DOCSLIB.ORG

Who Is in Control? Road Safety and Automation in Road Traffic Who Is in Control? Road Safety and Automation in Road Traffic

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Who Is in Control? Road Safety and Automation in Road Traffic Who Is in Control? Road Safety and Automation in Road Traffic SSubmitted by the expert from the Netherlands Distributed to GRVA as informal document GRVA-05-48 5th GRVA, 10-14 February 2020, agenda item 3 DUTCH SAFETY BOARD Who is in control? Road safety and automation in road traffic Who is in control? Road safety and automation in road traffic The Hague, November 2019 Photo cover: Dutch Safety Board The reports issued by the Dutch Safety Board are public. All reports are also available on the Safety Board’s website: www.safetyboard.nl - 2 - The Dutch Safety Board When accidents or disasters happen, the Dutch Safety Board investigates how it was possible for these to occur, with the aim of learning lessons for the future and, ultimately, improving safety in the Netherlands. The Safety Board is independent and is free to decide which incidents to investigate. In particular, it focuses on situations in which people’s personal safety is dependent on third parties, such as the government or companies. In certain cases the Board is under an obligation to carry out an investigation. Its investigations do not address issues of blame or liability. Dutch Safety Board Chairman: J.R.V.A. Dijsselbloem M.B.A. van Asselt S. Zouridis Secretary Director: C.A.J.F. Verheij Visiting address: Lange Voorhout 9 Postal address: PO Box 95404 2514 EA The Hague 2509 CK The Hague The Netherlands The Netherlands Telephone: +31 (0)70 333 7000 Website: safetyboard.nl E-mail: [email protected] N.B. This report is published in het Dutch and English language. If there is a difference in interpretation between the Dutch and English version, the Dutch text wil prevail. - 3 - CONTENT Considerations ........................................................................................................... 6 Summary .................................................................................................................... 8 Recommendations .....................................................................................................11 Abbreviations ............................................................................................................12 1 Introduction .........................................................................................................14 1.1 Road safety and automation ................................................................................ 14 1.2 Aim and research questions ................................................................................. 15 1.3 Working method .................................................................................................. 16 1.4 Terms of reference and definitions ....................................................................... 16 1.5 Involved parties .................................................................................................... 21 1.6 Guide for readers ................................................................................................. 22 2 Reference framework ......................................................................................... 23 2.1 Safe introduction of new technology ................................................................... 23 2.2 Cybersecurity ....................................................................................................... 26 3 Managing safety risks ..........................................................................................29 3.1 Immaturity of systems .......................................................................................... 30 3.2 Drivers as operators ............................................................................................. 37 3.3 Interaction between vehicles and drivers ............................................................. 44 3.4 Dynamics of automation ...................................................................................... 51 3.5 Cybersecurity ....................................................................................................... 56 3.6 Conclusions ...........................................................................................................61 4 Bottlenecks in the safe introduction and deployment of ADAS .........................62 4.1 Design .................................................................................................................. 62 4.2 Type approval and policy ..................................................................................... 66 4.3 Conclusions .......................................................................................................... 76 5 Bottlenecks in monitoring and adjustment .........................................................78 5.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 78 5.2 Lack of information ............................................................................................... 79 5.3 Learning from accidents and hazardous situations .............................................. 81 5.4 Learning from cybersecurity incidents ................................................................. 83 5.5 Conclusions .......................................................................................................... 86 6 Conclusions ..........................................................................................................87 - 4 - 7 Recommendations ............................................................................................... 