they create three concepts each. These three concepts are then further developed by the remaining five people of the group. Hence the name 6-3-5 (Johannesson, et al., 2013). In this case the method could be called 4-3-3. This since there are four people who creates three concepts and then further develop the other three participant’s concepts.

The session begun with an introduction of the problem and a general discussion on the topic. The group then got a paper with 12 squares on and a pen, see table 3. The first round the participants were given approximately 10 minutes to create the three first concepts. The remaining rounds were clocked and limited to five minutes.

Table 3, principle layout of the paper used during the 3-4-4 method. The paper is divided into squares that the people in the idea generation session the fill out. Each person has a paper that everyone in the team get to sketch on. The shaded cells are just for explanation and not on the paper during a session.

Idea 1 Idea 2 Idea 3 Person 1 Person one: first Person one: Person one: third sketch second sketch sketch Person 2 Sketch above Sketch above Sketch above further develop further develop further develop by person 2 by person 2 by person 2 Person 3 Sketch above Sketch above … further develop further develop by person 3 by person 3 Person 4 Sketch above … … further develop by person 4

2.6 Concept evaluation In order to choose the best concept, a concept evaluation is required. This to methodically and as objectively as possible evaluate the concepts. In this section the methods used are presented.

The approach used can be compared to (Johannesson, et al., 2013) and follows a straightforward process as seen in figure 5.

Do a concept Sort out concepts that screening (preferably don't reach product Concept scoring relative descision specification matrix)

Figure 5. The process Johannesson (2013) recommends for evaluation concepts.

During the evaluation phase, concepts that did not meet the product specification was put aside as irrelevant. This was done with the help of an elimination matrix. Then a relative decision matrix was used followed by a pros and cons list which acted as support for rating the concept for a weighted criterion matrix.

A layout construction was done for two concepts. This to give more background information and allow for a more objective and final weighted criterion matrix.

2.6.1 Elimination matrix The matrix eliminates concepts that do not fulfil the main function of the product (i.e., to steer) as well as other that are of great importance. The different concepts were rated with either negative (-), positive (+) or zero (0) meaning the criterion is similar to what today’s steering wheel offer.

2.6.2 Relative decision matrix To reduce the number of concepts further and to shed a light on the truly interesting ones a relative decision matrix was completed. Thereby, the concepts were compared to see how much they benefit the end customer, if the concept adds extra value for the customer, and how well it fulfils important musts in the product specification. The evaluation is subjective. Since focus was on the mechanical system, and the mechanical system is closely connected to the design of the steering device, it is not very relevant to look further into the product specification desires but as the concept as a whole.

2.6.3 Pros and cons In consultation with Volvo Car Corporation supervisors a concept summary as well as a pros and cons list was made for the remaining concepts. This was a way to

objectively look through the concepts as well as to look for strengths and weaknesses. The information is also meant to be used as background for further evaluations.

2.6.4 Kesselring criterion weight matrix To narrow the concepts down even further a Kesselring criterion weight matrix was used. The matrix rates, with weight, how well the concept reaches set criterions, see table 4. They are then compared relative to each other to find how well they perform. The total points (T) a concept collects are then compared to the best total of the concepts (T/Tmax) (Johannesson, et al., 2013). Each concept is giving a r = rank and a t = total. Each criterion is giving a weight from one to five, each concept is then given a rank for how well it meets the criterion from one to five. The weight times the rank is the total.

Table 4. Kesselring criterion weight matrix. Used for comparing the concepts to each other to find the best one.

Criterion Concept 1 2 n… Weight r t r t r t 1 2

T = Sum tn

T / Tmax Rank (highest T/Tmax is #1)

Johannesson, et al., (2013) stresses on the importance of evaluating the difference in

T/Tmax. Since the rank given is subjective the result may be biased. The book suggests looking in to the following points:

• Is the difference between the merit values great enough to determine that the first ranked concept is better than the second?

• Balance between points: does the highest ranked concept many high totals as well as many low totals. Or are they equally spread?

• Maybe the second highest ranked concept has more equally spread totals and are therefore better?

• Uncertainties: are there uncertainty in weight factors, grading of rank?

2.7 Layout construction This chapter will tell you how the project narrowed down the concepts and on what grounds. The to begin with more information about the concepts were created, this to make a more informed decision.

2.7.1 Product layout A product layout was created for the two best scoring concepts. Creating a rough design helps further evaluation. According to Produktutveckling (Johannesson, et al., 2013) the first step after concept evaluation is to create a product layout. This to look more in detail at the concept and through that one may find weak points that the other concepts may complement. Moreover, it is very important according to Johannesson et al. (2013), to critically evaluate the result from the concept evaluation matrix since they are subjective, especially if the final scores are even. In that matter the product layout can help the project group to have more information before a concept decision can be done.

The two best concepts were given a product layout to give the project leader more information before deciding on the best concept.

2.7.2 Concept validation The two concepts with the best scores were then created in Catia V5 (a computer aided design software) with low fidelity (2D). This allows to save time and to test its mechanical function (kinematics). Johannesson (2013) suggest that computer aided simulations usually is faster and a more effective way of predicting and testing the products function and behaviour that real tests. Usually a trial and error method is used when testing the design and function, this way the computer is a very effective tool. The product must of course be built and tested to secure its final function.

References was used from the XC90 SUV to visualize the available design space. And the design adapted to meet the required adjustment range. The models used for reference contains important information. The dashboard surface, the steering wheel centre as well as it extreme positions were used as reference. This enabled the team to test how the concept can move and where it clash with the interior.

2.7.3 Draft The 2D concepts were then translated in to 3D. This allowed for an even more visual product with better simulation possibilities. It could now be related to in space and in relation to the interior. This to secure its function in two directions. The third direction, which requires the 3D translation required new design solutions. Solutions that could not be solved in the 2D point of view.

The 3D model was then used to simulate the kinematics. Johannesson (2013) that it is not uncommon to have several different models for simulation, with different levels of details, this to simulate as the concept comes closer to its finished product. Discussions with Volvo supervisors arose when demonstrating concept I and III function over the desk. The demonstration turned in to what could be called a mini construction review – several important points were taken.

2.7.4 Peer review The final two (2) concepts were presented to the steering department during a status update meeting. This gave an opportunity for the team to give valuable feedback and share ideas and thoughts on the concepts. Nine people from the steering department were present and part of the discussions.

2.7.5 Steering wheel adjustment To evaluate solutions that fix the steering wheel in a desired position, a brainstorming session was held with three people. In the meeting a lead engineer, concept engineer as well as the project leader were present. A decision regarding what type of locking as well as concept regarding controlling the position of steering wheel in space were taken. The 3D models were then updated.

2.8 Concept recommendation A product layout of the concepts were created to allow for a more objective evaluation of the remaining concepts. Kesselring’s criterion weight matrix was used to evaluate the concepts. A final concept was then recommended to the company.

Within this section the key methods which are used to underpin this study have been reviewed and described. The next section of this report shows their outcome.

3 Result

This section aims to show the results and what was found during each of the five phases of the project. The result section is divided in eight (8) parts. The subchapters 3.x tells you the outcome from the previous chapter.

3.1 Project plan The project plan states the problem statement, time schedule, methods and background on the project and company. The problem statement chosen was

How may a steering device for a level-4 automated car be designed?

The target group are business commuters that use their car back and forth to work.

The full project plan can be seen in appendix 1, the project plan also contains important background information relevant to the project.

3.2 Feasibility study For design reference as well as for ergonomic purpose it is important to know what components are used today as well as why they are used. It is also part of the outside- in part of the hybrid approach – adapting to available technology, knowledge and best practise.

3.2.1 Today’s steering system In general, the steering system is a complex system with many parts. It has an important function – to steer the car. This is achieved by having a rack and pinon gear between the steering axle and the wheel axle. The steering is controlled by a wheel placed in the coupe. The steering wheel is mounted on a shaft that goes all the way to the rack and pinion through several u-joints. See figure 6 for an overview of the parts.

Figure 6. Overview of a Volvo V40 with electrical power assisted steering.

