ADAS ADS Companion-2022

ADAS/ADS
COMPANION
Knowledge for Tomorrowʼs Automotive Engineering

SEMINARS CONFERENCES KNOWLEDGE
Safer Mobility
Mobility.
To ensure that all modern in-car assistance

systems keep pace with reality, MESSRING
manufactures its Adult Pedestrian Target in
accordance with the latest NCAP and ACEA
guidelines and the ISO 19206-2 standard.
www.messring.de
ADAS/ADS Companion 2022/23
Legal & NCAP

Requirements
Page 19 - 85
Processes & Standards
Page 86 - 100
Scenarios & Databases
Page 101 - 103
SafetyAssurance
Page 104 - 105
Verification &
Validation
Technologies
Page 106 - 115
Life Cycle
Management
Page 116 - 118

i
Table of Contents
ADAS/ADS Companion 2022/23 36 SafetyWissen: EU 2021/646 Emergency Lane-

Keeping Systems (ELKS)
6 Table of Contents
37 SafetyWissen: 2021/1341/EU - Driver Drowsiness
8 Preface and Attention Warning Systems
9 Editorial Board 39 Seminar: Vehicle Safety under Self-Certification
10 Seminars at carhs.training - Your Benefits 40 Seminar: Product Liability in the Automobile
11 In-house Seminars Industry
12 SafetyWissen: ADAS/AD Definitions 41 Event: SafetyWeek
14 SafetyWissen: UNECE Vehicle Classification 42 Event: Auto[nom]Mobil
15 SafetyWissen: U.S. Motor Vehicle Classification 43 Event: SafetyUpDate
16 SafetyWissen: Levels of Driving Automation 44 Event: SafetyTesting Challenge
17 SafetyWissen: SAE J3016 - SAE Levels 46 SafetyWissen: Consumer Testing (NCAP)
18 SafetyWissen: Vehicle Automation Modes Assistance System Rating Matrix
48 Seminar: Automated Driving - Safeguarding and
Legal & NCAP Requirements Market Introduction
19 Seminar: Introduction to Active Safety of Vehicles 49 Seminar: NCAP - New Car Assessment Programs
20 SafetyWissen: UNECE Rulemaking Process 50 SafetyWissen: Euro NCAP / ANCAP AEB VRU-
21 SafetyWissen: New Assessment/Test Method Pedestrian
for Automated Driving (NATM) Guidelines for 52 SafetyWissen: Euro NCAP / ANCAP AEB VRU-
Validating Automated Driving System (ADS) Cyclist
22 Seminar: International Safety and Crash-Test 55 SafetyWissen: Euro NCAP / ANCAP AEB / LSS
Regulations PTW
23 Seminar: Briefing on the Worldwide Status of 58 Event: Euro NCAP UpDate 2022
Automated Vehicle Policies 59 SafetyWissen: Euro NCAP / ANCAP Test Method
24 SafetyWissen: UN R79 Commanded and for AEB Car-to-Car
Automatically Commanded Steering Functions 64 SafetyWissen: Euro NCAP / ANCAP Test Method
26 SafetyWissen: UN R131 Advanced Emergency for
Braking System (AEBS) for M2, M3 and N2, N3 Lane Support Systems
vehicles 66 SafetyWissen: Euro NCAP / ANCAP Safe Driving
27 SafetyWissen: Test of ESC Systems in UN R140, Assessment
GTR 8 and FMVSS 126 68 Seminar: Euro NCAP - Compact
28 SafetyWissen: UN R151 Blind Spot Information 69 SafetyWissen: IIHS AEB / Front Crash Prevention
System for the Detection of Bicycles Test
29 SafetyWissen: UN R152 Advanced Emergency 69 SafetyWissen: IIHS Test Scenarios for AEB
Braking System (AEBS) for M1 and N1 vehicles Pedestrian
31 SafetyWissen: UN R155 Cyber Security and Cyber 70 SafetyWissen: U.S. NCAP Crash Imminent Braking
Security Management System 70 SafetyWissen: U.S. NCAP Forward Collision
32 SafetyWissen: UN R156 Software Update and Warning
Software Updates Management System 71 SafetyWissen: U.S. NCAP Rear Automatic Braking
33 SafetyWissen: UN R157 ALKS Test Scenarios 72 SafetyWissen: U.S. NCAP Roadmap
35 SafetyWissen: EU General Safety Regulation 73 SafetyWissen: KNCAP AEB Tests
2019/2144 - ADAS Requirements
6
i
74 SafetyWissen: JNCAP Preventive Safety Scenarios & Databases

Performance Evaluation
101 SafetyWissen: What is a Scenario and a Scenario-
75 SafetyWissen: C-NCAP Active Safety Rating
based Approach in the Development and
77 SafetyWissen: C-NCAP Active Safety Roadmap Validation of ADAS/ADS Systems?
2025
102 SafetyWissen: PEGASUS 6-Layer Model
78 SafetyWissen: i-VISTA Intelligent Vehicle
103 SafetyWissen: Scenario Databases
Integrated Systems Test Area
81 Event: Automotive Safety Summit Shanghai Safety Assurance
82 SafetyWissen: Latin NCAP Safety Assist
104 SafetyWissen: Responsibility Sensitive Safety
85 SafetyWissen: Latin NCAP AEB Pedestrian
(RSS)
Processes & Standards 105 SafetyWissen: Positive Risk Balance
86 SafetyWissen: Code of Practice for the Design Verification & Validation

and Evaluation of ADAS
106 SafetyWissen: Verification & Validation
87 SafetyWissen: ASAM OpenSCENARIO®
108 SafetyWissen: Simulation for ADAS/ADS
88 SafetyWissen: ASAM OSI®
Validation
89 SafetyWissen: ASAM OpenODD®
109 SafetyWissen: Proving Ground Testing
90 SafetyWissen: ASAM OpenDRIVE®
110 Event: The ADAS Experience
92 SafetyWissen: British Standards Institute (BSI)
111 Seminar: Introduction to Artificial Intelligence
ADAS/ADS Standards
and Machine Learning for Advanced Driver
93 SafetyWissen: IEEE Standard 2846-2022 - Assistance Systems and Automated Driving
Assumptions in Safety-Related Models for Functions
Automated Driving Systems
112 Seminar: Scenario-, Simulation- and Data-based
94 SafetyWissen: ISO 21448:2022 Development, Validation and Safeguarding of
Road vehicles — Safety of the Intended Automated Driving Functions
Functionality (SOTIF)
113 Event: automotive CAE Grand Challenge
95 SafetyWissen: ISO 26262 - Road vehicles —
114 Seminar: Introduction to Impact Biomechanics
Functional Safety
and Human Body Models
96 SafetyWissen: ISO/CD TS 22133
115 Event: Symposium Human Modeling and
Road vehicles — Test object monitoring and
Simulation
control for active safety and automated/
autonomous vehicle testing
Life Cycle Management
97 SafetyWissen: Further ISO Standards in ADAS/
ADS Development and Validation 116 SafetyWissen: Life Cycle Management
99 SafetyWissen: NHTSA’s Automated Driving
Systems Voluntary Safety Self-Assessment (VSSA) 119 SafetyWissen: Important Abbreviations
100 SafetyWissen: UL 4600 - Standard for Safety for 121 General Terms for the Participation in Seminars
the Evaluation of Autonomous Products and Events
121 Terms & Conditions
122 Index
124 Advertisers Directory
125 Seminar Calendar
7
Preface
i
Introducing the ADAS/ADS Companion
Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) and Automated Driving Systems (ADS)
are synonymous with many technologies, development tools, processes, standards, ADAS/ADS
law and regulations, consumer assessments and others that are defining the future of COMPANION
mobility. The speed of development in this area is breath-taking and new information SafetyWissen on
is created by the minute, all over the world. 82 pages
Engineers working in or entering this field are overwhelmed by the sheer amount of
information. The all new ADAS/ADS Companion is our attempt to bring structure to
this mountain of information and also create entry points to more specific knowledge
and resources.
The ADAS/ADS Companion follows in its form and structure the highly popular SafetyCompanion by carhs.training
which has been published and updated annually since 2005. The SafetyCompanion has its focus on passive safety and
covers legal and consumer requirements from all over the world.
In compiling the new ADAS/ADS Companion, we have been very fortunate to gain the support of our international
editorial board (see next page) which helped us to develop the structure of the Companion and also gave us advice in
selecting the most relevant topics.
The ADAS/ADS Companion is by no means complete. It probably will never be as both technologies and require-
ments in the ADAS/ADS field are developing rapidly. Our aim is to add more relevant content to the Companion with
every edition and to make the Companion accessible to a large global engineering community. With the help of our
advertisers, we are happy to provide the ADAS/ADS companion free of charge (S&H may apply) to engineers around
the world.
The ADAS/ADS Companion is accompanied by SafetyWissen.com, our web portal to get access to full documents,
descriptions, tables and news for the automotive development engineer. QR-codes on the knowledge pages of the
Companion directly lead to deeper information on the respective topics. SafetyWissen.com also provides a superfast
navigation to resources in ADAS/ADS and Safety development, as well as knowledge in the field of virtual engineering.
The first edition of the ADAS/ADS Companion will be in English only; future editions will also come in different lan-
guages.
Enjoy reading and making use of the ADAS/ADS Companion for your daily work. We would be happy for any feed-
back from your side.
Your team at carhs.training
Rainer Hoffmann Ralf Reuter

President & CEO Executive Vice President
8
i
Editorial Board
The ADAS/ADS Companion is supported by an international editorial board with distinguished experts and industry
leaders in ADAS/ADS:
John F. Creamer Benjamin Engel Kai Golowko

Founder and CEO Chief Technology Officer Head of Vehicle Safety
GlobalAutoRegs.com ASAM Bertrandt
Prof. Klaus Kompass Dr. Andreas Kuhn Dr. Michael Schlenkrich

formerly Vice President Vehicle Managing Partner Product Manager & Strategist AI
Safety Andata / ML
BMW Group HEXAGON MI
Udo Steininger Prof. Hong Wang

Chief Expert Automotive Safety Tsinghua Intelligent Vehicle Design
TÜV SÜD and Safety Research Institute
Tsinghua University
9
carhs.training gmbh
i
Seminars at carhs.training - Your Benefits
Free parking
The carhs TrainingCenter in Alzenau offers plenty of free and secure parking spaces for our course
participants. You don't have to plan any time for searching for a parking space and can start your
course in a relaxed way.
Free EV charging
You can use our charging station for electric and hybrid vehicles free of charge during your course
attendance at the carhs TrainingCenter in Alzenau. Two 11 kW type-2 charging stations are available
at your disposal.
Seminar materials on paper & as PDF file

You will receive the seminar documents from us both as a ring binder for taking notes during
the course (on site seminars only) and as a PDF file for storage on your computer. You can also
bring your computer with you to the course and work directly in the PDF file.
Fair cancellation policy

We know that sometimes something interferes. Therefore you can cancel your seminar reg-
istration free of charge until 4 weeks before the course and until 2 weeks before the course
only a lump sum of 100 Euro will be charged. You can send a substitute participant at any time.
So you can register early for your seminar of choice without any risk and benefit from the
early bird rates.
Early bird rates reduce your costs

Early registrations give us and the course participants planning security. We return the favour
with a significantly lower early booking price for both seminars and conferences.
All-round catering during the seminar

You don't have to bring anything: During the seminar you will be provided with snacks, fresh
fruit and drinks in the breaks and we invite you to lunch with all course participants and train-
ers - this is the opportunity to network.
Small group sizes for maximum learning success

Our courses take place in small group sizes to ensure optimal interaction with the trainers and
between students.
And WiFi?
Of course, WiFi is also available free of charge at the carhs TrainingCenter in Alzenau. How-
ever, we recommend that you not be distracted while attending the seminar. But that is of
course your choice.
NEW: On Site & Online