90 References .................................................................................................................91 Appendix A. Explanation of the investigation .......................................................101 Appendix B. Responses to the draft report ..........................................................111 Appendix C. Accidents ...........................................................................................112 Appendix D. ADAS .................................................................................................136 Appendix E. Legislation and regulations ...............................................................146 - 5 - CONSIDERATIONS Safer cars thanks to innovation The history of the car is one of technological innovation. As a consequence, over time, cars have become more reliable, more comfortable and safer. Partly thanks to such innovations as crumple zones and airbags, road safety has improved drastically since the 1970s. Over the past few years, however, the improvement in road safety has stagnated: every year, there are more than 600 deaths on the roads in the Netherlands and around 21,000 serious injuries. In the face of this worrying situation, both national and European governments have announced the ambition of ‘zero deaths’ on the roads by the year 2050, starting with a reduction to not more than 500 road fatalities in 2020. The expectation is that innovation - and more specifically automation - will make a contribution in the form of advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS) such as emergency braking systems and adaptive cruise control. Fundamental change in the character of the car It is important to realize that modern cars equipped with ADAS are incomparable in technical terms with their predecessors of just a few decades ago. New cars can already take over numerous tasks from the driver, for example steering, braking and accelerating. The ADAS in fact carry out these actions on the basis of their own observations and their own decisions, coordinated by algorithms. Vehicles of this kind are equipped with so much hardware and software that they are effectively computers on wheels. This fact has far-reaching consequences for drivers, other road users and the infrastructure. It effectively implies a fundamental change in the character of the car: a transformation which, as is the case for any innovation, delivers not only progress but also new safety risks. Driving is becoming more difficult and easier at the same time Automation means that relatively simple tasks can be taken over and executed at a constant and higher level of safety. The difficult tasks (for the time being tasks that are too difficult to solve with automation) are left to human drivers. Automation is changing the human task because drivers are required to remain ‘constantly alert’ just in case the computer does not know what to do, or intervenes wrongly. This represents an additional difficulty since automation in fact reduces the level of alertness. In just a few short seconds, drivers are required to understand that intervention is necessary, before making the adequate response. After all, the margins on the roads are minimal. The outcome is a paradoxical situation in which ADAS that are intended to make the life of the driver easier in fact make it specifically more difficult. - 6 - The autonomous car is still a long way off When the discussion turns to the automation of cars, the focus is often on the future vision of autonomous cars, in which the driver if superfluous. The car drives itself, while the people it is carrying are busy with something entirely different. This distant-future vision appeals to the imagination of policy makers, engineers, town and city planners and philosophers. But we are still a long way from reaching that stage. Certainly in built-up areas where cars and vulnerable traffic participants come together, the future with fully autonomous cars is still a long way away, if it can ever in fact be achieved. Urgent attention
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Taxes and Charges on Road Users
    House of Commons Transport Committee Taxes and charges on road users Sixth Report of Session 2008–09 Report, together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed date 14 July 2009 HC 103 (incorporating HC 1175 of 2007–2008) Published on 24 July 2009 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £0.00 The Transport Committee The Transport Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration and policy of the Department for Transport and its associated public bodies. Current membership Mrs Louise Ellman MP (Labour/Co-operative, Liverpool Riverside) (Chairman) Mr David Clelland MP (Labour, Tyne Bridge) Mr Philip Hollobone MP (Conservative, Kettering) Mr John Leech MP (Liberal Democrat, Manchester, Withington) Mr Eric Martlew MP (Labour, Carlisle) Mark Pritchard MP (Conservative, The Wrekin) Ms Angela C Smith MP (Labour, Sheffield, Hillsborough) Sir Peter Soulsby MP (Labour, Leicester South) Graham Stringer MP (Labour, Manchester Blackley) Mr David Wilshire MP (Conservative, Spelthorne) Sammy Wilson MP (Democratic Unionist, East Antrim) The following were also members of the Committee during the period covered by this report: Clive Efford MP (Labour, Eltham) David Simpson MP (Democratic Unionist, Upper Bann) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk. Publications The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House. All publications of the Committee (including press notices) are on the Internet at www.parliament.uk/transcom.
    [Show full text]
  • SAE International® PROGRESS in TECHNOLOGY SERIES Downloaded from SAE International by Eric Anderson, Thursday, September 10, 2015
    Downloaded from SAE International by Eric Anderson, Thursday, September 10, 2015 Connectivity and the Mobility Industry Edited by Dr. Andrew Brown, Jr. SAE International® PROGRESS IN TECHNOLOGY SERIES Downloaded from SAE International by Eric Anderson, Thursday, September 10, 2015 Connectivity and the Mobility Industry Downloaded from SAE International by Eric Anderson, Thursday, September 10, 2015 Other SAE books of interest: Green Technologies and the Mobility Industry By Dr. Andrew Brown, Jr. (Product Code: PT-146) Active Safety and the Mobility Industry By Dr. Andrew Brown, Jr. (Product Code: PT-147) Automotive 2030 – North America By Bruce Morey (Product Code: T-127) Multiplexed Networks for Embedded Systems By Dominique Paret (Product Code: R-385) For more information or to order a book, contact SAE International at 400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096-0001, USA phone 877-606-7323 (U.S. and Canada) or 724-776-4970 (outside U.S. and Canada); fax 724-776-0790; e-mail [email protected]; website http://store.sae.org. Downloaded from SAE International by Eric Anderson, Thursday, September 10, 2015 Connectivity and the Mobility Industry By Dr. Andrew Brown, Jr. Warrendale, Pennsylvania, USA Copyright © 2011 SAE International. eISBN: 978-0-7680-7461-1 Downloaded from SAE International by Eric Anderson, Thursday, September 10, 2015 400 Commonwealth Drive Warrendale, PA 15096-0001 USA E-mail: [email protected] Phone: 877-606-7323 (inside USA and Canada) 724-776-4970 (outside USA) Fax: 724-776-0790 Copyright © 2011 SAE International. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, distributed, or transmitted, in any form or by any means without the prior written permission of SAE.