The steering column is a major part of the steering system and has several functions. It is there for crash safety reasons – in the event of a frontal crash, the column collapses in a pre-determined and calculated way to absorb energy both from the driver and the intrusion in the engine compartment. The length that the column can move and absorb energy under is called ride down.

On early models (pre second world war) the most dangerous component in the car was the steering system. Back then the steering column was a solid shaft and would at impact (if severe enough) pierce into the driver compartment and endanger the driver. The collapsible steering column was a lifesaving system that appeared around the 1960s (Happian-Smith, 2006).

The collapsing function comes from the design of the steering column. It comes in three different types (Crolla, 2009):

- Telescopic collapsible tubes - Flexible corrugated tube - Detachable steering tubes

The most commonly used systems are the telescopic and corrugated tube since they allow for a controlled deformation and have good torsional strength (Pfeffer & Harrer, 2015).

The existing steering column has a hexagonal shape or a spline shaft on its end that acts as the coupling for the steering wheel. The end of the rod has an internal tread (se arrow in figure 7). The steering wheel has the socket built in to its construction (se figure 8) and fits on the shaft, a bolt is then fastened to secure the steering wheel and

shaft together. The hexagonal or spline shaft allows for a turning torque to be applied.

Figure 7. Steering column hexagonal shaft and internal tread (red arrow).

Figure 8. Hexagonal socket in steering wheel construction that fits on the steering columns hexagonal shaft. This allows for a turning torque to be applied.

3.2.2 Steer by Wire The concept of this project integrates a relatively old technology called X-By-Wire (XbW) that has only recently found its way into the automotive industry. It has long been used in the commercial aviation industry and Airbus introduced the technology for their steering 1987, then called Steer By Wire, this without a mechanical backup system. In civilian aircrafts it was adopted as early as 1970.

Due to safety concerns the development of the technology has been relatively slow in the automotive industry. Since steering is a critical system that must always work, automotive companies have not applied the technology to more than to concept vehicles. The system must be redundant and have backup systems which has been hard to achieve. (Pfeffer & Harrer, 2015).

The technology allows for a non-mechanical connection to the wheels. Steering input from the driver is picked up by a sensor that sends the signals to (at the moment) three ECUs that process the input and send signals to actuators that move the wheels. (Pfeffer & Harrer, 2015)

X-By-Wire is since long used in the automotive industry but in less critical areas. The accelerator pedal is of that type. The throttle is not adjusted by a steel wire like many boats have today, it is electrical. This gives a quicker response from the engine (Pfeffer & Harrer, 2015).

One car on the market, the Infinity Q50, has taken the steps and created a redundant system that meets legal requirements. To achieve the redundancy required they have three ECUs that all check on each other. If there is a discrepancy the Q50 will enter fail-safe mode and the clutch will connect the steering wheels mechanically to the wheels and the computers will shut off (Cole, 2013). See figure 9 for a system overview of the Q50 steering system. Note that when the system is Figure 9. Nissan Q50 Steer-By-Wire system overview.

further developed the clutch can be removed and the number of control modules (ECUs) can be reduced.

Future system is expected to evolve from its today 3 ECU fail-safe system (fully redundant) to a fail-operational system with one ECU. This is both a cost saver and very beneficial in a packaging point of view – today SbW takes up about the same if not more space than a conventional steering system. While there are a number of advantages from SbW, main disadvantages is the requirement of redundancy and backup system as well as its development costs.

The advantages however are many. These include the possibility to improve driving dynamics, variable steering output and disturbance free driving1. As well as closing in the gap to autonomous cars since SbW can have a so-called silent wheel. Which means that the feedback motor connected to the steering wheel can stop giving feedback when in autonomous driving mode, which allows for a steering wheel that don’t even though the wheels are turning.

It would also facilitate in a packaging view (when redundant problem is solved and there is one ECU) and passive safety since the intermediate shaft would be of excess and one can design the front end of the car differently (Pfeffer & Harrer, 2015).

Further benefits are the possibility of reducing complexity in production and manufacturing. One can have a plug and play solution and interior that fit both right and left side steered cars. That would be a major improvement for OEMS. This may explain why it is a lot of development projects is ongoing concerning SbW among automotive manufactures. Having the technology also means that the steering wheel can be changed for a joy-stick, PlayStation control or something totally new. This allows for radically new design parameters of the front part of the car in regards of packaging, crump zones and interior.

Having an insight in the technology used today, in Steer by Wire as well as a basic understanding of benefits and, disadvantages from both technologies are to allow for

1 The car will not turn the steering wheel when going over a pothole for example, or do quick jerks when hitting bumps.

a deeper understanding of where this will be used and what is possible. It also helps create the product specification.

3.2.3 Benchmarking To have data to go on before starting, benchmarking was conducted. This to save time and give the project leader a sense of how the steering wheel and its related components is constructed today.

Measuring the S90 2017 led gave the result of the steering wheel being a torus with the diameter 369 mm and a depth of 148 mm. Data from a third party source shows that the steering wheel depth varies a lot. The big difference in depth of steering wheels may depend on the size and length and adjustment length of the steering column. This may have several explanations. The steering column design can vary from car model to model as well as between brands.

Different models have very different constructions of the steering column and therefore it extrude into the car different far depending on model. To allow an ergonomic driving position the steering wheel cannot be too close to the driver and neither too far away. Since the driver has to reach the pedals and the steering wheel at the same time and cars have different geometries which leads to the need of different depths of steering wheels – depending on how far away the foot pedals are located.

It is also a question of the airbag design. The airbag is commonly fitted in the centre of the steering wheel and builds depth since its function requires a deployment mechanism and balloon.

Further discoveries is that the SbW system do not need a steering lock either since the computer can shut of the steering angle sensor. In comparison, cars today have a steering lock that locks the steering axle when car is turned off, this makes it difficult for thieves to steel the car.

Equipping a car with SbW without steering lock on the other hand would make the steering wheel free to rotate when car is turned off. When entering and exiting the car many drivers take support on the steering wheel. The steering wheel is then used as a handle. A loose steering wheel may cause inconvenience for drivers entering and exiting the car.

3.2.4 Testing This part of the pre-study serves to help the project leader understand how important the steering wheel and how tough the demands are.

The steering wheel is put through extensive test before passing certification criterions. This since it’s a system that may cause great amount of damage and even death if a failure occurs. The tests are separate for the steering wheel rim and the steering column.

Note that the test may vary between manufactures and additional tests may be done. The standard procedure is to test both static and dynamic. (Pfeffer & Harrer, 2015)

The static test of the steering wheel is done by tightly and securely fixing the steering wheel hub. The object is then subjected to a static force of F= 500N at an angle of α = 60°, see figure 10. After the 500N the force is increased to F = 700N to evaluate the displacement. Figure 10. Forces and detail names of the steering wheel. The dynamic test have similarities to the static test. A force of F=300 N (towards the driver) is applied and thereafter a push of F = - 100 N (away from driver) is applied at a frequency of 1-3Hz this for 180 000 times and a survival rate of 50% is required for the product to be passed. (Pfeffer & Harrer, 2015)

3.2.5 How far away from autonomous cars are we? To facilitate with decisions and get a sense of where we are today as to where we want to be, competitors were looked in to. This to see where they see themselves in the automotive revolution. It also sets the tone for how wild concepts can be.

How far away are the automotive companies to realising level 4 or level 5 vehicles? According to Elon Musk, CEO at Tesla and SpaceX to mention a few, his cars are supposed to be level 5 autonomous in two years. Probably not for personal use but

commercial (Lambert, 2017). Level 3 autonomous is already in use. For example, Audi did reveal the first ever personal vehicle with level 3 classification according to ACE. They did this at the tech summit during summer 2017 and it caused a lot of discussion concerning safety. The system will only work below 60 km/h and on roads that have a clear line or barrier between oncoming traffic. What have been widely discussed is that the car allows the driver to watch TV as the autonomous mode is activated. The safety concerns are that the driver may not intervene fast enough when requested to do so if a hazardous situation occurs (McGee & Campbell, 2017).