Most of our events and seminars are available both for on-site and online attendance. You can
choose if you want to talk face to face with other attendees and trainers or if you want to take
part from your office or even from your home.
10
carhs.training gmbh
i
In-house Seminars
Seminars at your site - efficient, flexible and customized
Are you looking for an individual and customized training for your employees?
Most of the seminars from our training program can also be booked as in-house seminars in English, German or with simulta-
neous translation into your preferred language. Whether on your company site or at another venue of your choice, the scale
of our in-house seminars is tailored to your needs.
Your advantages
You retain full cost control. We offer attractive fixed prices for our
in-house seminars, depending on the number of participants and the
related service. Many of our customers have integrated
Even for a small number of participants you can save a lot of money our in-house seminars into their
compared to the individual booking of seminars. Additionally, there company's training program.
are no costs for travel and time of your employees.
We respect your target dates as far as possible – also upon short
Take advantage of this offer, too! We
notice in „urgent cases“. will be pleased to prepare you an
You benefit from our professional organization and the top-quality
individual offer.
seminar manuals.
Our lecturers answer your individual questions.
Even if you are interested in very specific questions – we are looking
for a qualified lecturer and develop the seminar.
References
ACTS, AIT, ARRK, AUDI, Autoform, AZOS, Bentley Motors, Bertrandt, BMW, Bosch, Brose, CATARC, Continental, CSI, Daimler,
Dalphimetal, Delphi, Dura Automotive, EDAG, Faurecia, Ford, F.S. Fehrer Automotive, Global NCAP, Grammer, HAITEC, Honda,
Hopium, Hyundai, IAV, IABG, IDIADA, IEE, JCI, IVM, Key Safety Systems, LEAR, Magna, Mahindra & Mahindra, MAHLE, MBtech,
MESSRING, MGA, NEVS, Opel, Open Air Systems, PATAC, Porsche, SAIC, SMP, SMSC, SEAT, Siemens, StreetScooter, TAKATA,
TASS, Tata, TECOSIM, TRW, TTTech, TÜV Süd, Valeo, VIF, Vinfast, Visteon, Volkswagen, ZF
Attractive prices
With reference to our regular seminar fees we offer attractive discounts on our in-house seminars:
1 Day Seminar 2 Day Seminar

Discount for the Discount for the
30 % 5th - 8th Participant 50 % 5th - 8th Participant
70 % 13 - 16 Participant
th th
75 % 13th - 16th Participant
80 % from the 21 Participant
st
85 % from the 21st Participant
Your contact at carhs.training

NEW Customer Specific Online-Seminars
Instead of an in-house-seminar, customers can now book our
Dr. Dirk Ulrich seminars as a customer specific online-seminar. This gives cus-
+49-6023-96 40 - 66 tomers the option to choose the date, duration & pace of the
dirk.ulrich@carhs.de seminar and enables them to let staff from multiple locations
take part without extra travel expenses.
11 11
SafetyWissen
SafetyWissen.com
ADAS/AD Definitions
Abstract Scenario compensate a sudden, unexpected change in the side force of

A formalized, declarative description derived from a →func the vehicle, or to improve the vehicle stability (e.g. side wind,
tional scenario. differing adhesion road conditions "µ split"), or to correct lane
ACSF | Automatically Commanded Steering Function departure.
A function within an electronic control system where actuation CSMS - Cyber Security Management System
of the steering system can result from automatic evaluation A systematic risk-based approach defining organisational
of signals initiated on-board the vehicle, possibly in conjunc processes, responsibilities and governance to treat risk asso-
tion with passive infrastructure features, to generate control ciated with cyber threats to vehicles and protect them from
action in order to assist the driver. cyberattacks.
ADS | Automated Driving System DDAW - Driver Drowsiness and Attention Warning
The vehicle hardware and software that are collectively capa DDAW means a system that assesses the driver’s alertness
ble of performing the entire →Dynamic Driving Task (DDT) on through vehicle systems analysis and warns the driver if
a sustained basis. needed.
AEBS | Advanced Emergency Braking System DCAS | Dynamic Control Assistance Systems
A system which can automatically detect an imminent forward A subset of ADAS, mean hardware and software collectively
collision and activate the vehicle braking system to decelerate capable of assisting a driver in controlling the longitudinal and
the vehicle with the purpose of avoiding or mitigating a col lateral motion of the vehicle on a sustained basis, and which
lision. requires the driver to be permanently engaged and to monitor
AES | Autonomous Emergency Steering the environment, and vehicle/system performance.
Steering that is applied automatically by the vehicle in response DIL | Driver-In-the-Loop
to the detection of a likely collision to steer the vehicle around An approach which is typically conducted in a driving simulator
the vehicle in front to avoid the collision. used for testing the human–automation interaction design.
ALKS | Automated Lane Keeping System DIL has components for the driver to operate and communi
A system which is activated by the driver and which keeps the cate with the virtual environment.
vehicle within its lane by controlling the lateral and longitudi DDT | Dynamic Driving Task
nal movements of the vehicle for extended periods without All of the real-time operational and tactical →ADS functions
the need for further driver input. required to operate the ADS-equipped vehicle in on-road traf
CDCF | Corrective Directional Control Function fic.
A control function within an electronic control system Edge Case
whereby, for a limited duration, changes to the steering angle A rare situation that still requires specific design attention
of one or more wheels and/or braking of individual wheels for it to be dealt with by the automated vehicle in a reason
may result from the automatic evaluation of signals initiated able and safe way. Edge cases can be individual unexpected
on-board the vehicle optionally enriched by data provided off events, such as the appearance of a unique road sign or an
board the vehicle, in order to correct lane departure, e.g. to unexpected animal type on a highway.
avoid crossing lane markings, leaving the road ESF | Emergency Steering Function
Concrete Scenario A control function which can automatically detect a potential
A scenario depicted with explicit parameters values, describ collision and automatically activate the vehicle steering system
ing physical attributes. Parameter values can consist of default for a limited duration, to steer the vehicle with the purpose of
values, randomly chosen values or advisedly chosen values. avoiding or mitigating a collision.
Critical Scenario ESS | Emergency Steering Support
A traffic scenario containing a situation in which the →ADS A system that supports the driver steering input in response to
needs to perform an emergency maneuver in order to avoid/ the detection of a likely collision to alter the vehicle path and
mitigate a potential collision, or react to a system failure. potentially avoid a collision.
CSF | Corrective Steering Function Functional Scenario
A control function within an electronic control system Scenarios with the highest level of abstraction, outlining the
whereby, for a limited duration, changes to the steering core concept of the scenario, such as a basic description of the
angle of one or more wheels may result from the automatic ego vehicle’s actions; the interactions of the ego vehicle with
evaluation of signals initiated on board the vehicle, in order to other road users and objects and other elements that com
12
SafetyWissen
SafetyWissen.com
pose the scenario (e.g. environmental conditions etc.). SIL | Software-In-the-Loop

HIL | Hardware-In-the-Loop An approach where the implementation of the developed
An approach which involves the final hardware of a specific model will be evaluated on general-purpose computing sys
vehicle sub-system running the final software with input and tems. This step can use a complete software implementation
output connected to a simulation environment to perform vir- very close to the final one.
tual testing. HIL testing provides a way of replicating sensors, Scenario
actuators and mechanical components in a way that connects A sequence or combination of situations used to assess the
all the I/O of the Electronic Control Units (ECU) being tested, safety requirements for an →ADS. Scenarios include a →DDT
long before the final system is integrated. or sequence of DDTs. Scenarios can also involve a wide range
Logical Scenario of elements, such as some or all portions of the DDT; differ
A scenario description which covers all elements and technical ent roadway layouts; different types of road users and objects
requirements necessary to implement a system and contains exhibiting static or diverse dynamic behaviours; and, diverse
all value ranges or probability distributions for each element environmental conditions (among many other factors).
within a scenario. Validation of the simulation model
MIL | Model-In-the-Loop The process of determining the degree to which a simulation
An approach which allows quick algorithmic development model is an accurate representation of the real world from the
without involving dedicated hardware. Usually, this level of perspective of the intended uses of the tool.
development involves high-level abstraction software frame VIL | Vehicle -In-the-Loop
works running on general-purpose computing systems. A fusion environment of a real testing vehicle in the real-world
MRM | Minimum Risk Manoeuvre and a virtual environment. It can reflect vehicle dynamics at
A procedure aimed at minimising risks in traffic, which is auto the same level as the real-world and it can be operated on a
matically performed by the system after a transition demand vehicle test bed or on a test track.
without driver response or in the case of a severe system
failure.
Nominal Scenario
A traffic scenario containing situations that reflect regular and
non-critical driving manoeuvres.
ODD | Operational Design Domain
The operating conditions under which an →ADS feature is
specifically designed to function.
Proving Ground or Test-Track
A physical testing facility closed to the traffic where the per
formance of an →ADS can be investigated on the real vehicle.
Traffic agents can be introduced via sensor stimulation or via
dummy devices positioned on the track.
RMF | Risk Mitigation Function
An emergency function which can, in the event the driver
becomes unresponsive, automatically activate the vehicle
steering system for a limited duration to steer the vehicle
with the purpose of bringing the vehicle to a safe stop within
a target stop area.
Simulation
The imitation of the operation of a real world process or sys
tem over time.
Simulation toolchain
A combination of simulation tools that are used to support the
validation of an →ADS.
13
SafetyWissen
SafetyWissen.com
UNECE Vehicle Classification R.E.3 Revision 6

Consolidated Resolution on the Construction of Vehicles (R.E.3), Revision 6
Engine Maximum Unladen

Wheels Power Seats Maximum Mass
Category Capacity Design Speed Mass
L1 2 ≤ 50 cm³ ≤ 50 km/h
L2 3 ≤ 50 cm³ ≤ 50 km/h
L3 2 > 50 cm³ > 50 km/h
L4 31 > 50 cm³ > 50 km/h
L5 32 > 50 cm³ > 50 km/h
L6 4 ≤ 50 cm³ ≤ 45 km/h ≤ 350 kg 3 ≤ 4 kW
L7 4 ≤ 400 kg 3, 4 ≤ 15 kW
M Vehicles used for the carriage of passengers
M1 ≥4 ≤9
M2 ≥4 >9 ≤5t
M3 ≥4 >9 >5t
N Vehicles used for the carriage of goods
N1 ≥4 ≤ 3.5 t
N2 ≥4 3.5 t < m ≤ 12 t
N3 ≥4 > 12 t
O Trailers (including semi-trailers)
O1 ≤ 0.75 t
O2 0.75 t < m ≤ 3.5 t
O3 3.5 t < m ≤ 10 t
O4 > 10 t
T Agricultural or forestry vehicles
G Off-road vehicles
1
asymmetrically arranged in relation to the longitudinal median plane
2
symmetrically arranged in relation to the longitudinal median plane
3
not including the mass of the batteries in case of electric vehicles
4
≤ 550 kg for vehicles intended for carrying goods
Applicabilty of selected UN Regulations to Vehicle Categories:
UN R L1 L2 L3 L4 L5 L6 L7 M1 M2 M3 N1 N2 N3 O1 O2 O3 O4
13 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
13-H ● ●
79 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
89 ● ● ● ● ● ●
130 ● ● ● ●
131 ● ● ● ●
139 ● ●
140 ● ●
151 ●1 ●1 ● ●
152 ● ●
155 ●3 ●3 ● ● ● ● ● ● ●2 ●2 ●2 ●2
156 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
157 ●
1 upon request of the manufacturer
2 if fitted with at least one electronic control unit
3 if equipped with automated driving functionalities from level 3 onwards
14
SafetyWissen
SafetyWissen.com
U.S. Motor Vehicle Classification NHTSA New Manufacturers Handbook
Classification Definition
Passenger car A motor vehicle with motive power, except a low-speed vehicle, multipurpose passenger
vehicle, motorcycle, or trailer, designed for carrying 10 persons or less.
Multipurpose A motor vehicle with motive power, except a low-speed vehicle or trailer, designed to carry
passenger vehicle 10 persons or less which is constructed either on a truck chassis or with special features for
MPV occasional off-road operation.
Truck A motor vehicle with motive power, except a trailer, designed primarily for the transportation of
property or special purpose equipment.
Bus A motor vehicle with motive power, except a trailer, designed for carrying more than 10
persons.
Motorcycle A motor vehicle with motive power having a seat or saddle for the use of the rider and designed
to travel on not more than three wheels in contact with the ground.
Trailer A motor vehicle with or without motive power, designed for carrying persons or property and
for being drawn by another motor vehicle.
Low-speed vehicle A motor vehicle, that is 4-wheeled, whose speed attainable in 1 mile (1.6 km) is more than 20
miles per hour (32 kilometers per hour) and not more than 25 miles per hour (40 kilometers per
hour) on a paved level surface, and whose GVWR is less than 3,000 pounds (1,361 kilograms).
Pole Trailer A motor vehicle without motive power designed to be drawn by another motor vehicle and
attached to the towing vehicle by means of a reach or pole, or by being boomed or otherwise
secured to the towing vehicle, for transporting long or irregularly shaped loads such as poles,
pipes, or structural members capable generally of sustaining themselves.
The knowledge you need,

any�me, anywhere.
Worldwide Safety Requirements
Summaries & Knowledge Tables
Web-based & Responsive
Daily SafetyNews
Customizable for In-Company
Knowledge Management System
15
SafetyWissen
SafetyWissen.com
Levels of Driving Automation

according to BASt, SAE and NHTSA Definitions
Execution of Monitoring of Fallback System BASt / SAE Level NHTSA Level