    [Show full text]
  • Issues in Autonomous Vehicle Testing and Deployment
    Issues in Autonomous Vehicle Testing and Deployment Updated April 23, 2021 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R45985 SUMMARY R45985 Issues in Autonomous Vehicle Testing and April 23, 2021 Deployment Bill Canis Autonomous vehicles have the potential to bring major improvements in highway safety. Motor Specialist in Industrial vehicle crashes caused an estimated 36,096 fatalities in 2019; a study by the National Highway Organization and Business Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has shown that 94% of crashes involve human error. For this and other reasons, federal oversight of the testing and deployment of autonomous vehicles has been of considerable interest to Congress. In the 115th Congress, autonomous vehicle legislation passed the House as H.R. 3388, the SELF DRIVE Act, and a separate bill, S. 1885, the AV START Act, was reported from a Senate committee. Neither bill was enacted. Comprehensive legislation concerning autonomous vehicles was not introduced in the 116th Congress, but the America’s Transportation Infrastructure Act of 2019, S. 2302, which was reported by the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, would have encouraged research and development of infrastructure that could accommodate new technologies such as autonomous vehicles. Comprehensive legislation has not been introduced in the 117th Congress as of the date of this report. In recent years, private and government testing of autonomous vehicles has increased significantly, although it is likely that widespread use of fully autonomous vehicles—with no driver attention needed—lies many years in the future. The pace of autonomous vehicle commercialization was slowed after to the 2018 death in Arizona of a pedestrian struck by an autonomous vehicle, which highlighted the challenges of duplicating human decisionmaking by artificial intelligence.
    [Show full text]
  • Global Autonomous Driving Market Outlook, 2018
    Global Autonomous Driving Market Outlook, 2018 The Global Autonomous Driving Market is Expected Grow up to $173.15 B by 2030, with Shared Mobility Services Contributing to 65.31% Global Automotive & Transportation Research Team at Frost & Sullivan K24A-18 March 2018 Contents Section Slide Number Executive Summary 7 2017 Key Highlights 8 Leading Players in terms of AD Patents Filed in 2017 10 Sensors Currently Used Across Applications 11 Next Generations of Sensor Fusion 12 Future Approach in Hardware and Software toward L5 Automation 13 Level 3 Automated Vehicles—What could be new? 14 2018 Top 5 Predictions 15 Research Scope and Segmentation 16 Research Scope 17 Vehicle Segmentation 18 Market Definition—Rise of Automation 19 Key Questions this Study will Answer 20 Impact of Autonomous Vehicles Driving Development of Vital Facets in 21 Business and Technology K24A-18 2 Contents (continued) Section Slide Number Transformational Impact of Automation on the Industry 22 Impact on the Development of Next-Generation Depth Sensing 23 Impact on Ownership and User-ship Structures 24 Impact of Autonomous Driving on Future Vehicle Design 25 Impact of Investments on Technology Development 26 Major Market and Technology Trends in Automated Driving—2018 27 Top Trends Driving the Autonomous Driving Market—2018 28 Market Trends 29 1. Autonomous Shared Mobility Solutions 30 Case Study—Waymo 31 2. Collective Intelligence for Fleet Management 32 Case Study—BestMile 33 3. Cyber Security of Autonomous Cars 34 Case Study—Karamba Security 35 K24A-18 3 Contents (continued) Section Slide Number Technology Trends 36 1. Convergence of Artificial Intelligence and Automated Driving 37 Case Study—Mobileye 38 2.