Ford Motor Company is developing its fleet of autonomous cars in Florida, USA. They believe they have fully autonomous cars (does not mention if level 4 or 5) in year 2021. This goal is just like Tesla Motors, the vehicles will not be for personal use but as a self-driving taxi service. Until then, Ford has partnered with Domino’s Pizza to do deliveries and move pizzas from A to B – not people. This to develop their software and gain experience and map the area (Marshall, 2018).

And cars without drivers are actually already here. In October 2017 Waymo (a sister company to Alphabet) started driving around the streets of Arizona without a safety driver (who oversees the system and is ready to intervene). From April 2 2018 there will be legal in California for licensed companies to test the vehicles without safety- drivers. (Wakabayashi, 2018)

3.2.6 Catalogue method To inspire the project leader as well as prepare for a well-looking presentation, with a futuristic and selling appearance, a trendy look was browsed for.

From the catalogue method inspiration for steering wheel design as well as for product lines was looked for. Mostly automotive magazines were browsed. A more aggressive but clean look was found in many concepts. Dark spacious colours that gives a trendy impression combined with big screens and sweeping, soft and long lines were constantly found.

3.3 User study For the in-side-out approach input was given by lead-users. Their insights and thoughts helped the project leader understand what was important and not.

3.3.1 Discussion with Driver User Experience-group The discussions, brainstorming and knowledge sharing session with the Driver User Experience (dUX) team led to in-depth user understanding. The recordings that were shown contained statements from test subjects and comments that all strengthens the thesis problem statement. Comments from test subjects, user behavioural analysis (from video recordings) and lead user comments are compiled below.

- The steering wheel should clearly indicate when in AD (Autonomous Drive)

- Should clearly indicate when to take over

- Clearly indicate when not in AD

- The test subjects want to go away from the steering wheel to allow for more room in their lap2.

- The steering wheel’s radius/width was never complained about or even mentioned. It’s intrusion into the coupe was more of a concern (depth). This all comes down to being comfortable in different ways and one is physically comfortable but aspects like feeling safe and having trust is important. In addition, the steering wheel is a symbol of control. Without control people are not likely to feel safe and relaxed. The steering wheel is an important detail of the car and has to fill this function. Regaining control of the wheels was also a topic Figure 11. 3D-model of man sitting behind the steering wheel.

2 Test subjects mentioned that the steering wheel was in the way and wanted to move their seat back further – not move the steering wheel further away from them. This strengthens von Hippel’s theory that regular users only see solutions they are familiar with.

which was discussed and resulted in the answer: the faster control can be passed on to the driver the better. In theory the steering wheel does not have to be fast. This since a level four AD car has complete self-driving capability. This means that even if the driver do not respond to a request to intervene the car will come to a stop all by its self, safely (SAE mobilus, 2016). Thus not requiring a very fast deployment mechanism therefore this aspect is not look in to further.

The whole session led to the decision to focus on giving the driver more space in the axial direction away from the driver and preferably also upwards, see figure 11.

3.3.2 Video analysis User analysis from a secondary source (video recordings) also confirms the need for more space in the driver seat when in AD-mode. Where several subjects mention the need for more space in order to comfortable perform task like reading a magazine or writing on a laptop. Noticeable is also the struggle to read magazines. When doing this the subjects rest the paper and laptops agents the steering wheel, see figure XX. The car the tests were done in was with a regular mechanical steering system and therefore the paper was moved as the steering wheel rotated which irritated Figure 12. Man sitting with his computer in the driver’s some of the test subjects. SbW seat during field tests. can remove this problem

3.4 Product specification The specification was brought forward by the Olsson matrix, see table 5 and discussions from the dUX meeting. Below are parts of the specification. See table 6. The specification acts as the guidance for the concept generation as well as for the concept evaluation.

Table 5. Olsson matrix. The matrix is used for generating product specification criterions. This one has one row less than the original which contains selling and distribution of the product.

Aspect Life cycle phase Process Environment Human Economy Creation (development, construction 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 Produetc.) ction (manuf., assembly, 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 Usage (installation, user, service quality check etc.) 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 Elimination (recycling, disposal etc.)etc.) 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4

Table 6. Draft of product specification for new steering wheel. It cotains everything the final product must and can have.

Cell Criteria Must Function Desired Restriction 1.1a Dimensions according to law/company M R demands/standards 1.1b Follow Trafikverkets recommendations on grip D, 5 R positing 1.1c Allow for desired cable volume to go through D, 5 R 1.1d Allow for SW-heating D, 3 R 1.1e Diameter around ø 360-380 mm D,5 R 1.1f Connect to existing SW-axle D,3 R 1.1g In manual mode have same adjustment M R possibilities as existing steering wheel 1.1h Allow visibility for driver to head up-display D R when diving 1.1i Always visible, even when not in use M R 1.1j Allow diameter displacement in AD-mode D, 5 F 1.1k Allow axial displacement in AD-mode M F 1.1l Control Multimedia (volume, track, phone etc) D F 1.1m Control turn signal M F 1.1n Control Windscreen wiper M F 1.1o Have an airbag D, 4 R 1.1r Turn steering axle M R 1.1s Control functions M F 1.2 Recyclable material D, 1 R 1.3a Ergonomically adapted grip for drivers M R 1.3b Cognitively easily understood functions D, 5 F 1.3c Clearly understand when AD-mode is activated M F 2.1 Easily manufactured parts D, 1 R 2.3a Low weight on parts D, 3 R 2.3b Easily assembled D, 1 R 2.3c Clear feedback when assembling D, 1 R 3.1a Give grip to user M F 3.1b Not bend/deform when exposed to usage M R 3.2a Not break due to fatigue when used daily M R 3.2b Blend in with car interior style D, 4 F

3.3a Not be of danger to the driver if a crash D, 5 R happens 3.3b Minimize risk of injuries while using (clamp, D,5 F stuck etc.) 3.3c Feel/look robust M R 3.3d Look “safe and controlled” M F 4.1 Easily replaced D, 1 R 4.2 Use recyclable materials D, 4 R

3.5 Concept generation Concepts were generated by several well-known methods. The concept generation was done with very few limitations to explore the whole solution space, the outcome is shown below.

3.5.1 Brainsketching The sketching alongside of the project resulted in several concepts, some of which are shown in Figure 13. The Brainsketching sketches were named 1,2,3…

Figure 13.Ffour of the individual sketches done during the project. Created from a form of brain sketching. The sketches are done on a profile of the steering column – this to have a sense of proportion.

For more of the individual Brainsketching, see appendix 2.

3.5.2 Morphological analysis From the broken down sub-functions many possible solutions were found. The biggest focus was on the solutions to the sub-function “give driver more space” since this is in the projects main interest. For the full analysis see appendix 3, parts of it can be seen in figure 14. The morphological analysis was not done in a table like it is commonly done but as a chart. This does not change the way of using the method only the way it is illustrated for its users.

Steering wheel

Control Cognitive easy Cue when AD is Feel/look functions to use active robust

Dimention to Buttons on Few moving Lights not deflect steering wheel parts much

Touch screen Clear symbols Symbols Smooth shapes

Predictable Blend in to the Stalks path of Change shape environment movement

Voice Easy to use & Sound commands reach buttons

Stalks/flicks on Vibration steering wheel

Figure 14. Parts of the morphological chart that has part solutions to different systems of the complete steering wheel.

The chart was used not to create complete concept but during brainstorming sessions when the creativity was low. As well as during layout construction when solving various solutions.

3.5.3 Brainstorming The session with engineers from the steering department resulted in several concepts, similar concepts were left out. The group quickly determined that the shape of the steering wheel is strongly connected to its ability to save space when not in use

– a big steering wheel is big, no matter where it is located in the car. Furthermore, the design of the wheel was discussed this with the intention to predict how we may look at the steering device in the future. Will a steering wheel look old when we are in an autonomous vehicle? Or will a joy-stick be too advanced and futuristic?

How far should the steering device be able to retract from the driver? These are questions that the group could not answer. It would require user tests, which takes time.

New types of solutions were created and at the same time new important questions were brought forward.