Steering and Driving Performance Capability Euro NCAP acc. to SAE
Acceleration/ Environment of User J3016
Deceleration Dynamic Communica-
Driving Task tion
0 0
- No automa- No automa-
tion tion
1
1
Some Functionspe-
Driver
driving modes cific automa-
assistance
tion
Assisted
2
2
Some Combined
Partial
driving modes function
automation
automation
3
3
Some Limited self
Conditional
driving modes Automated driving auto-
automation
mation
4
Some
High
driving modes 3/4
automation
Limited self
driving auto-
Autonomous mation /
Full self
driving auto-
5
All mation
Full
driving modes
automation
16
SafetyWissen
SafetyWissen.com
SAE J3016 - SAE Levels

Taxonomy and Definitions for Terms Related to Driving Automa-
tion Systems for On-Road Motor Vehicles
Overview
The well-known SAE-Levels describe automated driving systems (ADS) for vehicles that perform part or all of the dynamic driving
task (DDT) on a sustained basis. SAE J3016 provides a taxonomy with detailed definitions for six levels of driving automation,
ranging from no driving automation (Level 0) to full driving automation (Level 5), in the context of [motor] vehicles (hereafter also
referred to as “vehicle” or “vehicles”) and their operation on roadways:
Level 0 Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5
No Driver Partial Conditional High Full
Driving Assistance Driving Driving Driving Driving
Automation Automation Automation Automation Automation
Driver performs part or all of the dynamic driving task ADS performs all of the dynamic driving task (DDT)
(DDT)
The levels apply to the driving automation feature(s) that are engaged in any given instance of on-road operation of an equipped
vehicle. As such, although a given vehicle may be equipped with a driving automation system that is capable of delivering multiple
driving automation features that perform at different levels, the level of driving automation exhibited in any given instance is
determined by the feature(s) that are engaged.
The three primary actors in driving are: the (human) user, the driving automation system, and other vehicle systems and com-
ponents.
The levels of driving automation are defined by reference to the specific role played by each of the three primary actors in
performance of the DDT and/or DDT fallback. “Role” in this context refers to the expected role of a given primary actor, based on
the design of the driving automation system in question and not necessarily to the actual performance of a given primary actor.
Active safety systems, such as electronic stability control (ESC) and automatic emergency braking (AEB), and certain types of
driver assistance systems, such as lane keeping assistance (LKA), are excluded from the scope of this driving automation tax-
onomy because they do not perform part or all of the DDT on a sustained basis, but rather provide momentary intervention
during potentially hazardous situations. Due to the momentary nature of the actions of active safety systems, their intervention
does not change or eliminate the role of the driver in performing part or all of the DDT, and thus are not considered to be driving
automation, even though they perform automated functions. In addition, systems that inform, alert, or warn the driver about
hazards in the driving environment are also outside the scope of this driving automation taxonomy, as they neither automate
part or all of the DDT, nor change the driver’s role in performance of the DDT.
It should be noted, however, that crash avoidance features, including intervention-type active safety systems, may be included in
vehicles equipped with driving automation systems at any level. For automated driving system (ADS) features (i.e., Levels 3 to 5)
that perform the complete DDT, crash mitigation and avoidance capability is part of ADS functionality.
Status
Latest Version: J3016_202104
Link
https://www.sae.org/standards/content/j3016_202104/
17
SafetyWissen
SafetyWissen.com
Vehicle Automation Modes

by Dr. Philip Koopman, Carnegie Mellon University
Dr. Phil Koopman’s definition of Vehicle Automation Modes emphasizes the responsibilities of the user of a self-driving vehicle.
This is in contrast to the very common SAE Levels (SAE J3016) which provide a terminology of the engineering approach to
automated functions. By adopting a linear scale of 0 to 5, the assumption is that with an increase in the SAE level the capabilities
increase linearly. Furthermore has the introduction of so-called Level 2+ systems added to the confusion of consumers.
Dr. Koopman’s definition on the other hand differentiates clearly between those levels that require human interaction, i.e. driver
assistance or supervised automation and the autonomous operation where no driver is needed. In addition a new category of
vehicle testing has been created to set apart the task of testing automation platforms.
Operating Mode Driving Driving Safety Other Safety Human Role Vehicle Role
Active safety
Driving support
Driver Assistance Driving
Driving conve-
nience
Eyes ON the
road, monitor
Supervised Lane keeping
for an intervene
Automation in situations
Speed control
outside ODD
All aspects of
Autonomous No human driving and
Operation driver driving-related
safety
Automation
Trained safety being tested is
driver mitigates expected to
Vehicle Testing dangerous exhibit
behaviors dangerous
behaviors
Link
https://safeautonomy.blogspot.com/2022/01/simplified-proposal-for-vehicle.html
18
Legal & NCAP Latest info about
Seminar
this course
Introduction to Active Safety of Vehicles
Course Description Who should attend?

Increasing demands on the protection of vehicle occupants The seminar is aimed at new and experienced engineers work-
have led to a continuous reduction in the number of injured ing in the field of active vehicle safety in research and develop-
and killed persons. While more than 20,000 persons have ment departments of automotive OEMs or suppliers, as well
been killed on German roads in the early 1970s, this number is as for all other interested parties, which want to receive an
now just under 3,000. Passive safety, i.e. measures which are overview of current and future developments in the areas of
designed to minimize the consequences of an accident, has active vehicle safety, driver assistance and automated driving.
made a significant contribution to this achievement. Course Contents
While the potential of passive safety is considered to be largely Fundamentals of active safety
exhausted and huge efforts are required to achieve further Basic principles of action
progress in occupant protection, active safety has become Legal requirements
increasingly important in recent years. Active Safety means Euro NCAP requirements
measures which prevent an accident or at least reduce the Current active safety systems
collision speed and thus the energy input. ABS
While technologies such as ABS or ESC have been established ESC
Brake assist
years ago and have proven their effectiveness, new tech-
Pre-crash systems
niques such as the emergency brake or the lane keeping assist
Driver assistance systems
and numerous other driver assistance systems are just enter- Basic requirements and design strategies
ing the market. It can be assumed that these systems will be Current and future driver assistance systems
widely used in the next few years and will lead to a further Automated driving
decrease in the number of traffic victims. State of the art
Automated driving can be seen as the next step of active Opportunities and risks
safety. Although there is still a lot of development needed Human machine interface
in this area, it can be assumed that vehicles which will driven Market introduction strategies
at least partially automatically in certain traffic scenarios will
enter the market over the next ten years.
In the seminar first a brief introduction to active safety, in
contrast to passive safety is given. This is followed by a presen-
tation of current active safety systems and an overview of the
requirements of legislation and consumer protection organi-
zations. In addition, current and upcoming developments in
the area of driver assistance systems and automated driving
are presented.
Dr. Gerd Müller (Technical University Berlin) has been working at the department automotive
Instructor
technology of the Technical University of Berlin since 2007. From 2007 to 2015 he was a research assistant.
Since 2015 he has been a senior engineer of the same department. His research focuses on vehicle safety and
friction coefficient estimation. Dr. Müller gives the lecture "Fundamentals of Automotive Engineering" and
conducts parts of the integrated course "Driver Assistance Systems and Active Safety".
DATE ID VENUE DURATION PRICE LANGUAGE

Dates
30.11.2022 51/3933 Alzenau 1 Day 790,- EUR till 02.11.2022, thereafter 940,- EUR
19.-20.04.2023 51/4094 Online 2 Days 790,- EUR till 22.03.2023, thereafter 980,- EUR
19
Legal & NCAP Requirements
SafetyWissen.com Wissen
UNECE Rulemaking Process
WP:29 World Forum For Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations

The World Forum (WP.29) is a permanent body under the UNECE Inland Transport Committee (ITC). WP.29 gathers delega-
tions of national and regional vehicle safety and environmental authorities from around the world and administers three United
Nations Agreements:
The 1958 Agreement governing an international system for mutual recognition of type approvals,
The 1997 Agreement on Periodical Technical Inspections for motor vehicles in use,
The 1998 Global Agreement for the establishment of Global Technical Regulations (GTR) to promote common
requirements and test procedures.
WP.29 establishes and maintains regulations in line with technological progress under these Agreements for application under
national and regional legislation. The Forum plays a unique role in enabling regulatory authorities and non-governmental organi-
zations representing vehicle manufacturers, suppliers, safety and environmental advocacies, and others to collaborate on
common standards.
WP.29 oversees six permanent working parties specialized in vehicle subsystems and performance areas. With regard to ADAS
and driving automation, WP.29 established a Working Party on Automated/Autonomous and Connected Vehicles (GRVA) in
2018 to strengthen collaboration on these systems, building from a previous working party on vehicle brakes and running gear.
GRVA gathers specialists in steering, braking, driving automation, and vehicle connectivity to develop regulatory requirements
and assessment methods to address road safety. GRVA oversees work focused on automatic braking, assisted driving, auto-
mated driving, cyber security, and software update management among other topics. In particular, GRVA is working on a New
Assessment/Test Method (NATM) to provide a modern framework for assessing the safety of Automated Driving Systems (ADS).
Active subgroups under GRVA include the following:
Automatic Emergency Braking Systems (AEBS)
Automated Lane-Keeping Systems (ALKS)
Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS)
Functional Requirements for Automated Vehicles (FRAV)
Validation Methods for Automated Driving (VMAD)
Event Data Recorders/Data Storage Systems for Automated Driving (EDR/DSSAD)
UN Economic Commission for Europe UNECE
Inland Transport Committee

Working Parties
WP-1 ... WP-15 ... WP-29

Road Safety Transport of Harmonization of
Dangerous Goods Vehicle Regulations
Working Parties of Experts (Groupes de Rapporteurs - GR)
GRSP GRSG GRVA GRE GRB GRP

Passive Safety General Safety Automated & Lighting Noise & Tyres Pollution &
Connected Energy
Vehicles
GRVA Informal Working Groups
AEBS ALKS ADAS EDR/DSSAD FRAV VMAD

Automatic Automated Advanced Data Storage Functional Validation
Emergency Lane-Keeping Driver Assistance Systems for Requirements Methods for
Braking Systems Systems Systems Automated for Automated Automated
Driving Driving Driving
20
Wissen SafetyWissen.com
New Assessment/Test Method for Automated Driving (NATM)

Guidelines for Validating Automated Driving System (ADS)
This guidelines document represents current best practices identified by the Informal Working Group on Validation Methods
for Automated Driving (VMAD) for validating the safety of automated driving systems (ADS) using the NATM These guidelines
aim to provide clear direction for validating the safety of an ADS in a manner that is repeatable, objective and evidence-based,
while remaining technology neutral and flexible enough to foster ongoing innovation by the automotive industry. The intended
audience for these guidelines includes both developers of ADS technologies as well as contracting parties to both the 1958 and
the 1998 UN vehicle regulations agreements.
Validating ADS safety is a highly complex task which cannot be done comprehensively nor effectively through one validation
methodology alone. As a result, it is recommended to adopt a multi-pillar approach for the validation of ADS, composed of a
scenarios catalogue and five validation methodologies (pillars).
(a) Scenarios catalogue
(b) Simulation/virtual testing,
(c) Track testing
(d) Real world testing
(e) Audit/assessment
(f) In-service monitoring and reporting
NATM
Audit
Safety Management System

of the Manufacturer
Safety Assessment of ADS
Requirements
Test
Methods Real World Tests In-service
Monitoring &
Reporting
Track Tests
Simulation
Virtual Tool
Assessment
ODD Scenarios
Status
Informal document GRVA-13-35 13th GRVA, 23 - 27 May 2022
Link
https://unece.org/transport/documents/2022/05/informal-documents/vmad-status-report
21
Latest info about Legal & NCAP
Seminar
this course
International Safety and Crash-Test Regulations