    [Show full text]
  • AUSTRALIA Robert Hogan General Manager, Vehicle Safety Standards
    GOVERNMENT STATUS REPORT – was 3.3 per cent. Hospital admissions data also AUSTRALIA point to little, if any, national improvement in the number of people who were seriously injured in road crashes. Robert Hogan General Manager, Vehicle Safety Standards National Road Safety Strategy 2001–2010 Department of Infrastructure and Transport In November 2000, Australia’s transport Ministers AUSTRALIA endorsed the National Road Safety Strategy 2001– 2010. The strategy provided a framework for prioritising the road safety activities of federal, STATUS OF SAFETY PROBLEMS AND state, territory and local governments, as well as TRENDS other organisations that could influence road safety outcomes. Its target was to reduce the annual road General progress fatality rate by at least 40 per cent over the 10-year Australia has achieved substantial reductions in period to the end of 2010: from 9.3 deaths to no road crash fatalities over the last 30 years, despite a more than 5.6 deaths per 100,000 population. 50 per cent growth in population and a two-fold increase in registered motor vehicles. Between Despite significant gains over the decade, the 40 1980 and 2010, the nation's annual road fatality rate per cent reduction target was not reached (see declined from 22.3 to 6.1 deaths per 100,000 Figure 2). By the end of 2010 an actual reduction people. of 34 per cent had been achieved and the fatality rate stood at 6.1 deaths per 100,000 population – The chart below shows the progressive reduction in some way short of the 5.6 target.
    [Show full text]
  • Trends in the Netherlands 2019 Trends in the Netherlands 2019 Explanation of Symbols Colophon
    Trends in the Netherlands 2019 Netherlands the in Trends Trends in the Netherlands 2019 Trends in the Netherlands 2019 Explanation of symbols Colophon Publisher . Data not available Statistics Netherlands * Provisional figure Henri Faasdreef 312, 2492 JP The Hague www.cbs.nl ** Revised provisional figure X Publication prohibited (confidential figure) Prepress: Textcetera and Statistics Netherlands, The Hague – Nil Press: Sumis Design: Edenspiekermann – (Between two figures) inclusive 0 (0.0) Less than half of unit concerned Information empty cell Not applicable Telephone +31 88 570 70 70 Via contact form: www.cbs.nl/infoservice 2018–2019 2018 to 2019 inclusive 2018/2019 Average for 2018 to 2019 inclusive © Statistics Netherlands, The Hague/Heerlen/Bonaire, 2019. 2018/’19 Crop year, financial year, school year, etc., beginning in Reproduction is permitted, provided Statistics Netherlands is quoted as the source. 2018 and ending in 2019 2016/’17– Crop year, financial year, etc., 2016/’17 to 2018/’19 2018/’19 inclusive Due to rounding, some totals may not correspond to the sum of the separate figures. Contents 1. Society 5 International trade 89 Almost everyone and everything online 5 Macroeconomic trends 93 Figures 10 Manufacturing 98 Culture and society 10 Prices 101 Education 14 Trade, accommodation and food Environment 18 services 105 Health and care 24 Transport 110 Leisure 30 Nature 36 3. Labour and income 115 Population 40 More fatigued, less concerned 115 Security and justice 48 Figures 120 Traffic 54 Income and wealth 120 Well-being 58 Labour 125 Social security 129 2. Economy 63 Again strong economic growth 63 4. About CBS 135 Figures 69 Agriculture 69 Business services 76 Construction and housing 78 Energy 82 Enterprises 86 Contents 3 68% of all over-75s go online 78% of all Dutch consumers buy on the internet 4 Trends in the Netherlands 2019 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Issues in Autonomous Vehicle Deployment Name Redacted Specialist in Industrial Organization and Business
    Issues in Autonomous Vehicle Deployment name redacted Specialist in Industrial Organization and Business Updated May 17, 2018 Congressional Research Service 7-.... www.crs.gov R44940 Issues in Autonomous Vehicle Deployment Summary Legislation recently passed by the House of Representatives—H.R. 3388—and pending in the Senate—S. 1885—would provide new regulatory tools to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to oversee autonomous vehicles. Autonomous vehicles are seen as a way to reduce motor vehicle crashes; for example, there were 37,461 deaths from motor vehicle crashes in 2016 and nearly all of them were caused by driver error. However, despite unanimous approval in House and Senate committees and on the House floor, the legislation has proven controversial in the wake of several high-profile accidents involving autonomous vehicles being tested on public roads. At present, no fully autonomous vehicles are available for public use. Many new vehicles have automated some driver functions, but all require a human to monitor the driving environment and control the vehicle. However, rapid advances in technology have made it likely that vehicles with high levels of automation will be on the market within a few years, raising questions about the adequacy of existing methods of safety oversight. The federal government and the states share motor vehicle regulation, with the federal government responsible for vehicle safety and states for driver-related aspects such as licensing and registration. While NHTSA has the statutory authority to regulate all types of motor vehicles, its traditional standard-setting process would take many years at a time when vehicle innovation is changing rapidly; standards envisioned now could be obsolete by the time they took effect.