Ideas generated, named A-L:

A. Having a steering wheel that somehow moves away from driver B. Joystick steering C. Retractable iPad (axial direction) with hide-able handles D. Flush bar (“bike steering handle”) E. Tiller (sailboat style) F. Remove steering wheel completely G. Detach steering wheel and stove next to legs H. Steer with eyesight (car scans eyes and sees where you want to go) I. Transform steering wheel up on top of steering column J. Transform to a table and use it instead of hide it K. Steer with PlayStation hand controller L. Reduce original length of steering column so it’s flat against interior when not in use and then it comes out when needed. The steering wheel would be flush against the interior when not in use.

One of the papers created can be seen in Figure 15. For more see appendix 4.

Figure 15. Concepts created during the brainstorming session.

Keeping the design simple is also a conclusion from many of the discussions. This to reduce workload and potentially money as well, both in development phase as well as in manufacturing and assembly.

After a discussion with the supervisor after the brainstorming session and it was decided to cross out one restriction. Specifically, it was concluded that the steering wheel may not have to fit on the steering column, which was one of the limiting restrictions given in the beginning of the project. This allows for totally new degrees of design freedom. And from a new brainstorming session three concepts were created, one of them can be seen in Figure 16. For all concepts see appendix 5.

Figure 16.Concept I. One of four concepts created during a brainstorming session.

3.5.4 6-3-5 method The session ended with 48 (3*4*4) concepts, 12 of them can be seen in figure 17. The ideas created can be seen in appendix 6.

Figure 17, one of the A4 papers after a complete cycle of the modified 6-5-3 method. The paper contains 12 concepts generated by four people.

3.6 Concept evaluation This section will show the output from the methods presented in the methods chapter 2.6 concept evaluation. The presented material shows the logical order of how the concepts were evaluated and its’ outcome.

3.6.1 Elimination matrix The elimination matrix with its modified elimination criterions led to the discarding of several concepts. The remaining concepts were further evaluated. The criterions used to eliminate concepts were keywords and important aspects that has been brought up during discussions and in cooperation with Volvo Car Corporation supervisors. The evaluation can be seen in table 7.

Table 7. The elimination matrix used to reduce the number of concepts. Criterions based on keywords and important aspects that have come up during the development process.

Elimination matrix Elimination criterions

(+) Yes

(-) No

years (0) As today

(?) Need more information 10 -

Decisions (+) Continue

Concept (-) Eliminate Look robust Give driver more room eels like something new F Fulfils main function (steer) Recognizable within 5 Recognizable to today's system Decision 1 + + + + + + + 2 + + + + + + + 3 + + 0 + + + - 4 + - - 5 + - - 6 + - - 7 + + 0 + + - - 8 + - - 9 + + + + + + + 10 + + + + + + + 11 + + 0 + + + - 12 + + + + + + + 13 - - A + + + + + + + B + + + + + - - C + + + + + + + D + + + + - - E + + + + + - - F + + + + + - - G + + + + + - - H + + + - - I + + + + + + + J + - - K + + + + - - L + + + + + + + I + + + + + + + II + + + + + + + III + + + + + - - IV + + + + + + +

3.6.2 Relative decision matrix By comparing the concepts to the current steering wheel a relative rank was given relative the current solution, see table 8. The method is called Pug’s relative decision matrix and is the second step in the evaluation process according to Johannesson, et al., (2013). The criterions are key words and aspects brought up along the project.

Table 8. Relative decision matrix. Eliminates concepts that does not perform as much as others.

Concept Ref. 1 1 i ≈ I Criteria (0) 1 2 9 0 2 c 9/10 l I II III V + + + + Innovative ref + + + + + ++ 0 + + + + Gives driver more "front" + + + + space ref + + + + + ++ + + + + + Gives driver more leg room ref 0 - + + + + + + + + + + + + Adds extra value/features? ref - - + + 0 + 0 + + + + Gives a clear AD cure? ref + + + + + + + + + + + Ergonomic: gripping possibilities for driver ref 0 0 0 - 0 - + - - - - Ergonomic: additional adjustment possibilities ref 0 0 + + 0 0 0 + + 0 0 Reliazibility ref + + + + + + ++ 0 0 + 0 "Next" generation impression ref 0 0 + + 0 + + + + + +

Sum 3 2 8 7 5 8 7 9 9 9 7 N N Y N N Ye Ye Y Y Y N Continue Yes/No No o o es o o s* No s* es es es o *Combine concepts (-) worse than today or no, (0) as today, (+) improvement / good

The matrix clearly lists what concepts meet the criterions well. Two concepts (c & l) however score relatively high but not at the top. What is interesting is that they complement each other, where one has low score the other has performed well. This means that combined they should perform well. Concepts with a score lower than eight was regarded as underperformers and were therefore discarded.

3.6.3 Pros and cons list Here the concepts are quickly summarized and described. Their pros and cons are also told.

Concept 9 The concept builds on having an airbag free steering wheel with a rotational pivot that flips the steering wheel onto the dash/steering column. A display is also fitted in the centre of the wheel. If the display has a touch function (like an iPad) it may act as an entertainment system. Which means one could watch movies, browse the web, read news, blogs, etc. However, most importantly it moves up and away from the driver but the created space is limited to the steering column. The concept can be seen in figure 18.

Pros and cons:

+ Simple design + Works on current steering column + Adds value with display + Same ergonomics as today - Give maximum 140 mm more space in car length direction

- Not very integrated into the coupe Figure 18. Sketch of concept 9, a steering wheel - Similar to today’s design that rotates onto the steering column.

Concept c & l combined A design that was brought up in early discussions and refined during the first group brainstorming session were concept c. The concept includes a touchscreen with retractable handles that can be stowed away behind the screen, se figure 19. The touchscreen is a way of removing stalks and buttons – its purpose is to handle the commands needed when driving such as turn signal, horn, windscreen wipers etc. Figure 19. Sketch of concept c. iPad with retractable handles that hides behind the display when not in use.

This concept also allows for extra value with the centre touchscreen since it can be used for movies, reading or working. Combined with concept l, the display pulled back all the way to the interior panel, see figure 20, which gives the driver a lot of room as well as blends with the interior to some extent.

In summary, the pros and cons of the combined concept are:

+ Innovative design

+ Recognisable to today’s steering wheel + Extra value Figure 20. Sketch of concept l. The steering column + Creates much room for the driver is redesigned to retract all the way back to the interior dashboard. This combined with the steering + Hides the steering handles when not in use device with an iPad with handles (Figure 3.). A- surface stands for interior dashboard. - Advanced mechanism to hide the handle

- Requires a redesigned steering column - Less gripping area then today’s steering solution

Concept I Cannot be shown due to continuous development from company behind closed doors to not show competitor companies.

Concept II This design is based on having a steering wheel that folds sideways, similar to what some TV-mounts do. It also has an iPad with handles solution for steering, similar to concept c (figure 19).

The arm allows for good adjustment possibilities in length as well as using the touchscreen for work or entertainment. When not used it can easily fold close to the dashboard and therefore leave the driver with a great amount of space, see figure 21.

Pros and cons:

+ Recognisable steering device

+ Touchscreen adds additional value + Give driver a good amount of room Figure 21. Sketch of concept II. The steering wheel folds flush to the interior dashboard. when in AD + Simple construction - Difficult to adjust height - Not as much gripping area as today’s steering wheel - Requires dashboard space

Concept III This design contains a mechanical solution that is inspired by a scissor lift. The system can fold flush to the dashboard when not in use, or closer to the driver if one wants to use the touchscreen for work or entertainment. See figure 22.

The whole system builds on having a guiding rail along the dashboard. This guiding rail is meant to act as a way of bringing items to the car. Ideas is that one can mount a drawing pad, a table or a screen. This to add value to the interior.

Pros and cons: Figure 22. Sketch of concept III. A steering device fastened on a scissor lift like arms that can fold back to be flat + Good adjustment possibilities in against the dashboard. length + Extra value from the rail

+ New thinking + Redefines the interior - Requires space from the dashboard - Big construction when folded - Not as much gripping area as today’s steering wheel

Kesselring criterion weight matrix With the use of the Kesselring matrix (table 9) the concepts were given a normalized rank relative the ideal solution. A robustness test resulted in approximately the same end result. Concept l and III are the overall winners, even if weight or ratings changes. Worth noting is that concept 9 & cl are not very far behind – they are all somewhat even in performance.