Current Status and Future Developments
Since the 1960's, the regulation of vehicle safety performance This seminar should be of interest to anyone involved with
has had a major impact on vehicle and system design. As auto- meeting and anticipating legal requirements for vehicle
motive manufacturing has evolved into an integrated global safety performance across international markets. The course
system, understanding and anticipating legal requirements provides a compact review of changes in passive safety
has become an immense challenge. Regulators collaborate requirements and current priorities across the international
and diverge in how they address road-safety policy goals. regulatory community. Moreover, the course provides knowl-
Regulatory changes in a single market can translate into global edge critical to understanding differences in the way regula-
customer requirements. And these requirements are continu- tors establish and enforce these legal requirements.
ously evolving. In a compact program, this two-day seminar Course Contents
provides a worldwide update on the passive safety landscape, History of safety regulation and development of legal
covering local, national, regional, and international policy and regimes (e.g., self-certification, type approval, product
rulemaking developments. liability, in-use surveillance)
The first segment of the seminar focuses on regulatory insti- Regulatory agencies and rulemaking processes (e.g., UN,
tutions and processes. By understanding the regulatory envi- European Union, U.S. NHTSA, etc.)
ronment, including the trend towards an integrated global Regulatory drivers and priorities
regulatory system, businesses can better prepare for changes Types and purposes of regulations (UN Regulations, GTR,
that impact competitiveness and customer satisfaction. FMVSS, EU Regulations and Directives, etc.)
The second segment applies this knowledge to current and Developments in crashworthiness and occupant
future regulatory requirements. The seminar covers crash- protection requirements (frontal impact, side impact,
worthiness (frontal, side, rear impact, etc.) as well as pedes- pole-side impact, full width barrier, ODB, MPDB, etc.)
trian protection and new technologies. Vulnerable road user (VRU) protection (e.g., pedestrian
Course Objectives safety, cyclist safety)
This course informs participants of recent developments Safety of new propulsion technologies (electric vehicles,
and discussions within the global regulatory community hydrogen fuel-cells, minimum vehicle noise levels)
concerning passive safety. The seminar explores differences Passive safety implications of new safety technologies
in regulatory systems and philosophies, in compliance and (e.g., emergency call systems, collision avoidance, VRU
enforcement, and in the forces behind the regulation of detection, automated driving)
vehicle safety. The course provides participants with a broad
understanding of current regulatory directions and guidance
on how to follow, and even influence, future requirements.
John Creamer (GlobalAutoRegs.com) is the founder of GlobalAutoRegs.com and a partner in The

Instructors
Potomac Alliance, a Washington-based international regulatory affairs consultancy. In his client advisory role,
Mr. Creamer is regularly involved with meetings of the UN World Forum for the Harmonization of Vehicle
Regulations (WP.29). Previously, he has held positions with the US International Trade Commission and the
Motor & Equipment Manufacturers Association (representing the US automotive supplier industry), as the
representative of the US auto parts industry in Japan, and with TRW Inc. (a leading global automotive safety
systems supplier).
Dr. Thomas Kinsky (Humanetics Europe GmbH) completed his studies of automotive engineer-
ing at TU Dresden in 1991 and received a doctorate at TU Graz in 2015. From 1999 to 2018 Dr. Kinsky worked
for the car manufacturer Opel in the area of vehicle regulations. Lastly as a senior expert, he was responsible
for the development of legislation on passive vehicle safety and represented Opel in the discussion with au-
thorities and associations. Since 2018 he is Director of Business Development at Humanetics Europe GmbH.
In this role he is at Humanetics the contact for all topics regarding dummy development as well as for require-
ments on passive and active safety at Humanetics.

Dates
15.-16.11.2022 16/3917 Alzenau 2 Days 1.340,- EUR till 18.10.2022, thereafter 1.590,- EUR
22
Seminar
this course
Briefing on the Worldwide Status of Automated Vehicle Policies

Regardless of the hype surrounding "self-driving cars", it is The briefing is aimed at employees from the development
clear that automated driving systems (ADS) will fundamentally departments of vehicle manufacturers and suppliers working
change the automotive industry. Moreover, despite wide- in the field of automated driving and vehicles equipped with
spread expectations that ADS hold the key to achieving sub- automated driving systems. Given the risks of misuse, it is par-
stantial reductions in road crashes, injuries, and deaths, these ticularly important for all employees in product strategy and
systems also raise concerns among safety authorities. The marketing departments.
validation of ADS requires long-duration testing and develop- Course Contents
ment to ensure correct behavior under massively variable Safety authority expectations for automated vehicle
road conditions. Conventional regulatory methods developed safety
over the past half-century lack methods and tools to assess Role and influence of manufacturers on regulatory
such performance, forcing safety authorities to look for new thinking
ways to ensure that ADS will be safe for public use. Pressures on current regulatory methods and tools
Course Objectives Pressure on type approval for near-term framework
This seminar reviews current efforts to adapt regulatory sys- Guidance versus regulation: How and when?
tems to meet this challenge, including the vigorous debates Hybridization: Merging of self-certification and type
over strategies and methods and the roles of regulators and approval
manufacturers in ensuring the safety of automated vehicles. Levels of automation from a regulatory perspective
Current efforts to establish automated vehicle regulations
Outlook: Can regulations ensure automated vehicle
safety?

Instructor
systems supplier).

Dates
23 23
UN R79 Commanded and Automatically Commanded Steering

Functions UN R79
CSF Corrective Steering Function
Optical warning during intervention (min. 1 s)
Acoustic warning if intervention lasts for more than 10 s (M1, N1) / 30 s (M2, M3, N2, N3) or in the case of two or more
consecutive interventions within a rolling interval of 180 s
Override with ≤ 50 N
Tests
Warning test
Overriding force test
ESF Emergency Steering Function
VUT shall not leave road
If lane is marked: VUT shall not leave the lane
If lane is not marked: lateral offset ≤ 0.75 m
No collision with other other road user
Optical and acoustic or haptic warning during intervention
Tests (depending on system type)
Unintentional lateral manoeuvre
Intentional lateral manoeuvre
Approach to object within VUT's trajectory
False positive test: plastic sheet (0.8 x 2 m)
ACSF Category A: Low speed manoeuvering
Operating up to 10 km/h
Deliberate driver action for activation
Obstacle detection required (e.g. vehicles or pedestrians)
Remote Controlled Parking (RCP) manoeuvers permitted (max. range 6 m)
ACSF Category B1: Lateral control hands on

Maximum lateral acceleration:
Speed range 10 - 30 km/h > 30 - 60 km/h > 60 - 100 km/h > 100 - 130 km/h > 130 km/h
Maximum value M1, N1 3.0 m/s²
for the specified
maximum lateral
acceleration M2, M3,N2, N3 2.5 m/s²
Minimum value M1, N1 0 m/s² 0.5 m/s² 0.8 m/s² 0.3 m/s²
for the specified
maximum lateral
acceleration M2, M3,N2, N3 0 m/s² 0.3 m/s² 0.5 m/s²
Optical and acoustic or haptic warning if system reaches its boundary conditions
The activated system shall at any time, within the boundary conditions, ensure that the vehicle does not cross a lane
marking
Optical warning after ≤ 15 s hands off
Additional acoustic warning after ≤ 30 s hands off
System deactivation ≤ 30 s after start of acoustic warning if still hands are off
Default OFF
Tests
Lane keeping test
Maximum lateral acceleration test
Overriding force test
Transition test - hands on test
24
UN R79 Commanded and Automatically Commanded Steering

Functions
ACSF Category C: Lane change commanded by the driver
ACSF B1 required and active
Default OFF
Activation by deliberate driver action
Only available on roads where pedestrians and cyclists are prohibited an with with a physical separation that that divides
the traffic moving in opposite directions and which have at least two lanes in the direction the vehicles are driving
Lateral acceleration during lane change ≤ 1 m/s² in addition to the acceleration gererated by lane curvature and total lateral
acceleration within the limits for Category B1 systems (see above)
Optical signal during lane change
Optical warning after ≤ 3 s hands off during lane change procedure
Lateral movement ≥ 1 s after start of lane change procedure
Lane change manoeuvre shall be initated within 3.0 to 5.0 s after the deliberate driver action
Lane change manoeuvre shall be completed in < 5.0 s (M1, M2) / 10 s (M2, M3, N2, N3)
Lane keeping (Category B1) to resume after completion of lane change
Suppression of lane change if
Critical situation detected (approaching vehicle in target lane would have tto decelerate at > 3.0 m/s²)
System is overridden or switched off
System reaches its boundaries (e.g. no lane markings detected)
Driver's hands off at start of the manoeuvre
Driver manually deactivates direction indicator
Lane change has noct commenced 5.0 s after the driver action
Lateral movement is not continuous
Minimum rearward detection range 55 m
Minimum operation speed to be set such that a vehicle approaching at 130 km/h and decelerating at 3.0 m/s² after 0.4 s
reaction time can maintain a 1 s gap to the VUT
Tests:
Lange change functional test
Minimum activation speed tests @Vsmin - 10 km/h and @Vsmin + 10 km/h
Overriding test
Lane change procedure suppression tests @ Vsmin + 10 km/h
Sensor performance test @ Vsmin + 10 km/h with approaching motorcycle
Sensor blindness test
Engine start / run cycle test
RMF Risk Mitigation Function
Intervention only if the driver is either directly (e.g. through a driver monitoring system) or indirectly (e.g. prolonged failed response to a
warning, failure to control the vehicle) assessed to be unresponsive; or if manually activated
≥ 5 s warning phase before start of mitigation
Decleration ≤ 4 m/s2
Bring vehicle to a safe stop in the target stop area (e.g. emergency lane, hard shoulder, beside the road, slowest lane of traffic, own lane of
travel
Includes lane changes
Tests
Lane Change Manoeuvre is possible
Lane Change Manoeuvre is not possible (other vehicle in target lane)
25
UN R131 Advanced Emergency Braking System (AEBS)

for M2, M3 and N2, N3 vehicles UN R131
Approach to stationary target

with 100 % overlap
① ② v0 = 80 km/h v = 0 km/h
AEB
Approach to slower
target with 100 % overlap
① M3, N3, N2 > 8 t: v0 = 80 km/h v = 12 km/h
② M2, N2 ≤ 8 t: v0 = 80 km/h v = 67 km/h
False Pos.
Approach to stationary targets

4.5 m
v0 = 50 km/h v = 0 km/h
Requirements
System active from 15 km/h up to the max. design speed of the vehicle.
System shall be automatically ON at the initiation of each new iginition cycle.
Warning in at least 2 modes selected from acoustic, haptic or optical.
Speed reduction during warning phase ≤ 15 km/h or 30 % of the total speed reduction
Emergency braking @ TTC ≤ 3.0 s
Stationary Target Moving Target
Speed Speed Target

Timing of warning modes Timing of warning modes
reduction by reduction by speed
First Second emergency First Second emergency
warning warning braking warning warning braking
≥ 0.8 s ≥ 0.8 s
≥ 1.4 s ≥ 1.4 s
before start before start
before start before start
of of
① of of
emergency emergency
M3, emergency emergency
braking ≥ 20 km/h braking no impact 12 ± 2 km/h
N3, braking braking
N2 > 8 t 2 modes: 2 modes:
1 mode: 1 mode:
haptic / haptic /
haptic / haptic /
acoustic / acoustic /
acoustic acoustic
optical optical
≥ 0.8 s
before start ≥ 0.8 s before start
before start
of before start of
of
emergency of emergency
② emergency
braking emergency braking
N2, braking ≥ 10 km/h no impact 67 ± 2 km/h
2 modes: braking 2 modes:
N2 ≤ 8 t: 1 mode:
haptic / 1 mode: haptic /
haptic /
acoustic / haptic / acoustic /
acoustic /
optica acoustic optical
optical
26
Test of ESC Systems in UN R140, GTR 8 and FMVSS 126

Step 1: Slowly-Increasing-Steer Manoeuvre to determine Parameter A
At a constant velocity of 80 ±2 km/h the steering angle is ramped at 13.5 deg/s until a lateral acceleration of 0.5 g is reached. Out of 2
series (1x left turn / 1x right turn) with 3 repetitions of the manoeuvre the steering angle A (in degrees) at which the lateral acceleration
is 0.3 g is determined using linear regression.
Step 2: Sine with Dwell Manoeuvre to assess Oversteer Intervention and Responsiveness
At a velocity of 80 ±2 km/h the vehicle is subjected to two series of test runs using a steering pattern of a sine wave at 0.7 Hz
frequency with a 500 ms delay beginning at the second peak amplitude:
δ
UN R140
GTR 8
FMVSS 126
Steer angle
-δ
One series uses counterclockwise steering for the first half cycle, and the other series uses clockwise steering for the first half
cycle. In each series of test runs, the steering amplitude is increased from run to run, by 0.5 A, starting at 1.5 A. The steering
amplitude of the final run in each series is the greater of 6.5 A or 270 degrees, provided the calculated magnitude of 6.5 A is less
than or equal to 300 degrees. If any 0.5 A increment, up to 6.5 A, is greater than 300 degrees, the steering amplitude of the final
run is 300 degrees.
Performance Requirements:
Yaw Rate
1 s after completion of the steering input (t0) < 35 % of the first peak value of yaw rate recorded after the steering wheel angle changes
sign.
1.75 s after completion of the steering input (t0) < 20 % of the first peak value of yaw rate recorded after the steering wheel angle changes
sign.
Lateral displacement of the vehicle center of gravity with respect to its initial straight path when computed 1.07 seconds
after the Beginning of Steer (BOS)
for vehicles with GVM (GVWR) ≤ 3500 kg > 1.83 m
for vehicles with GVM (GVWR) > 3500 kg > 1.52 m
Steer angle
lateral displacement
1.83 m
(1.52 m)
yaw rate ψ
t
35 % 20 %
100 %
ψPeak
t = 1.07 s t0 t0 + 1 s t0 + 1.75 s 27
UN R151 Blind Spot Information System for the Detection of