    [Show full text]
  • CHOP PCPS IR Report 03
    The State of Child Occupant Protection Interim Report 2003 Monitoring Trends In its fifth year of data collection, the Partners for Child Passenger Safety (PCPS) research team works simultaneously in each phase of the research-to-action-cycle with a continued focus on saving children from injury and death in motor vehicle crashes. The team has gone beyond identification and in-depth study of crashes involving children to develop- ment and implementation of interventions. Monitoring trends over time is a vital next step to evaluate the success of these efforts. The field of child occupant protection has experienced a recent infusion of new technology, laws and targeted educational campaigns fueled, in part, by PCPS research findings. Further, there are approximately 4 million births in the United States each year. Each day, new parents learn about child passenger safety (CPS) issues for the first time. 1 Surveillance PCPS’ continued surveillance of children in automobile 6 2 crashes serves as a unique national resource that helps Impact Identify Issues set the agenda for improving the protection of chil- Research-to-Action INSIDE Cycle dren. Real-world current data provide a snapshot of Trends 2 how our nation’s children fare in motor vehicle crash- Research Findings 2002-2003 4 es, and in-depth engineering studies by the research 5 3 Intervention 6 team identify how their protection can be Intervention In-depth Study improved. Impact 7 4 Recognizing the importance of continued monitoring, Publish Research Research Review 8 State Farm Insurance Companies® and The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia have renewed their commitment to child passenger safety by extending PCPS to at least 2005.
    [Show full text]
  • DRIVE PILOT: an Automated Driving System for the Highway Introducing DRIVE PILOT: an Automated Driving System for the Highway Table of Contents
    Introducing DRIVE PILOT: An Automated Driving System for the Highway Introducing DRIVE PILOT: An Automated Driving System for the Highway Table of Contents Introduction 4 Validation Methods 36 Our Vision for Automated Driving 5 Integrated Verification Testing 36 The Safety Heritage of Mercedes-Benz 6 Field Operation Testing 38 Levels of Driving Automation 8 Validation of Environmental Perception and Positioning 40 On the Road to Automated Driving: Virtual On-Road Testing 42 Intelligent World Drive on Five Continents 12 Validation of Driver Interaction 44 Final Customer-Oriented On-Road Validation 44 Functional Description of DRIVE PILOT 14 How does DRIVE PILOT work? 16 Security, Data Policy and Legal Framework 46 Vehicle Cybersecurity 46 General Design Rules of DRIVE PILOT 18 Heritage, Cooperation, Continuous Improvement 47 Operational Design Domain 18 Data Recording 48 Object and Event Detection and Response 20 Federal, State and Local Laws and Regulations 49 Human Machine Interface 23 Consumer Education and Training 50 Fallback and Minimal Risk Condition 25 Conclusion 52 Safety Design Rules 26 Safety Process 28 Crashworthiness 30 During a Crash 32 After a Crash 35 Introduction Ever since Carl Benz invented the automobile in 1886, Mercedes-Benz vehicles proudly bearing the three-pointed star have been setting standards in vehicle safety. Daimler AG, the manufacturer of all Mercedes-Benz vehicles, continues to refine and advance the field of safety in road traffic through the groundbreaking Mercedes-Benz “Intelligent Drive” assistance systems, which are increasingly connected as they set new milestones on the road to fully automated driving. 4 Introduction Our Vision for Automated Driving Mercedes-Benz envisions a future with fewer traffic accidents, less stress, and greater enjoyment and productivity for road travelers.