Criterions are from further discussion about key words.

Table 9. Kesselring criterion weight matrix. The matrix compares the concepts and brings out the best concepts based on the criterions given - this in relation to the other concepts.

Concept Criterion Ideal 9 cI I II III w r t r t r t r t r t r t

1 1 1 Add extra feature 3 5 5 3 9 2 6 4 2 3 9 5 5 2 1 Level of integration when not in use 4 5 0 1 4 2 8 2 8 3 2 2 8 2 2 2 1 1 Low risk of injuries 5 5 5 4 0 4 0 3 5 1 5 2 0 1 1 Low risk of misunderstanding function 3 5 5 3 9 3 9 3 9 3 9 4 2 2 1 1 2 1 2 Aesthetics 5 5 5 2 0 3 5 4 0 3 5 4 0 Degrees of gripping (half-moon 3, full 1 1 circle 5) 2 5 0 5 0 3 6 3 6 3 6 3 6

110 62 64 70 56 71 T = sum t T / Tmax 1,00 0,56 0,58 0,64 0,51 0,65 Rank - 4 3 2 5 1

3.7 Layout Construction To more fairly evaluate the two even concepts they were simultaneously developed further. This permits a more objective ground to base the concept recommendation on.

3.7.1 Product layout Only concept III will be shown. This due to further investigation into the design and continuous development of concept I. The company want to further develop and evaluate the concept before releasing it to the public.

Concept III After creating sketches of the concept with more details the product layout could be summarized. The concept would consist of two extruded aluminium profiles which acts as guides for the folding collapsing. These can be fitted with a sliding mount that slides in the guide. There would need to be one profile integrated into the dashboard and one profile behind the steering wheel and a connection between these two. These arms (see figure 23, referred to as supporting arms) would need to have a joint at each end to handle the angle variation. As well as being constructed in such way that they can fold though each other.

A steering axle to transfer feedback to the driver is also needed. Therefore a telescopic steering axle is needed to handle the compression exposed to when in AD- mode.

The arms cannot rotate and therefore a bearing is needed that connects the supporting structure and allows the steering axle to turn. This has to go through the arms since it is in the centre and the arms meet in the pivot point. Se figure 23. When

the distance A changes the angle a changes.

Figure 23. Explanatory picture with notes showing the main details of the concept.

Concept I’s layout construction cannot be shown due to further development by the company.

3.7.2 Concept validation In consultation with the supervisors it was decided that the concept can be fitted to a slim IP (interior panel), without the information cloud etc. A slim IP can be compared to the passenger side interior panel, a simplification of this was done in Catia V5, see figure 24. The passenger side was used as reference since this is what many OEM companies sees in the close future, this partly because of symmetry benefits – reduced complexity and cost. Tesla model 3 is an example of this symmetry dashboard design. Not only does it catch the eye but it opens up the possibility to radically redesign the Figure 24. References used from the XC90 SUV. The new slim interior interior. panel is also seen.

A model with low level of details were created to validate function and test range of motion. The axial adjustment range is illustrated as a box with green dashed lines. The 2D extreme driving positions, seen from above are shown in figure 25 and 26. The concept saves approximately 130 mm in the axial Figure 25. The concept can reach the current steering wheel direction. See figure 27. adjustment in terms of axial length.

Figure 26. The concept can go further back from the Figure 27. Measurement of distance given to driver when current minimum axial driving positon. steering wheel is pulled back towards the interior panel.

3.7.3 Draft A 3D draft was created to see if the concept was realisable in terms of packaging and collision of details in 3D. There were several iterations with the design to test its kinematical function. And different steering wheel design were played with. The result can be seen in Figure 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32.

Figure 30. The supporting structure of the concept. Figure 31. The sliders fit and can slide along the extruded On the ends there are joints that allow the sliders to profile fitted in the dashboard. be parallel to the sliding profiles in the dashboard and behind the steering wheel.

Figure 28. Section of the steering wheel with its Figure 29. Section of the arms and steering axle supporting details. The steering wheel has a bearing in its most extended position. who’s outer housing is joined to the extrude profiles. Thus allowing the steering wheel to rotate the steering axle which comes through the hexagonal hole.

Figure 32. Section of the arms when collapsed to AD-position. The steering axle have sufficient clearance to pass though the arms, min. 1 mm in each direction.

A draft was also done for concept I. The draft cannot be show due to continuous development of the concept within the company.

3.7.4 Peer-review Discussions around the concepts gave a lot of valuable feedback. Ideas that arose was how is the steering wheels position controlled, how is it moved from autonomous mode to driving positon? See figure 33 and 34. Whether the iPad was necessary or not, or should it be fixed in a horizontal position or rotate with the steering wheel.

Figure 34. Man relaxing during autonomous mode Figure 33. Man driving concept III. concept III.

3.7.5 Positioning system To control the position of the steering wheel a positioning system is needed. This system needs to do two things. Both lock the system when the car is moving but also transfer the steering wheel from driving mode to autonomous mode and back when requested.

The movement needed for the sliders is 66mm, it is the difference in length of the outmost extended and inmost retracted position. See figure 35 and 36.

Figure 35. Measurement from centre of steering wheel to interior panel slider centre. This when the steering wheel is in autonomous mode – retracted to the interior panel.

Figure 36. Measurement of distance between steering wheel centre axle to slider. This when the steering wheel is in it outmost position.

A group brainstorming session was held with one lead engineer, one concept engineer and the project leader. The following ideas as well as requirements and wishes were brought up.

The steering wheel should be able to adjust at least as much as the steering wheel can today. Preferably even more, the adjustment area should preferably, according to the ergonomics team, be around 70*50 mm (l x h). Compared to todays 65*40 (l x h), see green box in figure 37.

For active safety, the steering system should have a collapse length of 120 mm (also known as ride down). This to have energy absorbing capabilities in the event of Figure 37. A steering wheel in a crash. Still it should be very rigid when driving. space. The cross can move around in the green box, is it’s Preferably it should also have adjustable steering wheel the steering wheel’s adjustment area. It is approximately 65 x 40 angle, also known as neck tilt. See figure 38. mm.

Several options for controlling the position of the arms was discussed. In order to reduce parts shown to the car’s passengers, only ideas that can be hidden behind the interior panel was discussed. Ideas that came up ca be seen in table 10.

Figure 38. Illustration of neck tilt. The steering wheel can change its angle in relation to the

driver.

Table 10. Ways to controlling the position of the steering wheel.

Actuator Screw and nut drive Belt drive of sliders Hydraulic system Solenoid locking of slider Electromagnetic locking position of slider position Chain drive

A quick assessment of the ideas was done:

Actuator • Self-locking options available • Over the desk availability • Easy to create a prototype with • Compact/telescopic collapse

Screw and nut • Self-locking possibility • Current solution in steering column – well tested • Easy to create a prototype with • Not telescopic

Belt drive • Well known • Large

Hydraulic system • Well known • Space efficient behind steering wheel, pressure can be managed anywhere in the car • Compact • Weights a lot

Solenoid locking • Quick • Silent • Would require manual positioning of steering wheel • Not step-less

The whole discussion narrowed down to a decision about what solution to use. Because of little time and keeping it simple as well as being a reliable and commonly used for precise positioning the actuator was chosen.

3.8 Concept recommendation Finally, the further developed concept I and III compared to each other with a Kesselring decision matrix, see table 11. This to come to a conclusion about what concept is the better.

Table 11. The final evaluation of the concepts were done with a weighter criterion matrix.

Concept Criterion Ideal I III weight rating total r t r t

Neck tilt 2 5 10 5 10 0 0 Airbag compatible 3 5 15 3 9 3 9 Ride down length 4 5 20 5 20 4 16 Adjustment capabilities X (horizontal) 3 5 15 5 15 5 15 Adjustment capabilities Z (vertical) 3 5 15 5 15 0 0 AD: X-direction space saved 5 5 25 5 25 3 15 AD: Z-direction space saved 5 5 25 5 25 0 Comany's preference 2 5 10 5 10 0 0

135 129 55 Sum total: T/Tmax 1,00 0,96 0,41 Rank - 1 2

The neck tilt is not available with the construction set for concept III. This lack of degree of freedom is a step back regarding innovation and continuous development. It is expected to create, even if slight, an improvement in ergonomics as well as technology for every new product, not staying were the technology is today.