Bicycles UN R151
Scope
Vehicles of categories N2, N3, M2,M3
Dynamic Test Procedure
dcorridor
dlateral
Theoretical Collision Point
Bicycle line of Bicycle
Line D
Line A
Line B
Line C
movement starting
position dc
db
da
dd
dbicycle
lcorridor
Test Cases
Test vbicycle vvehicle dlateral da db dc dd dbicycle lcorridor dcor- Impact Turn
case [km/h] [km/h] [m] [m] [m] [m] [m] [m] [m] ridor Position Radius
[m] [m] [m]
1 20 10 15.8 15 26.1 6 5
2 20 10 1.25 44.4 22 15 38.4 0 10
3 20 20 38.3 38.8 - vehicle 6 25
4 10 20 43.5 15 37.2 65 80 width + 0 25
22.2
5 10 10 19.8 19.8 - 1m 0 5
4.25
6 14.7 28 6 10
20 10 44.4 15
7 17.7 34 3 10
The techical service may select different test cases if deemed justified.
Criteria
Blind spot information signal activated before vehicle has reached line C but not before it has reached line D
No signal required if the relative longitudinal distance between bicyle and the front right corner of the is more than 30 m
to the rear or 7 m to the front
For vehicle speeds up to 5 km/h the it is satisfactory if information signal is issued @ 1.4 s TTC.
Static Test Procedures
Criteria
7.77 m 2m
2.75 m Blind spot information signal activated at the
20 km/h latest at the Last Point of Information (LPI) (2
LPI
m / 7.77 m)
Bicycle line of
movement
Bicycle at
speed
5 km/h
44.44 m
1.15 m
28
UN R152 Advanced Emergency Braking System (AEBS)

for M1 and N1 vehicles UN R152
CCRs*: Approach to stationary

AEB CCR
v0 = 10 ... 60 km/h v = 0 km/h
CCRm*: Approach to slower

v0 = 10 ... 60 km/h v = 20 km/h
* CCR: Car-To-Car Rear; s: stationary; m: moving
Child, Nearside, Impact at

50 % of the Vehicle Width
AEB VRU
v 0 = 20 ... 60 km/h v = 5 km/h
Cyclist, Nearside, Impact at

v 0 = 20 ... 60 km/h v = 15 km/h
Turn at intersection
TTC ≤ 1.7 s
v0 = 30 km/h v =0 km/h
braking to ≥ 16 km/h
False Positive Tests
Turn of a forward vehicle

TTC ≤ 2.5 s
v0 ≥ 26 km/h v =10 km/h

braking to ≥ 20 km/h
v0 = 30 km/h braking to
≥ 22 km/h @ start of curve,
Curved road with guard pipes turning @ constant ≥ 21 km/h
and a stationary object (pe-
destrian)
TTC ≤ 1.1 s
Lane change due to road

construction
TTC ≤ 3.3 s
v 0 = 40 km/h
29
Maximum relative Impact Speed (km/h) for Car to Car and Car to Pedestrian Scenarios
Relative Speed M1 vehicles N1 vehicles
(km/h) Maximum Mass Mass in running order Maximum Mass Mass in running order
10 0 0 0 0
15 0 0 0 0
20 0 0 0 0
25 0 0 0 0
30 0 0 0 0
32 0 0 0 0
35 0 0 0 0
38 0 0 0 0
40 0 0 10 0
42 10 0 15 0
45 15 15 25 15
50 25 25 30 25
55 30 30 35 30
60 35 35 40 35
Maximum relative Impact Speed (km/h) for in Car to Bicycle Scenario
Relative Speed M1 vehicles N1 vehicles
(km/h) Maximum mass Mass in running order Maximum mass Mass in running order
20 0 0 0 0
25 0 0 0 0
30 0 0 0 0
35 0 0 0 0
36 0 0 0 0
38 0 0 15 0
40 10 10 25 0
45 25 25 30 25
50 30 30 35 30
55 35 35 40 35
60 40 40 45 40
For relative speeds between the listed values, the maximum relative impact speed assigned to the next higher relative speed
shall apply. For masses above the mass in running order, the maximum relative impact speed assigned to the maximum mass
shall apply.
Test Speeds
Car to Car
Stationary Moving
M1 N1 M1 N1
max. mass running order max. mass running order max. mass running order max. mass running order
Speed 1 20 20 20 20 30 60 30 30
Speed 2 40 42 38 42 60 60 58 60
Speed 3 60 60 60 60
Car to Pedestrian Car to Cyclist
M1 N1 M1 N1
max. mass running order max. mass running order max. mass running order max. mass running order
Speed 1 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20
Speed 2 40 42 38 42 38 40 36 40
Speed 3 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60
All scenario tests will be performed two times. If one of the two test runs fails, the test may be repeated once. The
scenario is accounted as passed the required performance is met in two test runs. The number of failed test runs
within one category shall not exceed 10 % for Car to Car and Car to Pedestrian tests and 20 % for Car to Bicycle tests.
The technical service may test any other speeds within the speed range of the respective scenario..
30
UN R155 Cyber Security and Cyber Security Management System

UN R155
Overview
UN R155 is a regulation of the Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) and sets requirements for the security of vehicles
against cyber attacks.
Vehicle manufacturers are required to establish a cyber security management system (CSMS) and demonstrate that this CSMS is
functioning for the type approval of a new vehicle type.
For a CSMS, processes are defined for vehicle development so that risks from cyber attacks are systematically gathered and
assessed.
The manufacturer must also demonstrate that it controls supplier risks so manufacturers will presumably require suppliers to
also establish a CSMS, as is already common with other product liability risks. A typical way would be by means of "Cybersecurity
Interface Document" within ISO/SAE 21434.
Key features of a Cyber Security Management System (CSMS)
The main parts of the CSMS are:
Risk management: processes to identify, assess, and mitigate cyber threats must be implemented within the
manufacturer's organization.
The processes must cover the phases of vehicle development, vehicle production, and the operational phase at the end
customer (in the field).
Monitoring for known attacks and distribution of updates to secure vehicles in the field.
An assessment by an independent testing institute should demonstrate that the manufacturer's CSMS meets the
requirements of UN R155. To this end, testing institutes are accredited by the approval authorities for this task. The
verification is valid for three years. It is mandatory for the vehicle manufacturer in order to obtain type approvals for new
vehicles.
A CSMS is expected to have processes established which will identify new threats and develop defensive measures. UN R155 sets
out criteria for what a CSMS must be able to do and how this is checked. However, UN R155 leaves open how the CSMS should
be designed and there are also no suggested solutions as to which cyber threats can be defended against and how.
Focus of risk analyses

In the focus of risk analyses, Annex 5 of UN R155 gives numerous examples of attack methods and targets. For example, Part A
of Annex 5 states:
The wireless communication of the vehicle with its environment, e.g., with the manufacturer's update servers, for hazard
warnings via a Car2x communication or for a keyless function.
The security of the update process to prevent the import of manipulated software.
Interventions by vehicle occupants that allow actions by attackers through deception (comparable to email phishing on a
PC)
Security and protection of programs and data against manipulation as well as spying out of data
Inadequate protection using unsuitable cryptographic methods or methods that were still considered secure at the time of
development but lose their protective effect over the years due to technical progress, for example short cryptographic keys.
Part B describes types of attacks and measures to defend against them, and Part C deals with securing against attacks from
insiders or on the manufacturers' backend servers.
Guidance
ISO/SAE 21434 is intended to serve as a guideline for the implementation of UN R155 and to set a standard in the vehicle indus-
try. To help vehicle manufacturers prepare for the assessment, the VDA has published the volume "Automotive Cyber Security
Management System Audit".
Valid for vehicle classes: M, N, O
31
UN R156 Software Update and Software Updates Management

System UN R156
Overview
UN R156 is a regulation of the Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) that describes requirements for updating software in
control units of vehicles.
Proof of a functioning Software Update Management System (SUMS) is required of manufacturers if they
wish to place vehicles on the market (within the meaning of the legal term placing on the market),
want to carry out updates of software in its vehicles even after they have been approved for public road traffic,
want to update the software of components relevant for registration.
The regulation then requires that the manufacturer has established a SUMS and can demonstrate this to the approval authority
or a testing institute accredited by the approval authority. ISO 24089 "Road vehicles - Software update engineering" is currently
being developed to describe in more detail measures suitable for the industry.
Purpose
The purpose of a SUMS is to ensure that an update of software functions that were relevant for type approval (for example,
exhaust, brakes, engine control) are developed and validated so that they continue to operate in compliance with the law after
the update. To this end, UN R156 requires that updates be "safe and secure", without elaborating further. The exact details
should be determined by each manufacturer and their SUMS should ensure that the abstract expectations of UN R156 are met.
In automotive engineering, the English terms safe and secure refer primarily to the following points:
Safe means security against malfunctions of the software itself (bugs). In the automotive industry, the consideration of
functional safety in accordance with ISO 26262 has become particularly common here. Dangerous malfunctions would be,
for example, an airbag deployment without reason or self-acceleration due to an error in the engine control system.
Secure means tamper-proof during the update process and can be considered, for example, using cyber security methods
(according to ISO 21434). For example, the update mechanism should prevent the import of malware as well as tuning
software.
UN R156 also considers the case where an update fails. In this case, the software must still function properly as before the update
or assume a safe state.
Proof
A SUMS consists of processes and methods to safely distribute software updates to a specific type of vehicle. R156 does not
describe exactly what a SUMS should look like. Rather, it is about manufacturers developing a systematic approach to developing
and distributing updates, i.e., defining processes for how software updates are developed, tested and distributed.
For a company to be able to demonstrate that an effective SUMS has been implemented includes:
A certificate, which must be presented to the approval authority when a new vehicle type is type-approved.
The assessment is carried out by the approval authority or an approved independent testing institute.
After every 3 years the certificate has to be renewed by an assessment.
After the end of production of the vehicle type, the SUMS for this type shall be deregistered.
Proof of this SUMS must be provided for each type approval.
Valid for vehicle classes: M, N, O, S, T
32
UN R157 ALKS Test Scenarios UN R157
Lane Keeping
VUT stays within lane and maintains stable position
test duration ≥ 5 min.
passenger car and PTW as lead/other vehicle
lead vehicle swerving in lane
other vehicle driving close beside in adjacent lane
Collision Avoidance
VUT avoids collisions with other road users or objects
with stationary targets
passenger car
PTW
pedestrian
pedestrian crossing the lane @ 5 km/h
blocked lane
target partially within lane
multiple consecutive obstacles
on curved section of the road
Following a lead vehicle

VUT is able to maintain/restore safe distance and avoid col-
lisions with decelerating lead vehicle
across full speed range of the ALKS
passenger car and PTW lead vehicles
constant and varying lead vehicle speeds
straight and curved roads
different lateral lead vehicle positions in the lane
lead vehicle decelerations ≥ 6 m/s² until standstill
Lane change of other vehicle into lane (cut-in)

VUT is able to avoid or mitigate collisions with cutting in
vehicles
for different TTC including scenarios in which avoidance
is not possible
cutting-in vehicles at constant speed, accelerating or
decelerating
different lateral velocities and accelerations of
cutting-in vehicles
passenger cars and PTW as cutting-in vehicles
avoidance required if
cutting in vehicle maintains its longitudinal speed
lateral movement of the cutting in vehicle has been visible
for a time of at least 0.72 s before the reference point for
TTCLaneIntrusion is reached
TTCLaneIntrusion> vrel / (2∙6 m/s²) + 0.35 s
(where TTCLaneIntrusion = The TTC value, when the outside
of the tyre of the intruding vehicle’s front wheel closest to
the lane markings crosses a line 0.3 m beyond the outside
edge of the visible lane marking to which the intruding
vehicle is being drifted)
Scenario pictures for illustrative purposes only. Pictures do not cover
all applicable scenarios.
33
UN R157 ALKS Test Scenarios

