Your Selections

Safety testing and procedures
Show Only

Collections

File Formats

Content Types

Dates

Sectors

Topics

Authors

Publishers

Affiliations

Committees

Events

Magazine

   This content is not included in your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.

Safety-Relevant Guidance for On-Road Testing of SAE Level 3, 4, and 5 Prototype Automated Driving System (ADS)-Operated Vehicles

On-Road Automated Driving (ORAD) committee
  • Ground Vehicle Standard
  • J3018_201909
  • Current
Published 2019-09-04 by SAE International in United States
This document provides safety-relevant guidance for on-road testing of vehicles being operated by prototype conditional, high, and full (Levels 3 to 5) ADS, as defined by SAE J3016. It does not include guidance for evaluating the performance of post-production ADS-equipped vehicles. Moreover, this guidance only addresses testing of ADS-operated vehicles as overseen by in-vehicle fallback test drivers (IFTD). These guidelines do not address: Remote driving, including remote fallback test driving of prototype ADS-operated test vehicles in driverless operation. (Note: The term “remote fallback test driver” is included as a defined term herein and is intended to be addressed in a future iteration of this document. However, at this time, too little is published or known about this type of testing to provide even preliminary guidance.) Testing of driver support features (i.e., Levels 1 and 2), which rely on a human driver to perform part of the dynamic driving task (DDT) and to supervise the driving automation feature’s performance in real time. (Refer to SAE J3016.) Closed-course testing. Simulation testing (except for training purposes). Component-level testing.
This content contains downloadable datasets
Annotation ability available
   This content is not included in your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.

Safety Assessment of General Aviation Airplanes and Rotorcraft in Commercial Service

S-18C ARP5150A and ARP5151A Working Group
  • Aerospace Standard
  • ARP5151A
  • Current
Published 2019-08-20 by SAE International in United States
This document describes a process that may be used to perform the ongoing safety assessment for (1) GAR aircraft and components (hereafter, aircraft), and (2) commercial operators of GAR aircraft. The process described herein is intended to support an overall safety management program. It is to help a company establish and meet its own internal standards. The process described herein identifies a systematic means, but not the only means, to assess continuing airworthiness. Ongoing safety management is an activity dedicated to assuring that risk is identified and properly eliminated or controlled. The safety management process includes both safety assessment and economic decision-making. While economic decision-making (factors related to scheduling, parts, and cost) is an integral part of the safety management process, this document addresses only the ongoing safety assessment process. This ongoing safety assessment process includes safety problem identification and corrective action, tracking of problems, the application of “lessons learned” to improve the efficiency of the process, and reduction of the time to achieve corrective action in the field. ARP5150 is the recommended practice for…
This content contains downloadable datasets
Annotation ability available
   This content is not included in your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.

‘Road Race’ for AV Testing May Be Slowing

Autonomous Vehicle Engineering: May 2019

Stuart Birch
  • Magazine Article
  • 19AVEP05_10
Published 2019-05-01 by SAE International in United States

To optimize safety, as well as cost- and time-efficiency, experts espouse increased virtual testing of autonomous vehicles as preferable to the industry's rush to test on public roads.

Chris Hoyle, technical director of software specialist rFpro, believes the race by auto and technology companies to be ahead of competitor programs involving autonomous vehicle (AV) testing on public roads is losing momentum.

Annotation ability available
   This content is not included in your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.

A Trajectory-Based Method for Scenario Analysis and Test Effort Reduction for Highly Automated Vehicle

Tsinghua University-Yunlong Qi, Yugong Luo, Keqiang Li, Wei Kong, Yongsheng Wang
Published 2019-04-02 by SAE International in United States
Unlike the test of passive safety of traditional vehicles, highly automated vehicles (HAV) need more capabilities to be tested. Besides, there are more parameter combinations for the scenarios that need to be tested for each capability, resulting in a high time-consuming and costs for the autonomous vehicle tests. This paper proposes a method for scenario analysis and test effort reduction. Firstly, the trajectories of the vehicle under test (VUT) in the scenario are analyzed, and the trajectories which lead to the test mission failure are obtained. Based on the above trajectories, the threshold that lead to the test mission failure, or a combination of thresholds are analyzed. The above thresholds or a combination of thresholds values are defined as Scenario Character Parameter (SCP). The process of the analysis of the SCPs are related to the abilities of the HAV, but does not depend on the specific algorithm of the HAV. Therefore, through the above analysis of trajectories and SCPs, the ability of the scenario to measure the performance of HAVs can be quantized. After completing…
This content contains downloadable datasets
Annotation ability available
   This content is not included in your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.

FRED II Quasistatic Seat Testing Rearward: An Improved Method Based on the SAE H-point Manikin

Collision Research & Analysis Inc.-Samuel White
Ford Motor Company-Roger Burnett
Published 2019-04-02 by SAE International in United States
Various methods have been used to load a seat in the rear direction, including FMVSS 207, assorted body blocks and QST (quasistatic seat test). However, each method lacks some critical aspect of occupant loading of the seat or is too complex for routine development work. A new method is presented to determine the strength and energy transfer of a seat to an occupant in rear impacts that reflects how an occupant interacts with the seat in a rear impact. A metal-cast H-point manikin, called FRED II, was modified to support a loading bar and was pulled rearward into the seatback by a hydraulic ram. The force and displacement of the loading and the inboard and outboard seatback angle were measured. The response of the seat was recorded by video. The moment about the recliner pivot at peak force was determined by aligning the center of the recliner in side views of the seat position initially and at peak load. The height of the cable above the center of the recliner was determined giving the moment…
This content contains downloadable datasets
Annotation ability available
   This content is not included in your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.

