• English

Meetings & Events


{{filtered.length}} / {{meetings.length}}
{{ search | json }}
{{ search.area | json }}
{{ search.year | json }}
{{ search.$ | json }}

List of Meetings and Events on {{selectedDate | date:'fullDate'}}

List of meetings for {{search.year}}

List of Meetings and Events - All


Automated Vehicles – Technology and Application

13 September 2016

Ad hoc meeting of WP.29/GRRF and WP.1 experts

Quick Facts

  • Date: 20 September 2016
  • Venue: Room VII, Palais des Nations, Geneva, Switzerland

During the third week of September 2016, three intergovernmental bodies dealing with automated vehicles had their sessions in the Palais des Nations in Geneva. Taking advantage of the presence of experts, the Working Party on Road Safety (WP. 1) and the Working Party on Brakes and Running Gear (GRRF) stopped their usual work on 20 September 2016 (afternoon) in order to meet together in the configuration of a joint meeting of WP.1, WP.29/GRRF and IG on ITS/AD experts.

The aim of this ad hoc meeting was to support an in-depth exchange of view facilitating the synchronization of activities in the various bodies.

20 September 2016 

14:30 - 14:45 Opening by the Co Chairs of the ad hoc meeting
  • L. Iorio
  • B. Frost
14:45 - 15:15 Part 1: Challenges and opportunities related to the usage of connected and automated vehicles in traffic
  • J. Valmain, Chair of WP1-IWG on Automated Driving
The challenges and opportunities that WP.1 is considering with regard to the circulation of automated vehicles.  The role WP.1 expects of WP.29 to address these points.
     
15:15 - 15:30

Q & A session

15:30 - 16:00

Coffee Break

16:00 - 16:30 Part 2: Challenges and opportunities related to the technology and functionality for automated vehicles
  • O. Kloeckner (Germany).
The current work plan for regulatory change:
•    Overview of the technology being considered
•    Timeline for delivery

     
16:30 - 16:45

Q & A session

16:45 - 17:15

Discussion

17:15 - 17:30

Wrap-up and Closing

The WP.1, WP.29 and ITS/AD experts received:
- a speech from Mr. Joël Valmain, as well as
- a presentation from Oliver Klöckner
Followed by a Q& A.

1. Some elements of the speech of Mr Joël Valmain:

- Context of the 2016 amendment to the Vienna Convention, aligning the Convention with the technical progress regulated at WP.29 (ABS, ESC, AEBS...)

- The reference to the 1958 Agreement and the 1998 Agreement in this amendment helps to work on technical regulations addressing Automation.

- There is a need, though, for a precise exchange of information as he considers that WP.1 is the only group in charge of road safety, and thus regulating traffic rule, especially Art. 13 of the Vienna Convention.

- The WP.1 informal working group on AD is reflecting on the interpretation of the current text of the convention in order to analyse what type of automation is addressed by the convention.

2. Presentation made by Oliver Klöckner: PDF

3. Q&A

Short report of the Q&A session:

The WP.1 delegate from Sweden wondered why GRRF was prioritizing its work on technical provisions applicable for lower levels of automation, if it would block technical progress and the introduction of these technologies. The Chair of GRRF noted that no Contracting Party and no other stakeholder presented any request or proposal related to higher level of automation and that no members of the industry expressed the need to do so at this stage. The expert from OICA confirmed some public relations activities on these technologies and explained that they were mostly related to market probing activities. The delegate from Slovakia wondered whether driver training would be necessary in order for drivers to understand and well control these new technologies. The delegate from Germany mentioned the work done on Human Machine Interface (HMI) to minimize system complexity and make systems intuitive for the driver. The WP.1 delegate from Belgium noted the Terms of Reference of the IWG on ACSF. He raised the question whether a driver or a system would be able to identify a highway in the sense of the Regulation. The expert from Finland, responding to the expert from Sweden, added that shuttles, with automation corresponding to those described in the SAE level 4 definition, would be locally or nationally approved. He noted that the work at the WP.1 level might have to be ahead of the regulatory work done at the GRRF level. The Chair of GRRF noted that the use of Remote Controlled Parking (RCP) systems may be prohibited by traffic laws in some Countries. The expert from WP.1 and GRRF experts noted that some future work could be of mutual interest, especially a reflection on secondary tasks that can be performed by drivers during automated driving phases.

 

 

Pictures taken during the session