The airbag is a lifesaving device and was not set as a requirement from the beginning. Still Volvo have always hoped to find an opportunity to incorporate active safety in some way. However, the airbag capability is a bit unsure. The airbag builds approximately 89mm in depth and 30 mm in diameter, see figure 39. This however can be reduced and a thinner airbag system can be built. Figure 39. Driver airbag in XC90. Measures around 130 mm in diameter and 90mm in depth. The steering wheel can be designed to flatten the airbag if depth is restricted, since its volume will stay the same. A thinner airbag design requires more width. So here the concepts are scored equal.

The ride-down lengths of the concepts are close to the desired 120mm’s asked for from the company. With the current layout construction for concept I there is approximately 130 mm and concept III have 110mm, see figure 40. This ride down length is also a measurement of Figure 40. Comparisons of the current steering how much more space the drivers get wheel in nominal position and concept III in its’ most inward position. The steering wheel can be when riding in autonomous mode. pushed back towards the interior panel approximately 110 mm.

The adjustment capability is compared to today’s adjustment range. The green box in figure 37. The two concepts fully cover the same possibilities to adjust the steering wheel to the driver in the axial direction. The vertical however is not met for concept III. Not for the delimitations set in the project plan, see appendix 1. The concept could have the same adjustment capabilities but those must then come from the seat, if the seat can have greater adjustment capabilities these could compensate for the lack of adjustment available in the steering wheel. Changing components not connected to the steering wheel is according to the limitations set, not allowed. Therefore, concept III scores zero on this point.

To quantify the projects goal, to free space for the driver. The translation of the steering wheel is measured in two directions, horizontal and vertical. Concept III can go back approximately 111mm, see figure 40. The vertical translation is negative and the steering wheel moves closer to the floor, which is undesirable since this is where the knees are. This is also mentioned in the analysed video recordings – the users want more space in-front of them to easier read and use a laptop. Concept I however can horizontally move back 147 mm and vertically 185 mm, which is what the customer wants. This allows for more space in the drivers lap since the steering wheel will be out of their way.

Lastly the company’s and supervisors wish were taken into consideration, thus must be taken into account since they have knowledge, insight and intuition in to what they think suits the company and their customers.

With the result given from the matrix, it is clear that concept I has far more potential than its closest competitor, concept III. The recommendation given to the company is to not continue with concept III, but to further investigate and develop concept I.

4 Discussion

This section discusses the key learnings and implications following from the thesis’ different phases.

The project started with a known problem – the steering wheel being in the way when not in use. The initial plan was to create a solution that fits the current steering column that when not in used would give the driver space enough to do other tasks. This was later, six weeks into the project changed. This limitation was removed when not satisfying solutions enough were found, the space available was too small to create a satisfying concept. This led to less time left to redo the process all over.

Therefore, the process may have suffered and not been used as intentioned at all times. This is also evidence that the design process is iterative.

The use of a hybrid inside-out and outside-in approach proved to be effective because the user needs could be generated and the recordings also verified that there is a need for more room when the car is autonomous. However, the availability of users was very limited since this technology and these type of car interiors are not yet on the market, which makes it difficult to find lead users.

For further development lead users could be identified faster by using a method called pyramiding, which builds on that an expert probably know a person more expert then themselves. This way one can quickly find several good lead-users (von Hippel, et al., 2009). Having more lead-users may have change the outcome of this thesis.

This is common according to (Herrmann, et al., 2006) arguing that companies usually have two key persons who implement radical innovation. One person who have a good position and authority as well as a technical specialist who pushes for the technology. The project leader is neither of those but a person below the technical experts – the thesis’ supervisors. Their open mind and willingness to go for odd and never seen before solutions. This provided the possibilities to create radical innovative products that can be further evaluated and developed.

The thought of being last to the market with SbW and autonomous drive is very terrifying for all the automotive companies. SbW and autonomous drive is a radical innovation. Radical innovation refers to an innovation that provides a new technology base as well as a radically new experience to the user. There is evidence of a

relationship between radical innovation and long lasting and large profits according to (Herrmann, et al., 2006). As (Herrmann, et al., 2006) highlight, radical innovation can destroy firms in terms of loss of customer if the firm cannot provide product their competitors can. This may answer why the company Volvo Car Corporation want to be on the forefront of both SbW as well as autonomous cars.

The idea generation period went by fast and the solution space may not have been thoroughly gone through. This period was cut short due to the supervisors, who pushed for concept I. The project’s time plan was therefore after a while not very applicable. The methods were till used and with good result. Some of the methods, like the semantic analysis, were skipped because of lack of time. While this might be seen as a drawback, it also allowed the project leader to have a more open mind that is not influenced by old solutions.

Discussions held throughout the project was of great value and having input from different departments; design, Driver User experience and steering, gave a lot of insights. This the project leader believes helped the project in the right path. The planned user feedback that were supposed to take place after the concept choice, were unfortunately not completed. This because of the lack of available users with experience as well as lack of time. The concept would also have been very difficult to give feedback to. A computer model does not let us try them the same way we would in a mock-up – with our hands and emotions.

The project specification was a bit ambitious and the author of this thesis have come to the conclusion that it could have been scaled down very much. It however covers a lot of aspects that needs to be looked in to in the future. It would require a lot of time and knowledge to make it a working concept in car and the major specifications are there for that. In this case the project was scoped to create a concept, not a finished product ready for implementation. So solving all the requirements is not realistic.

The concept generation phase was interesting and many possible solutions came up. And it is very clear that Johannesson (2013) and Childs (2014) are correct when saying that design is an iterative process. Many iterations have been done and the design has come closer to the finished product after each meeting, discussion and kinematic test.

Having such an open scope as this project had, I believe set limitations to the people involved during the concept generation methods. Unfortunately, not very many usable and realistic solutions came forward. This complies with what von Hippel (1986) states about lead users, who stresses on the importance of having people with broad knowledge of the subject.

It is clear for the project leader that more usable information and ideas came from people that have more insight in the topic like the dUX-team and their video recordings. Having even more access to people who know the subject more in-depth or people who have been in autonomous cars, the project leader believe would have helped the project to an even more satisfying solution.

Using a morphological matrix was helpful to have a clear overview of important sub- functions of the concept. Still it quickly got big and clumsy. One would have had to break it down even further to have use of it. Since one can combine many sub- functions with each other, the chart quickly losses its purpose.

The concept evaluation were an important part of this thesis. Since there was mainly one goal; to give the driver more space and since this is very difficult to quantify. The evaluation took outside factors in to consideration, this to better suit the company as well as align with the time companies expect to roll out autonomous cars. The recommended concept the project leader and his supervisors believe have great potential.

Having two concepts along each other to compare in the end before the concept recommendation was good. This way one can clearly see where flaws and potential is for both the concepts. As well as being able to evaluate them more fairly when you have a rough construction to base decisions on. The opinion of the author of this thesis think that is, more objective and give better outcome then the matrixes done earlier in the process when the concept detail level is low.

This section has discussed the projects different phases and methods as well as its result. Key learnings, improvement possibilities as well as problems from the project have been highlighted and debated.

5 Conclusions

This section answers questions behind the project’s purpose and goal and what the project is about. The following are conclusions drawn from the result and discussion section together with propositions for continuous development.

The project is believed to have reached to project goals both for the company as well as for the project leader. The company wanted to have a technical concept presented at the end of the project which has been delivered. The concept is believed to fulfil the demands asked from the target group. It is a concept that works with steer by wire and that is suitable for a level 4 autonomous car. It is a proposition of how a steering device for a level four autonomous car may look adapted to the target group commuters.

The project can be said to be partly completed. In order to verify the concept and see if it works, a prototype should be built, this was one of the projects goals but was missed due to a project restart with new delimitations. The project had goals to deliver a 3D-model of the concept, present the concept for the company and University, to attend both an exhibition and an opposition. This has all been done.