Determination of Validation Testing Scenarios for an ADAS Functionality: Case Study

ZF-Oleg Kirovskii
Published 2019-04-02 by SAE International in United States
As the engineering community continues working on automated driving (AD) functionalities, the topic of safety validation still provides fuel for discussions. Despite the vehicles equipped with higher level AD functionalities ready to enter service on public roads, there is still no state-of-the-art process created for safety validation procedures. In this situation, vehicles with similar functionalities may end up coming through fundamentally different validation procedure, and the public may be exposed to additional risks.This paper fist formulates requirements which safety validation process needs to fulfill. The requirements are based on ISO 26262, PAS 21448 (SOTIF), and the state of the art requirements typical for safety applications. Then, the process of implementation of those requirements is sketched.
This content contains downloadable datasets
Annotation ability available
   This content is not included in your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.

Study on a Method for Evaluating the Safety of the Braking Control Algorithm for Automated Driving System When Following

National Traffic Safety and Environment-Masato Gokan, Nobuhisa Tanaka, Yoshimi Furukawa, Tunetoshi Iwase, Taichi Hirowatari
Published 2019-04-02 by SAE International in United States
The purpose of this study is to develop a method for evaluating the safety of the braking control algorithm for automated driving under mixed traffic flow of automated driving system and vehicles driven by drivers. We consider that the automated driving system should be controlled such that it blends in with mixed traffic. Therefore, in evaluating the safety of braking control for the automated driving system when following, the influence of the automated driving system on the driver of the following vehicle is an important evaluation index.First, we analyzed past traffic accidents in Japan to determine a suitable traffic environment for evaluating the safety of the braking control algorithm for the automated driving system when following.Second, the driver’s braking operations were measured using actual vehicles in this situation. We developed a method of generating sample algorithms of braking control based on the driver’s braking operations.Finally, we developed a method of identifying the most suitable range of parameters of braking control algorithms by evaluating these sample algorithms based on the results of actual experiments.This evaluation method…
This content contains downloadable datasets
Annotation ability available
   This content is not included in your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.

A Fault Tolerant Time Interval Process for Functional Safety Development

Ford Motor Co., Ltd.-Daniel Denomme, Sam Hooson
kVA-James Winkelman
Published 2019-04-02 by SAE International in United States
During development of complex automotive technologies, a significant engineering effort is often dedicated to ensuring the safe performance of these systems. An important aspect to consider when assessing the viability of different safety designs or strategies is the time period from the occurrence of a fault to the violation of a Safety Goal (SG). This time period is commonly referred to as the Fault Tolerant Time Interval (FTTI). In Automotive Safety, ISO 26262 [1] calls for the identification and appropriate partitioning of the FTTI, however very little guidance is provided on how to do this. This paper presents a process, covering the entire safety development lifecycle, for the identification of timing constraints and the development of associated requirements necessary to prevent Safety Goal violations.
Annotation ability available
   This content is not included in your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.

Enabling Efficient Functional Safety Audits - The Missing Link between ISO 26262 and Automotive SPICE

Dyson Technology Ltd.-Ireri Ibarra
Volvo Group-Per Johannessen
Published 2019-04-02 by SAE International in United States
In the field of electric and electronic (E/E) design for the automotive industry, there are separate traditions related to functional safety and software quality assurance. Both relying on the evaluation of the processes used; Automotive SPICE provides detailed guidance on how to perform this evaluation whilst ISO 26262 does not and simply mention Automotive SPICE as one possible solution. ISO 26262 additionally requires for an evaluation of the functional safety achieved by the product and uses the process evaluation (or functional safety audit in ISO 26262 terms) to support the final functional safety assessment. The purpose is to evaluate the implementation of the necessary safety processes according to the claimed scope defined in the safety plan.Automotive SPICE does not make a distinction on whether the application of the software under evaluation is safety related or not. ISO 26262 requires formal functional safety audits as a minimum for the part of the life cycle activities related to elements having ASIL C and ASIL D requirementsIn this paper we show how the link between ISO 26262 and…
Annotation ability available
   This content is not included in your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.

AD-EYE: A Co-Simulation Platform for Early Verification of Functional Safety Concepts

KTH Royal Institute of Technology-Naveen Mohan, Martin Törngren
Published 2019-04-02 by SAE International in United States
Automated Driving is revolutionizing many of the traditional ways of operation in the automotive industry. The impact on safety engineering of automotive functions is arguably one of the most important changes. There has been a need to re-think the impact of the partial or complete absence of the human driver (in terms of a supervisory entity) in not only newly developed functions but also in the qualification of the use of legacy functions in new contexts. The scope of the variety of scenarios that a vehicle may encounter even within a constrained Operational Design Domain, and the highly dynamic nature of Automated Driving, mean that new methods such as simulation can greatly aid the process of safety engineering.This paper discusses the need for early verification of the Functional Safety Concepts (FSCs), details the information typically available at this stage in the product lifecycle, and proposes a co-simulation platform named AD-EYE designed for exploiting the possibilities in an industrial context by evaluating design decisions and refining Functional Safety Requirements based on a reusable scenario database.Leveraging our…
Annotation ability available