Stationary obstacle after lead vehicle cut-out
VUT is able to avoid collision with stationary object after
evasive manoeuvre of lead vehicle
with stationary targets centered in lane
passenger car
PTW
pedestrian
road block
with multiple consecutive obstacles (e.g. PTW and car)
Field of view test
VUT is able to detect other road users within the forward
detection area upto the declared range and beside within
the lateral detection area upto at least the full width of the
ajacent lane
Forward detection
PTW at outer edge of each adjacent lane
stationary pedestrian at outer edge of each adjacent lane
stationary PTW within ego lane
stationary pedestrian within ego lane
Lateral detection
PTW approaching the VUT from left adjacent lane
PTW approaching the VUT from right adjacent lane
Rearward detection
PTW approaching the VUT from the rear to the left of the
VUT
PTW approaching the VUT from the rear to the right of the
VUT
Direction indicator status detection area
VUT is able to assess the status of other vehicle’s (car, PTW)
direction indicators
vehicle positioned at random within the detection area
Lane changing
VUT does not cause an unreasonable risk to safety of occu-
pants and other road users during a lane change, is capable
of correctly performing lane changes, and is able to assess
the criticality of the situation before starting the lane change
Test
with different vehicles (car, PTW) approaching from the rear
in a scenario where a lane change is possible and executed
in a scenario where a lane change is not possible due to a
vehicle approaching from the rear
with an equally fast vehicle following behind in the adjacent
lane, preventing a lane change
with a vehicle driving beside in the adjacent lane preventing
a lane change
in a scenario where a lane change during a minimum-risk-
manoeuvre is possible and executed
in a scenario where the VUT reacts to another vehicle that
starts changing into the same space within the target lane,
to avoid a potential risk of collision
Avoid emergency manoeuvre before a passable object
in the lane
VUT is not initiating an emergency manoeuvre due to a
passable object in the lane Scenario pictures for illustrative purposes only. Pictures do not cover
without/with lead vehicle (car, PTW) in the lane all applicable scenarios.
34
EU General Safety Regulation 2019/2144 - ADAS Requirements

Regulation 2019/2144/EU
M1 M2 M3 N1 N2 N3
NT 7/2024 NT 7/2024
AEB VRU UN R152-02
NR 7/2026 NR 7/2026
NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022
AEB Car-to-Car UN R152-00
NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024
NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022
VRU Collision Warning UN R159
NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024
NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022
Blind Spot System UN R151
NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024
NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022
ELK EU 2021/646
NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024
NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022
ISA EU 2021/1958
NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024
Drowsiness Detection & NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022
EU 2021/1341
Warning NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024
Advanced Driver Distraction NT 7/2024 NT 7/2024 NT 7/2024 NT 7/2024 NT 7/2024 NT 7/2024
Warning NR 7/2026 NR 7/2026 NR 7/2026 NR 7/2026 NR 7/2026 NR 7/2026
NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022 NT 7/2022
Event Data Recorders EDR EU 2022/545
NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024 NR 7/2024
NT = New Types (Date for refusal to grant EU type-approval of vehicles, that do not meet the requirements)
NR = New Registrations (Date for the prohibition of the registration of vehicles, that do not meet the requirements)
Advertisement
Active
Safety
Testing
WE ARE YOUR SOLUTION SPECIALIST. Learn more about

x-track, our fully
We don‘t think in silos. Our engineering experts work in an equipped mobile
interdisciplinary organization to find the best solution for your laboratory.
project. From virtual to physical testing and validation - high
quality engineering services worldwide from a single source. www.bertrandt.com
35
EU 2021/646 Emergency Lane-Keeping Systems (ELKS)

Regulation (EU) 2021/646
Lane Departure Warning

Dashed Line
v0 = 65 - 130 km/h (Test @ 70 km7h), vlat = 0.1 - 0.5 m/s

LDW
Solid Line
v0 = 65 - 130 km/h (Test @ 70 km7h), vlat = 0.1 - 0.5 m/s
Requirements
Warning by at least two warning means out of visual, acoustic and haptic; or one warning means out of haptic and
acoustic, with spatial indication about the direction of unintended drift of the vehicle.
Warning indication at the latest when the DLTM (DistanceTo Lane Marking) = - 0.3 m
Emergency Lane Keeping

CDCF Corrective Directional Control Function
Solid Line:

Solid Line:
Fully Marked Lane
v0 = 70 (65) - 130 km/h (Test @ 72 km/h)

vlat = 0.2 - 0.5 m/s for v0 ≤ 100 km/h; 0.2 - 0.3 m/s for v0 > 100 km/h
R ≥ 1200 m
Requirements
CDCF active at least between 70 km/h and 130 km/h (or the maximum vehicle speed if it is below 130 km/h). In the
case that the vehicle reduces its speed from above 70 km/h to below 70 km/h, the system shall be active at least
until the vehicle speed reduces below 65 km/h.
Prevention of lane departure by crossing of visible lane markings by more than a DTLM (DistanceTo Lane Marking)
= - 0.3 m
36
2021/1341/EU - Driver Drowsiness and Attention Warning Systems

Regulation 2021/1341/EU
Specific test procedures and technical requirements for the type-approval of motor vehicles with regard to
their driver drowsiness and attention warning systems
The DDAW is defined as a system that assesses the driver’s alertness through vehicle systems analysis and, where needed,
provides a warning to the driver. In particular, DDAW must detect or recognise the driving and/or steering pattern symptomatic
of a driver exhibiting reduced alertness due to fatigue, and interact with and alert the driver via the vehicle’s human-machine
interface.
DDAW regulation entered into force in September 2021. It shall apply for new types vehicle from 6 July 2022 and for new cars
vehicle from 6 July 2024.
Technical Requirements
DDAW System Control

It shall not be possible for the driver to manually deactivate the DDAW system. It may however be possible for the driver to
manually deactivate the DDAW system HMI warnings. The DDAW system shall be automatically activated above the speed of
70 km/h. Once activated, DDAW system shall operate normally within the speed range of 65 km/h to 130 km/h or the vehicle’s
maximum allowed speed, whichever is lower.
Environmental Conditions
The DDAW system shall operate effectively during the day and night. At a minimum, the DDAW system shall work effectively on
a multi-lane divided road, with or without a central divide, when lane markings are visible on both sides of the lane.
Monitoring driver drowsiness

The DDAW system shall provide a warning to the driver at a level of drowsiness which is equivalent to or above 8 on the reference
sleepiness scale set out in the Karolinska Sleepiness Scale (KSS) (Fig. 1). The DDAW system may provide a warning to the driver at
a level of drowsiness which is equivalent to level 7 on KSS.
Human Machine Interface requirements

Visual and acoustic or any other warning used by the DDAW system to alert the driver shall be presented as soon as possible after
occurrence of the trigger behaviour and may cascade and intensify until acknowledgement thereof by the driver. The visual and
acoustic warning shall be easily recognised by the driver.
DDAW failure warning

When there are failures detected in the DDAW system, visual failure warning signals shall be provided.
Test procedures for validation of driver drowsiness and attention warning (DDAW) systems
Manufacturers shall carry out validation testing to ensure that DDAW systems are able to monitor driver drowsiness in a manner
which is accurate, robust and scientifically valid.
Testing requirements
Validation testing shall take place using human participants. Alternatively the data used for the validation shall derive from
behaviour data collected with human participants. The validation testing can be carried out in a real-world road environment
or in a simulator. If validation testing is performed in a simulator, the manufacturer shall document its limitations with regard to
real-world open road testing for the purpose of testing the DDAW system.
Test sample
The minimum sample size of participants shall be 10 participants. The participants shall correspond to the targeted demography
37
for the vehicle. None of the 10 participants of the minimum sample size shall be involved in the development of DDAW system.
Each test participant shall generate at least 1 true positive or 1 false negative event. The total number, obtained by the sum of
true positive events and false negative events, shall be equal to or higher than 10. It is allowed to run more than one test per
participant in order to acquire more data for a given participant. At a minimum, the system shall be tested in the day and night
conditions.
Measuring drowsiness
The participant’s level of drowsiness shall be measured using the KSS. Participants shall be trained on the KSS before they apply it
as part of the DDAW system validation testing. Measurements shall be obtained during the testing at intervals of approximately
5 minutes. Any warning from the DDAW system shall be treated as a true positive event if the participant previous or next rating
is at a KSS level of 7 or above. Manufacturers may use an alternative measurement(s) to validate a DDAW system. If alternative
measurements to KSS are used to validate a DDAW system, the manufacture shall state the threshold being used and provide
evidence detailing the equivalency between the threshold and a KSS level of 8.
Test results
Test data shall only be discarded by the manufacturer before any statistical analysis is conducted in any of the following cases:
(a) there is an error in carrying out the testing procedure;
(b) the participant’s KSS ratings are deemed unreliable;
(c) insufficient data is collected for a participant.
The manufacturer shall document any errors that occur during testing shall be documented as part of the evidence in the docu-
mentation package.
Acceptance criteria
A DDAW system shall be deemed effective by the technical services if the following requirement (a) or (b) is satisfied:
(a) the average sensitivity is above 40 % (Sensitivity calculated from the average of the sensitivity of all participants)
(b) the lower bound from the 90 % confidence interval of the sensitivity results shall be above 20 %.
Procedures for assessment of technical documentation and verification testing by the approval authorities and
technical services
The technical service shall assess the capability of the test protocol, proposed by the manufacturer, to detect a drowsy driving
event. The technical service shall also perform the test based on the proposed protocol.
The test shall be accounted as passed as soon as the DDAW system provides a warning for a drowsy driver.
If the test fails to provide a warning for a drowsy driver, the technical service may repeat it up to two times.
The root cause of any failed test run shall be analysed by the technical service and the analysis shall be annexed to the test
report.
Fig. 1: Reference sleepiness scale for DDAW system KSS

(Karolinska Sleepiness Scale)
Rating Verbal Description
1 Extremely alert
2 Very alert
3 Alert
4 Rather alert
5 Neither alert nor sleepy
6 Some signs of sleepiness
7 Sleepy, no effort to keep awake
8 Sleepy, some effort to keep awake
9 Very sleepy, great effort to keep awake, fighting sleep
38
Seminar
this course
Vehicle Safety under Self-Certification

Principles, Obligations, Enforcement and Remedies
Course Description Course Contents
When looking at regulatory requirements across different mar- Background and origins of self-certification
kets, it's common to think in terms of technical specifications, Players and processes in U.S. rulemaking
checking for differences in test procedures and performance Principles of U.S. safety compliance and enforcement
criteria. However, failure to consider how the regulations are Role of product liability laws
used can be a fatal mistake because safety authorities differ in Role of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS)
how they apply and enforce their requirements. NHTSA and FMVSS compliance
This seminar looks at the self-certification compliance and NHTSA and safety monitoring
enforcement system which focuses heavily on monitoring Non-regulatory methods to ensure safety
the performance of vehicles in use. Compliance with the legal Safety defects and motor vehicle recalls
standards is only one part of a much larger, more complex Manufacturer roles and responsibilities
system requiring the assurance of safety throughout the life- Outlook for U.S. safety policies
time of every vehicle on the road. Manufacturers must have
systems in place to detect possible safety concerns regardless
of whether they relate to compliance with specific standards
and must communicate continuously with safety authorities
or run the risk of damaging recalls that can place the company
in peril.
Course Objectives
This seminar provides a review of self-certification compliance
and enforcement mechanisms toward helping manufacturers
avoid expensive recalls, costly penalties, and lost reputation.
Who should attend?
The seminar is aimed at employees from the development
departments of automobile manufacturers and suppliers who
develop vehicles for the U.S. market as well as all employees
in the areas of product strategy, sales and warranty and defect
management for the U.S. market. Images: NHTSA

Instructor
systems supplier).