For future development of the concept a test rig should be built to verify the kinematics. As well as dimensioning of its structure and joints should be done. Further studies and evaluation of the positioning system should also be considered.

6 Acknowledgment

Firstly, I would like to thank Volvo Car Corporation and everyone that have help me during the project. The project would not have been possible without you.

A special thanks to my supervisors at Volvo Car Corporation Johan Svensson, Daniel Krstic and Maurice Smith. Without your guidance and help the result would have been undoubtedly not as pleasing as it became.

I would also like to thank Karlstad University for giving me the tools and knowledge to take on such an interesting project as this thesis have been. As well as my supervisor Jakob Trischler and his belief in my knowledge, his supportive words and academic guidance. Cannot thank you enough.

7 References

Burgees, M. (2017). When does a car become truly autonomous? Levels of self-driving technology explained. [Online] Available at: http://www.wired.co.uk/article/autonomous-car-levels-sae-ranking [Accessed 05 02 2018].

Childs, P. R. N. (2014). Mechanical Design Engineering Handbook. Amsterdam: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Cole, C. (2013). 2014 Infiniti Q50 Steer-by-Wire Explained. [Online] Available at: http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2013/11/2014-infiniti-q50-gets- direct-adaptive-steering.html [Accessed 20 02 2018].

Crolla, D. A. (2009). Automotive engineering. 1 ed. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann.

Dhillon, B. S. (2006). Creativity for engineers. Vol. 3. Singapore: World scientific.

George, Dani. (2012). Concept Generation Using Morphological And Options Matrices. All Theses. 1558. https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/all_theses/1558

Happian-Smith, J. (2006). An introduction to modern vehicle design. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Harrer, M. & Pfeffer, P. (2017). Steering Handbook. Berlin: Springer.

Herrmann, A., Tomczak, T., & Befurt, R. (2006). Determinants of radical product innovations. European Journal of Innovation Management, Vol 9, Nr. 1, pp. 20-43.

Johannesson, H., Persson, J. & Pettersson, D. (2013). Produktutveckling; effektiva metoder för konstruktion och design. Second Edition ed. Stockholm: Liber AB.

Lambert, F. (2017). Elon Musk updates timeline for a self-driving car, but how does Tesla play into it?. [Online] Available at: https://electrek.co/2017/12/08/elon-musk-tesla-self-driving-timeline/ [Accessed 27 02 2018].

Marshall, A. (2018). Ford's Miami self-driving cars will tackle the tricky bits. [Online] Available at: https://www.wired.com/story/ford-miami-self-driving-cars/ [Accessed 27 02 2018].

McGee, P. & Campbell, P. (2017). Audi launches most advanced self-driving car. [Online] Available at: https://www.ft.com/content/973f2f5c-6649-11e7-8526-7b38dcaef614 [Accessed 27 02 2018].

Olsson, K. (2015). Maskinelement [beskrivning, analys, användning]. 2nd ed. Stockholm: Liber.

Rowe, S. F. (2015). Project Management for Small Projects. 2nd ed. Virginia: Management Concept.

SAE mobilus (2016). Taxonomy and Definitions for Terms Related to Driving Automation Systems for On-Road Motor Vehicles. [Online] Available at: https://saemobilus.sae.org/content/j3016_201609 [Accessed 19 02 2018].

Volvo Car Corporation. (2017). This is Volvo. [Online] Available at: https://www.media.volvocars.com/global/en-gb/corporate/this-is-volvo [Accessed 2018 06 18] von Hippel, E. (1986). Lead users: A source of novel product concepts. Management Science, Vol. 32, Nr. 7, p. 791. von Hippel, E., Franke, N. & Prügl, R., 2009. Pyramiding: Efficient search for rare subjects. Research Policy, Vol. 38, p. 1397-1406.

Wakabayashi, D., (2018). California Scraps Safety Driver Rules for Self-Driving Cars. [Online] Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/26/technology/driverless-cars- california-rules.html [Accessed 27 02 2018].

Appendix 1: Project plan Background Volvo Cars is Sweden’s leading car manufacturer and a very established and well- known company in the car business. Their product portfolio contains premium segment cars in three categories – Sedan (S90 and S60), estate (V90, V60 and V40) and SUV (XC90, XC60 and XC40).

If autonomous or partly-autonomous cars become norm, the existing steering wheel will be of excess in terms of its size and central position. Thus, Volvo is looking in to how the future may play out. Specifically, Volvo among other car manufactures are investigating a technology called Steer-By-Wire (SbW). SbW allows for an electrical connection (non-mechanical) between steering wheel and steering gear, thus allowing for new design and construction opportunities.

The steering wheel is today mounted on the steering column. The steering column is the part behind the steering wheel, the part which you can move when adjusting the position of the steering wheel. The steering column assembly will still be necessary even if no mechanical linkage to the wheels are existent.

Steering column Mechanical connection to wheels

Figure 41. TRW’s EPS Column Drive Gen3 System

[Type here] I

Preliminary Problem Statement The steering wheel is nowadays always within a certain operating range because of the mechanical connection to the wheels. When this requirement is of excess and the level of automation has risen among car manufactures the steering wheel may not be used as much as it is today.

How may a steering device for a level 4 automated car be designed?

The project is about finding a solution for a steering device that mounts on the steering column (for human driving) that does not intrude as much on the driver’s personal space when car is put in autopilot. Thus allowing the driver to carry out tasks that cannot be done while “manually” driving; reading a newspaper, working on a laptop or eating for example. This because of both safety reason as well as lack of room.

To alight with Volvo’s vision the primary target group is business commuters. They are workers that usually drive their car back and forth to work alone. This problem statement will be confronted with the method presented in Produktutveckling (Johannesson, et al., 2013) which follows the steps in Figure 1. During the project users with experience from autonomous-driving will give feedback to get user input into the project. This way the project follow a hybrid strategy; inside-out and partly outside-in design approach.

Concept Feasibility Target Layout Detail Concept evaluation study specification construction construction generation and choice

Figure 42. Problem statement approach

Delimitation Due to short timeframe and lack of deeper knowledge within electricity, programing and mechatronics this will be left out of consideration. Choice of material will not be carefully chosen to leave space for price and weight optimizing.

Goal & Purpose The project has as a goal to deliver a SbW-technology based concept that can be implemented in a car. Victor is expected to deliver a technical solution for his chosen concept and if time allow also produce a functioning prototype to be implemented in a concept car. The result is to be delivered the 25 of May 2018. Individual goal is to fulfill the criteria’s listed in Course PM (se appendix 1.1) in order to achieve a pass in the course.

Organization The project is to be led by Victor Wetterlind with Victor Wetterlind support in the form of Project leader mentoring from Johan Svensson and Daniel Krstic at Volvo Cars as well as academic support and Jakkob Trischler Johan Svensson guidance from Jakob Trischler Karlstad university Volvo Cars at Karlstad University.

Contact information

Leo De Vin SbW-department Volvo Cars Sweden (examiner) (customer) Assar Gabrielsson väg, PVV- Figure 43. Organization structure for project. building.

41 262, Gothenburg

Contact person at Volvo Cars Sweden:

Johan Svensson

On-site mentor and technical support.

Academic guidance at Karlstad University:

Jakob Trischler

III

Responsible for academic guidance throughout the project.

Project leader:

Victor Wetterlind

Responsible for the delivered result.

Project model

The project will use the following project model, which also acts as the critical path.