    [Show full text]
  • Towards a Viable Autonomous Driving Research Platform
    Towards a Viable Autonomous Driving Research Platform Junqing Wei, Jarrod M. Snider, Junsung Kim, John M. Dolan, Raj Rajkumar and Bakhtiar Litkouhi Abstract— We present an autonomous driving research vehi- cle with minimal appearance modifications that is capable of a wide range of autonomous and intelligent behaviors, including smooth and comfortable trajectory generation and following; lane keeping and lane changing; intersection handling with or without V2I and V2V; and pedestrian, bicyclist, and workzone detection. Safety and reliability features include a fault-tolerant computing system; smooth and intuitive autonomous-manual switching; and the ability to fully disengage and power down the drive-by-wire and computing system upon E-stop. The vehicle has been tested extensively on both a closed test field and public roads. I. INTRODUCTION Fig. 1: The CMU autonomous vehicle research platform in Imagining autonomous passenger cars in mass production road test has been difficult for many years. Reliability, safety, cost, appearance and social acceptance are only a few of the legitimate concerns. Advances in state-of-the-art software with simple driving scenarios, including distance keeping, and sensing have afforded great improvements in reliability lane changing and intersection handling [14], [6], [3], [12]. and safe operation of autonomous vehicles in real-world The NAVLAB project at Carnegie Mellon University conditions. As autonomous driving technologies make the (CMU) has built a series of experimental platforms since transition from laboratories to the real world, so must the the 1990s which are able to run autonomously on freeways vehicle platforms used to test and develop them. The next [13], but they can only drive within a single lane.
    [Show full text]
  • Technologies for the Prevention of Run Off Road and Low Overlap Head-On Collisions
    TECHNOLOGIES FOR THE PREVENTION OF RUN OFF ROAD AND LOW OVERLAP HEAD-ON COLLISIONS Colin, Grover Matthew, Avery Thatcham Research UK Iain, Knight Apollo Vehicle Safety Limited UK Paper Number 15-0351 INTRODUCTION A substantial number of serious collisions occur when a vehicle: • Runs off the edge of the road way and collides with roadside furniture such as trees; and • Crosses the centre line of the road and collides head-on with an oncoming vehicle. A proportion of these are very likely to be caused by some form of inattention and/or distraction and several new technologies have been introduced into the market with the intention of preventing these crashes. Actions to promote the fitment of “lateral assist” systems are included within the Euro NCAP programme (Euro NCAP, 2014): • Lane Keep Assist Test and Assesment Procedure for the 2016 rating scheme • Advanced Lateral Support System Test and Assessment Procedure for 2018 rating scheme. The aim of this research was to: • Analyse the frequency and severity of relevant collisions in order to understand the potential impact of lateral control technologies • Characterise crashes to inform the development of performance criteria that will be relevant to the real world • Undertake initial research to explore the capability of different technologies • Investigate the potential of candidate test procedures that could form part of future assessments. LATERAL ASSIST TECHNOLOGIES A wide range of lateral assist technologies have been developed and put into production since the beginning of the 21st century. These include blind spot monitoring systems but these have not been considered in-depth in this paper because they are intended to be of benefit in crashes that occur during deliberate lane changes rather than crashes that occur because of unintended departure from the lane or road.
    [Show full text]
  • The Future of Automated Vehicles and Assert That a Certain Kind of Vehicle Is Likely to Succeed, E.G
    The Future of vehicles Automated Vehicles Scenarios for automated vehicles and the consequences for mobility, safety and the environment Bachelor thesis Anne van der Veen - S2322668 - University of Groningen - 2015 Abstract In the last decade, automation has entered the realm of vehicles. The automated vehicles that are being developed will have a large impact on the transportation network, which in turn impacts mobility. To prepare for what’s to come it is vital to get an understanding of what the future might look like. Because the technology is still in an early stage, it can develop in numerous wildly different directions. This research assesses these different directions by looking at what kind of automated vehicles are likely to occur. These vehicle types are defined using two key factors: the level of automation (full / limited automation) and the kind of mobility the vehicle provides (personal / on-demand / centralized). It does not look at the status quo but only at the future, which is why non-automated vehicles are not within the scope of this research. This results in six categories of automated vehicles. The impact of each automated vehicle on the transportation network and on mobility is assessed using scenarios and the assumption that that vehicle type becomes dominant. Using multiple expert interviews, these scenarios are explored. The result is that the impact of automated vehicles is very dependent on the kind of vehicle, that the impacts are complex and rather difficult to predict and that efficiency and that safety are greatly impacted because of these technological advancements. University of Groningen - Thesis A.
    [Show full text]