Dates
25.-28.04.2023 183/4084 Online 4 Days 1.340,- EUR till 28.03.2023, thereafter 1.650,- EUR
39
Seminar
this course
Product Liability in the Automobile Industry
Course Description Course Objectives

In the framework of the ongoing extension of active and pas- The aim of this course is to convey the importance of product
sive safety systems automobiles are becoming increasingly liability for businesses and employees as well as an under-
complex. standing of preventive measures.
In this context the faultlessness of systems becomes more and Who should attend?
more important, as with growing complexity, especially in the The seminar is aimed at all decision-makers in the automotive
field of autonomous vehicles, not only the number but also development, production and at suppliers who want to learn
the severity of possible faults is increasing. The use of specific about the consequences of product liability and want to get
sensors, software, information technology, artificial intel- familiar with preventive measures.
ligence and machine learning expand the scope of liability-
related topics. Even implemented equal parts strategies can Course Contents
quickly lead to a large number of affected vehicles in case of Fundamentals of Product Liability
Civil and criminal responsibility of the company and
defects. An indicator for this is the growing number of recalls
in recent years. personal liability of employees
Liability for Defects
Each manufacturer holds the responsibility for consequential
Product liability in Europe and in the U.S.
damages caused by its products when used as intended. This
U.S. TREAD ACT, Reporting obligation for OEMs and
responsibility is defined by law in all countries and has civil and
criminal penalties. suppliers
Motor Vehicle Whistleblower Act (importance to
Examples include cases of damage and recalls of large num-
bers of vehicles that several OEMs were obliged to do during companies)
EU-Whistleblower Directive
the last few years.
Importance of norms and standards (e.g. ISO 26262
Obviously a safety related recall of a mass product may have Functional Safety)
Product liability and advertisement / public relations of
severe or even existence-threatening consequences.
companies
Quality management and its relevance from a product
Consequently, manufacturers must ensure faultlessness
throughout their organization. Amongst others, questions liability point of view
Product liability in the supply chain
may raise like:
Consequences of new technologies, liability in the area of
Who in the company is responsible for product safety?
Is your entire organization set up to avoid safety-related
driver assistance systems and autonomous vehicles
Instructions, warnings
errors or to reduce the risk?
Risk minimization within the organization, prevention
Is compliance with product liability ensured throughout
Preventive product safety measures during product
the company?
In the case of allegations, can targeted and
development
Product observation and resulting consequences
comprehensive evidence be quickly provided?
Documentation, conclusive evidence
How can unwarranted claims be averted?
Insurance of product liability risk
What can be learned from the product liability cases,
Recall decision and processing
which are particularly well received by the public?
Hans-Georg Lohrmann (Quality-Reliability-Safety Consultant) Hans-Georg Lohrmann was

Instructor
Manager of Reliability & Conformity of Production at ZF TRW Automotive GmbH. He has many years of expe-
rience in the field of safety, reliability and product liability in the automotive sector. Since September 2015
he has retired and is still active as a freelance consultant. He specializes in the area of restraint systems for
vehicle occupant protection and supports his clients in the areas of reliability, safety planning and methods of
verification and litigation support.

Dates
40
Event
NEW
Supporting automotive development engineers to further

improve automotive safety, that is the essence of SafetyWeek.
In a unique combination of knowledge congress, events and exhibition, SafetyWeek offers
participants and visitors the opportunity, to bring their expertise up-to-date and to learn
about the latest developments and technologies in product development and product
verification.
In 2023 SafetyWeek will feature numerous highlights:
Auto[nom]Mobil, the expert forum on L3 and beyond  page 42
The knowledge congress SafetyUpDate with the latest updates on requirements
and solutions in active and passive safety.  page 43
The SafetyTestingChallenge with the innovations from the Leaders in Testing and
Simulation of components and systems in active and passive safety  page 44
The accompanying exhibition SafetyExpo, the meeting point for suppliers and
decision makers in automotive safety.
SAFETYTESTING
SAFETYUPDATE
Who should attend?

SafetyWeek is the meeting point for everyone involved in vehicle safety. This includes
developers as well as test and simulation engineers from OEMs and suppliers, manu-
facturers of test systems, representatives of governments and consumer protection
organizations and researchers from universities and research institutes.
DATE 23.-25.05.2023
Facts
VENUE Würzburg, GERMANY & ONLINE
HOMEPAGE www.carhs.de/safetyweek
LANGUAGE German / English

41
Event
NEW
The Experts' Dialogue

Automated Driving and Safety
The hype about what is often called autonomous driving is increasingly giving way to real-
ity. In recent years, even the greatest visionaries have realized that many questions still
have to be answered, many barriers overcome and many challenges mastered in order to
implement vehicle automation.
However, especially in times of the current crisis, it has become all the more clear that
mobility must be regarded as one of the most fundamental basic needs, and mobility for
all means that we must work on vehicle automation with full commitment.
In the Auto[nom]Mobil session of the carhs.training SafetyWeek, fundamental and cross-

competitive necessities for achieving goals will be addressed and possible solutions will
be presented. This expert dialogue provides the platform for an intensive exchange and is
intended to accelerate the essential stronger networking of the participants.
DATE 24.- 25.05.2023

Facts
LANGUAGE
42
Event
NEW
The concept is familiar: To keep software up-to-date you regularly make an update. The
same is true for automotive safety engineering: To keep yourself up-to-date you have
to attend the SafetyUpDate on a regular basis. Here you get a comprehensive overview
of all relevant news in automotive safety.
Active + Passive Safety = SafetyUpDate

The SafetyUpDate reflects the close integration of active and passive safety and com-
bines both topics in one event. General topics such as the NCAP consumer tests are
dealt with in plenary presentations, whereas specific topics such as testing are pre-
sented in parallel session on active respectively passive safety.
Conference Topics include:

Regulations for active & passive safety and
assisted, automated & autonomous driving
NCAP consumer protection tests
Development tools: Test & simulation
Development strategies & solutions
Biomechanics & accident research
From Experts for Experts

The speakers are leading experts from government agencies, consumer protection
organizations, industry and universities. We consider it important that the UpDate
presentations are product-neutral and practical.
Meeting Point: Expert Dialog

In addition to the presentations the SafetyUpDate encourages the communication
among experts. After the presentations the speakers are available for discussions at
the MeetingPoint.
Who should attend?

The SafetyUpDate is aimed at automotive developers, who are interested in active or
passive vehicle safety and want to bring their knowledge up-to-date. In addition to the
knowledge update, SafetyUpDate offers excellent opportunities to build and maintain
contacts in the safety community.
DATE 24.- 25.05.2023

Facts
LANGUAGE German with translation into English

43
Event
NEW
Testing is a key element in the product development cycle of

any new vehicle development and its active and passive safety
functions. In collaboration with the industry experts in our
program committee, we defined the current challenges of the
safety testing landscape. Join us for a new conference format
where the industry leaders challenge the test tool and testing
suppliers and their hard- and software solutions. Four sessions
will be defined to focus on one of the challenges that will pro-
vide the platform for dialogue and discussion.
We have invited global leaders out of the full safety testing
spectrum to answer these industry calls.
Challenge Topics
Expect discussions on innovations from the following fields:
Full scale crash testing and advanced sled simulation for
battery-electric vehicles
Measuring technologies, data acquisition and ATDs for
future mobility concepts

ADAS and AD test tools for complex scenarios
In-Door testing innovations for active safety
Who should attend?

The SafetyTesting Challenge is suited for engineers and decision
makers from testing departments for active and passive safety.
Both experts and newcomers get an overview over the latest
innovations in test equipment and software tool and find ample
opportunity to share their own experiences with industry col-
leagues.
DATE 23.05.2023
Facts
HOMEPAGE www.carhs.de/safetytesting
LANGUAGE
44
iMAR Navigation GmbH
Im Reihersbruch 3
D-66386 St.Ingbert
+49 6894 9657 0
sales@imar-navigation.de
Your Experts
for Test Track
Instrumentation
and Automation
iSWACO-ARGUS
Manufacturer independent Swarm Control for
increasingly complex Scenario-Based Testing
Holistic Toolchain ranging from Simulation to Real-World Testing on a

Proving Ground supporting ISO 22133, AFGBV, SOTIF and iSCAML –
standardised Independent Scenario Advanced Meta Language
Localisation Vehicle Guidance Scenario

INS/GNSS and Control Database
Infrastructure Communication SCT Platforms &
Management WiFi and 5G Vehicle Robots
www.imar-navigation.de
Consumer Testing (NCAP) Assistance System Rating Matrix
Euro NCAP
U.S. NCAP IIHS Latin NCAP
ANCAP
SBR Seat Belt rear seat w/ occupant front front
Reminder detection rear rear
OSM / DSM Occu- distratction
pant/Driver Status fatique
Monitoring unresponsivenes
ABS Anti-Lock Braking
System
ESC Electronic Stability
Moose test
Control
MCB Multi Collision
part of the AOP rating
Brake
SAS Speed Assistance Speed Limit Inform. Manual Speed Ass.
Systems Speed Control Speed Control
LSS Lane Support LDW
LDW
Systems LKA LDW
LKA
ELK LKS
RED
ELK PTW
BSM Blind Spot Car BSW
Motorcycle
Monitoring Motorcycle BSI
AEB Car to Car rear (stat./mov./brake.)
rear (stat./mov./brake.)
turn across path
intersection rear (stationary) rear (stat./mov./brake.)
crossing
head on
head on
AEB Pedestrian crossing
crossing crossing
longitudinal crossing
longitudinal longitudinal
turn across path
AEB Cyclist crossing
longitudinal tba
turn across path
AEB PTW rear
tba
turn across path
AEB Reverse Pedestrian (stat./mov.) child (stationary)
Emergency Call part of the AOP rating e-Call
Rear View Monitor
Rear Cross Traffic Alert
Headlights adaptive driving

visibilty
beam lower beam
glare
semiautomatic
Pedal Misapplication based on JNCAP
L2/L3 Assisted Driving
assisted
automated
● 2023 ● 2024 ● 2025 ● 2027 ● introduction to be announced
46
ASEAN NCAP C-NCAP C-IASI JNCAP KNCAP

front seats passenger w/ detection front passenger seat

rear seats rear seats rear seats
on 2025 road map
UN R13h
UN R13h / UN R140 ESC
Optional systems 
LKA
LDW (optional LKA
 
systems) ELK LDW
LDW curve
Motorcycle Optional systems 
rear (stat./mov.)
rear (stat./mov.)
rear (stat./mov.) turn across path rear (stat./mov./brake.) rear (stat./mov./brake.)
junction
crossing
crossing
crossing
longitudinal crossing crossing
longitudinal
turn across path
crossing
crossing crossing crossing
longitudinal
longitudinal longitudinal longitudinal
turn across path
crossing
turn across path
Pedestrian
part of the OP rating e-Call
Rear View Monitor Rear View Monitor
on 2025 road map 

Low beam
Automatic antiglare
Auto High Beam High beam 
Automatic switching
Bonus
Pedal misapplication
47
Seminar
this course
Automated Driving - Safeguarding and Market Introduction

The seminar presents the necessary and sufficient conditions National and international laws and regulations
for bringing automated vehicles onto the market. In addition, Safety standards (functional safety, safety of the intended
requirements for product monitoring and market surveillance function, cyber security)
will be derived, which can be used to ensure that the technol- Positive risk balance
ogy proves itself throughout the entire product life cycle. The Technically unavoidable residual risks
question is addressed as to what forms automated driving can Proof of operational reliability
be expected to take in private transport, local passenger and Epidemiological and systemic approaches in safety and
freight transport, long-distance transport and in very special risk analyses
areas of application, and what opportunities connectivity and Development of automation in
digitization of the technology open up. Customer vehicles
People & goods movers
Course Objectives Heavy commercial vehicles
The course teaches the steps necessary to bring an automated Special applications
vehicle to the market. In particular, it deals with how the safety Connectivity and digital mobility ecosystems
of such vehicles can be proven and documented.
Who should attend?
The seminar is aimed at engineers who are faced with the task
of making automated vehicles ready for the market and pro-
viding legally compliant proof of the safety of these vehicles.
Udo Steininger (TÜV SÜD Rail GmbH) is Chief Expert Automotive Safety at TÜV SÜD Rail GmbH. He
Instructor
has been involved in the safety of complex human-machine systems for over 35 years. After studying physics
at the Technical University of Dresden, he worked for 5 years in reactor safety research. Since 1991, he has
been working at TÜV SÜD on the topics of risk, reliability and safety in various fields of application - first in
industry, then in railroads and, for the last 20 years, in the field of motor vehicles. For the past 15 years, he
has specialized in assisted and automated driving. Initially, the focus of his work was on safety assessment
during development, testing of vehicles and vehicle systems, and safety driver training. He currently supports
manufacturers, suppliers and mobility service providers in the market introduction of systems for automated
driving and related services. He is active in the DIN Automotive Standards Committee (ISO 26262 and ISO
21448) and is a member of the Safety - Methods and Processes - Advisory Board of the VDI Society for Vehicle
and Transport Technology (FVT). Udo Steininger was a lecturer at the Munich University of Applied Sciences
for many years and is a guest lecturer at the Chair of Automotive Engineering at the Technical University of
Munich. His column on the current status and development of automated driving appears regularly in carhs'
SafetyNews.