Project Due Milestone Gate Responsible Phase date Project plan 07- Victor

Start done feb Wetterlind Project plan accepted Leo de Vin 16- Victor Research feb Wetterlind Feasibility Target 16- Victor

study specification feb Wetterlind 16- Johan Target spec. approved feb Svensson Concept 28- Victor

storming feb Wetterlind User Victor

feedback Wetterlind Concept 02- Victor

evaluation mar Wetterlind 02- J.S / D.K / Concept approval mar M.S Layout wee Victor

Concept construction k 10 Wetterlind Catia v5 wee Victor

course k 11 Wetterlind 19- Victor Methods report done mar Wetterlind 21- Victor Half-way presentation mar Wetterlind Approved half-way Leo de Vin presentation J.S, D.J & Design review V.W Constructio Detail 18- Victor

n construction maj Wetterlind Johan Construction OK Svensson

25- Victor Thesis report due maj Wetterlind Project 31- Victor

exhibition maj Wetterlind Final 31- Victor

Finishing presentation maj Wetterlind Exhibition and Leo de Vin presentation OK Victor Peer review 7-jun Wetterlind Peer review OK Leo de Vin

For a more careful resource planning se appendix 1.2 for Gantt schedule.

Time plan comments

Moreover the working methods are presented below under WBS – Work break-down. Furthermore ongoing and continuous discussions will be held with Johan Svensson at Volvo Cars as well as with Jakob Trischler at Karlstad University to make sure the project is moving in the right direction. Report will be worked on continuously throughout the project.

WBS - Work Break-down structure

The following steps are the preliminary methods chosen to complete the project with desired result.

Bachelors Thesis

Target Layout Final Feasability study Concept Report specification construction presentation

Relevant Analyse Break down Prepare Write method information necessary functions to sub Catia V5 course presentation chapter browsing functions functions material

Discuss with Generate Continually Customer Further develop Practice design and HID solutions to sub document analysis concept presentation department functions progress

Gather Semantic Create concepts techinical Finish report analysis information

Create virtual Prepair for peer User feedback model review

Correct with Evaluate Assambly model peer review concepts feedback

Risk evaluation To build in robustness and increase the chances of success a risk evaluation is done. With the purpose to find weak points in the process and find solutions to risks before they occur – this way it is possible to work around the problems and in some cases avoid them totally.

Risk analysis Risk P C R Solution Set clear delimitations and set a focus area to Project grows to big 4 5 20 concentrate on (SW or mechanics) Discus problem with Johan/Daniel as well as simplify To advanced CAD-models 4 5 20 model To large target Reduce criteria’s with collaboration and approval from specification 4 4 16 Johan/Daniel Start looking early, ask around for Volvo AD teams with Hard to find user group 4 4 16 experience. Tesla drivers? Book time to write every week. Start well before due and Report not ready in time 3 5 15 work continually

Integrate extra time in schedule to allow for a bit of a Project not ready in time delay, gather plenty of material during research, forward for Volvo delivery 3 4 12 heavy process and delimitate. Make sure to enter the project with a crystal clear Unclear problem problem statement, ask supervisor to give feedback and statement 2 5 10 guidance Project not approved by examiner 2 5 10 Continuous dialog with academic supervisor Use online backup system (transfer data to USB once a Documentation gets lost 1 5 5 week) 1 = low P = Probability (1-5) risk C = Consequence (1-5) 5= high risk R = Risk factor

Document handling Documents will be handled by ending all documents with the current version in the following format: vX.Y. The first version starts with number: v1.0.

Documents will be stored in the local cloud system as well as a weekly back up will be saved on to a portable hard drive.

VII

Appendix 1.1

KursPM - UTKAST Examensarbete för högskoleingenjörsexamen i innovationsteknik och design

MSGC12 - vt 2018 - 22,5 hp – anmälningskod 29868

Generell information:

Kursens syfte är att studenten skall: - tillämpa ett ingenjörs- och industridesignmässigt arbetssätt i ett produktutvecklingsprojekt, eller ett produkt- och tjänsteutvecklingsprojekt. - utföra ett självständigt arbete och presentera detta skriftligt och muntligt samt genomföra en kritisk bedömning av andras arbeten.

Efter avslutad kurs skall studenten kunna: - identifiera, formulera och avgränsa problem - tillämpa kunskaper och färdigheter som inhämtats under studietiden, på problem inom det valda området - självständigt planera, genomföra och dokumentera ett produktutvecklingsprojekt eller produkt- och tjänsteutvecklingsprojekt - på ett målgruppsanpassat sätt presentera resultatet skriftligt och muntligt - dokumentera den egna arbetsinsatsen i en rapport enligt ingenjörsmässig och vetenskaplig praxis - granska och ge synpunkter på produktutvecklingsprojekt eller produkt- och tjänsteutvecklingsprojekt samt kunna bedöma motsvarande synpunkter på eget arbete.

Kursen innehåller: - enskilt arbete - handledning - delredovisning - slutredovisning (muntlig och skriftlig) - utställning - opponering på annan students rapport.

Examination Examinationen sker genom obligatorisk närvaro och aktivt deltagande i delredovisning, muntlig slutredovisning, opponering, examensutställning samt att arbetet dokumenteras i form av skriftlig rapport.

För att bli godkänd på kursen krävs:

VIII

- Godkänd projektplan - Godkänt metodkapitel - Genomförd delredovisning och närvaro vid delredovisningsseminariet - Projekt av tillräcklig omfattning (motsvarande 22,5 hp)

- Närvaro vid slutseminarium och genomförd slutredovisning - Genomförd utställning, vanligtvis i anslutning till slutredovisningen - Fullständig slutrapport inlämnad i tid till respektive opponeringstillfälle - Godkänd opponering och inlämnad opponeringsrapport - Kompletterad rapport efter opponering inlämnad efter opponeringstillfälle på Itslearning3 med kommentarer och svar på framkommen opponering enligt nedanstående datum för respektive examinationstillfälle.

Översikt av proceduren i startfasen Nedanstående text inkluderas för att ge studenten ett intryck av proceduren i startfasen:

- Studenten ansvarar själv för att hitta ett lämpligt examensarbete - Det skriftliga eller muntliga uppdraget ska utvecklas till en projektplan. Man ska då akta sig för orimliga sekretesskrav eftersom enbart den offentliga delen av arbetet/rapporten ligger till grund för examination. - Examinatorn godkänner projektplanen när projektplanen anses ge studenten tillräckligt bra vägledning under genomförandefasen av projektarbetet. Godkänd projektplan krävs inför delredovisningen. - Även innan projektplanen blir godkänd brukar det vara möjligt att påbörja vissa aktiviteter så som litteraturorientering eller förstudie. - Inför delredovisningen ska en första version av metodkapitlet lämnas in.

Att tänka på inför examination av rapporten När ni lämnar in er rapport för opponering påbörjar examinationsprocessen av rapporten.

Det betyder bland annat:

- En rapport som inte godkänns för opponering blir underkänd. - Om rapporten inte redigeras inom angivna tidsramar efter opponeringen examineras versionen som inlämnades inför opponeringen. Detta innebär vanligtvis stor sannolikhet att rapporten blir underkänd.

När ni lämnar in en rapport för examination anses handledningen vara avslutad. Då har ni således inte längre rätt till handledning även om rapporten skulle bli underkänd.

3 Eller den lärplattform som KAU använder vid aktuell tidpunkt (gäller även ”Itslearning” i resten av texten)

Efter inlämning av en rapport för examination blir utgången antingen godkänd eller underkänd.

- Om rapporten är godkänd kan examinatorn ändå rekommendera vissa förbättringar, men det är i så fall upp till studenten att bestämma om den vill genomföra en sådan ändring. - Om en rapport endast kräver mindre redaktionella ändringar (så som något störande stavfel eller ett översättningsfel i titeln/abstract) kan examinatorn kräva att de åtgärdas (inom en angiven tidsram). Uteblir den redigerade rapporten blir utgången underkänd. - En rapport som kräver fortsatt projektarbete eller innehållsmässiga ändringar, innehåller slarv, eller som saknar akribi blir underkänd. - När rapporten är godkänd ska studenten ladda upp den på DIVA då detta är nödvändigt för att resultatet kan registreras i Ladok.

Appendix 1.2 Gantt time schedule

Appendix 2: Individual brainsketches

XII

XIII

Appendix 3: Morphological analysis of steering wheel

XIV

Appendix 4: Group brainstorming results

Appendix 5: Brainstorming with new restrictions

Figure 44. Concept II.

Figure 45. Concept III.

XVI

Figure 46. Concept IV.

XVII

Appendix 6: Result from 6-5-3 method

XVIII

XIX