Dates
48
Seminar
this course
NCAP - New Car Assessment Programs

Tests, Assessment Methods, Ratings
Course Description In both focusses the current overall rating methods are
In 1979 the first New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) was described and explained. In addition to that an outlook is
established by NHTSA in the United States. The goal was given on the roadmaps and future developments of the NCAP
to motivate competing car manufacturers to enhance the programs.
safety level of their cars beyond the minimum safety stan-
dards defined by regulations. The same approach has been Who should attend?
followed globally by other organizations (e.g. by Euro NCAP, The seminar addresses design, simulation, testing and project
IIHS, ANCAP, JNCAP, KNCAP, C-NCAP, ...). Euro NCAP which engineers as well as managers who want to get a current over-
has been established in 1997 has taken a leading role and view on the global range of NCAP programs with an outlook
has significantly influenced other countries and regions. The on upcoming topics and trends from an insider. Depending on
NCAP programs in many cases are highly dynamic, especially the focus of their work attendees should chose the appropri-
in comparison with rulemaking activities. In order to reach ate focus of the seminar.
the goal to continuously improve the safety level of cars, the
requirements need to be permanently adapted to the state
of technology. Developers in the automotive industry need to Course Contents
know about upcoming changes at an early stage in order to be Basics of New Car Assessment Programs
Euro NCAP
able to design or equip their vehicles accordingly.
Background, Principles and Organisation
In this seminar attendees get an overview of the organizations
Products, Rating and Rules
in charge of the NCAP programs and become familiar with the Adult Occupant Protection (AOP)
various test and assessment methods. Child Occupant Protection (COP)
The seminar is conducted several times a year with Vulnerable Road User Protection (PP / VRU)
Safety Assist (SA)
changing focuses:
Automated Driving
Commercial Van Safety
Focus passive safety: Here the focus is on test and Roadmap 2030
assessment methods for passive safety. Frontal and IIHS
side impact, whiplash, child protection and pedestrian China NCAP
protection are discussed in detail. Tests for active safety
are only mentioned in as far as they are relevant for the
overall rating.
Focus active safety: Here the focus is on active safety
systems such as AEB or lane assistance. The tests and
assessments for these systems are explained in detail.
Tests for passive safety are only mentioned in as far as
they are relevant for the overall rating.
Direktor and Professor Andre Seeck (German Federal Highway Research Institute)
Instructor
is head of the division "Vehicle Technology" with the German Federal Highway Research Institute (BASt). In
this position he is responsible for the preparation of European Safety Regulations. Furthermore he represents
the German Federal Ministry for Digital and Transport in the Board of Directors of Euro NCAP and he is the
chairman of the strategy group on automated driving and of the rating system. These positions enable him to
gain deep insight into current and future developments in vehicle safety. In 2017 NHTSA awarded him the U.
S. Government Special Award of Appreciation.

Dates
49
Euro NCAP / ANCAP AEB VRU-Pedestrian ! valid from 2023
Test Protocol 4.2

Assessment Protocol 11.2
Adult, Farside, Impact at daylight testing

50 % of the Vehicle Width 50 %
(CPFA-50) nighttime
v 0 = 10 km/h ... 60 km/h v = 8 km/h testing
Adult, Nearside, Impact at nighttime testing
25 & 75 % of the Vehicle 25 % / 75 % with streetlights
Width (CPNA-25/75) high beam
headlights
v 0 = 10 km/h ... 60 km/h v = 5 km/h
low beam
Child, Obstruction, Near- headlights
50 %
side, Impact at 50 % of the
Vehicle Width (CPNCO-50) 1m 1m 1m
v 0 = 10 km/h ... 60 km/h v = 5 km/h

Adult, Longitudinal, Impact
at 25 & 50 % of the Vehicle 25 % / 50 %
Width (CPLA-25 / 50)
CPLA-50: v 0 = 20 km/h ... 60 km/h v = 5 km/h
CPLA-25: v 0 = 50 km/h ... 80 km/h v = 5 km/h
Reverse Adult, Nearside,

Impact at 50 % of the 50 %
Vehicle Width
(CPRA Moving)
v = 5 km/h v 0 = -4 km/h / -8 km/h
Reverse Adult, Stationary,

Impact at 25/50/75 % of 25 % / 50 % / 75 %
the Vehicle Width
(CPRA Stationary)
v = 0 km/h v 0 = -4 km/h / -8 km/h
CPTA-Farside: v = 5 km/h
v0 = 10|15|20 km/h
Adult, VUT Turning, Farside
/ Nearside, Same / Op-
posite Direction, Impact at 50 %
(CPTA-Farside / Nearside)
CPTA-Nearside: v = 5 km/h
v 0 = 10 km/h
Prerequistes for Scoring:
The AEB system must be default ON at the start of every journey.
The AEB system must operate from speeds ≥ 10 km/h in the CPNA-75 day + night, must be able to detect pedestrians
walking as slow as 3 km/h and reduce speed in the CPNA-75 scenario at 20 km/h.
The system may not automatically switch off at a speed < 80 km/h.
The score of the pedestrian impact tests (legforms & head) must be ≥ 18 points.
In CPRA/CPRC the system may not release the brakes after an intervention, unless the threat (EPT) has left the vehicle path
or in case of a positive action by the driver. If the VUT is fitted as standard with a rear-view camera, the brakes may be
released after 1.5 s
50
Scoring Table: points available per test speed
v0 CPTA CPTA
Scenario CPFA CPNA CPNCO CPLA CPLA Farside Nearside
CPRA
(km/h)
Opposite / Same Station-
configuration 50 % 25 % 75 % 25 % 75 % 50 % 50 % 25 % Moving
direction ary
light conditions day night day night day night day & night day day
function assessed AEB AEB AEB AEB AEB FCW AEB AEB AEB
4 1 1
8 1 1
10 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
15 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
20 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
25 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
30 2 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1
35 3 2 3 3 2 2 3 2 2
40 3 2 3 3 2 2 3 2 2
45 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
50 2 3 2 2 3 3 2 3 3 3
55 2 3 2 2 3 3 2 3 3 3
60 1 2 1 1 2 2 1 2 2 2
65 1
70 1
Euro NCAP / ANCAP AEB VRU-Pedestrian
75 1
80 1
30 day / 30 4 Opposite /
max. total scenario score (1) 20 20 40 40 20 20 4
night 4 Same dir.

normalized scores (2) actual score / (1)

scenario points (3) 0.25 0.75 0.25 0.75 1 0.5 0.5 day / 1 night 2 2
AEB Pedestrian total points Σ (2)·(3) max. 9 points
Scoring method:
AEB VRU Test Speed (km/h)
!
score = Points according to AEB VRU Points table Points table 10 15 20 25 30 35 - 60

pass / fail: Points are awarded if impact is avoided 0 1 1 1 1 1 1
pass / fail: Points are awarded if Forward Collision Warning >0 0 0.25 0.25 0.50 0.50 0.75
(FCW) is issued @ TTC ≥ 1.7 s, or if the manufacturer demon- > 10 0 0 0.25 0.25 0.50
Test Protocol 4.2
> 20 0 0 0.25
valid from 2023
strates that their ESS (Emergency Steering Support) system

(Relative)
Impact Speed
(km/h)
> 30 0
51
provides appropriate support to avoid the collision
Euro NCAP / ANCAP AEB VRU-Cyclist ! valid from 2023
daylight testing Assessment Protocol 11.2 Test Protocol 4.2
Cyclist, Unobstructed,
Farside, Impact at 50 % of the 50 %
Vehicle Width
(CBFA-50)
v0 = 10 km/h ... 60 km/h v = 20 km/h
Cyclist, Unobstructed,
Nearside, Impact at 50 % of 50 %
the Vehicle Width
(CBNA-50)
v0 = 10 km/h ... 60 km/h v = 15 km/h
Cyclist, Obstructed,
Nearside, Impact at 50 % of 50 %
the Vehicle Width
(CBNAO-50)
v0 = 10 km/h ... 60 km/h v = 10 km/h
Cyclist, Unobstructed, Longi-

tudinal, Impact at 50 % of the 50 %
Vehicle Width (CBLA-50)
v0 = 25 km/h ... 60 km/h v = 15 km/h
Cyclist, Unobstructed, Longi-

tudinal, Impact at 25 % of the 25 %
Vehicle Width (CBLA-25)
v0 = 50 km/h ... 80 km/h v = 20 km/h
CBTA-Farside: v = 15 km/h
v0 = 10 / 15 / 20 km/h
Cyclist, VUT turning, Farside,
Nearside, Impact at 50 % of
the Vehicle Width
(CBTA-Nearside / Farside)
CBTA-Nearside
v0 = 10 km/h
D
Cyclist, Obstructed, Dooring
(CBDA)
v = 15 km/h operate door handle @ D = 7 m
52
LEADING PARTNER
for ADAS
development, testing
& validation services
DEVELOPMENT & EURO NCAP PROTOCOL

CERTIFICATION TESTS Autonomous Emergency
EU & USA Regulation Tests Breaking (AEB) Tests
Main GSR Regulations Accident Avoidance, Occupants
ADAS Protection and Road User Protection
(VRU), Night Testing, Cyclist and PTW
Vehicle Dynamics Scenarios
Driver Assistance Systems
ADAS ROAD VALIDATION
ADAS Validation on Public Road Lane Keeping/Assist System
and Road Edge Detection
Data Collection in accordance
with GDPR Future NCAP 2023 test: Crossing
Point Of Interest Identification Junction Scenarios, Rear AEB Tests
and Testing and High-speed Maneuvers
Subjective Evaluation Assisted Driving
Main NCAP Protocols (C-NCAP,
K-NCAP, A-NCAP)
automotive.csi-spa.com
v0
valid from 2023
Scenario CBFA CBNA CBNAO CBLA CBTA CBDA

Test Protocol 4.2
(km/h)
configuration 50 % 50 % 50 % 50% 25 % farside nearside dooring
light conditions day
function assessed AEB AEB AEB AEB FCW AEB AEB visual
!
10 1 1 1 1 1 information
15 1 1 1 1 TTC ≥ 2.3 s
20 1 1 1 1 0.25
25 1 1 1 1
warning
30 1 1 1 1
TTC ≥ 1.7 s
35 1 1 1 2
40 1 1 1 2 0.25
45 1 1 1 3
door
50 1 1 1 3 3
retention
Euro NCAP / ANCAP AEB VRU-Cyclist
55 1 1 1 3 3
60 1 1 1 1 1 0.25
65 1
70 1 all doors
75 1
Wissen
80 1 0.25
max. total scenario score (1) 11 11 11 27 4 1
scenario points (3) 2 1 1 2 2 1
AEB Cyclist total points Σ (2)·(3) max. 9 points
Scoring method:
SafetyWissen.com
score = Points according to AEB VRU Points table AEB VRU Test Speed (km/h)
Points table 10 15 20 25 30 35 - 60
Impact Speed
pass / fail: Points are awarded if Forward Collision Warning >0 0 0.25 0.25 0.50 0.50 0.75
(FCW) is issued @ TTC ≥ 1.7 s, or if the manufacturer demon-
(Relative)
> 10 0 0 0.25 0.25 0.50
(km/h)
strates that their ESS (Emergency Steering Support) system > 20 0 0 0.25
> 30 0
provides appropriate support to avoid the collision
54
Euro NCAP / ANCAP AEB / LSS PTW ! valid from 2023
Assessment Protocol 11.2 Test Protocol 4.2
Motorcycle, stationary,
Unobstructed, Longitudinal, 50 %
Impact at 50 % of the Vehicle
Width (CMRs)
v0 = 10 km/h ... 60 km/h in 5 km/h steps v = 0 km/h
d0
Motorcycle, braking,
Unobstructed, Longitudinal, Im- 25 %
pact at 25 % of the Vehicle Width
(CMRb)
v0 = 50 km/h d0 = 12m v 0 = 50 km/h, a= -4 m/s²
v0 = 50 km/h d0 = 40m v0 = 50 km/h, a= -4 m/s²
Motorcycle, Front turn across

path, Impact at 50 % of the Vehic-
le Width
(CMFtap)
v0 = 10 km/h ... 20 km/h v = 30 / 45 / 60 km/h

in 5 km/h steps

Oncoming Motorcycle:
Fully marked lane,
Impact at 10 % of the Vehicle v = 72 km/h
Width*
(CMoncoming) v0 = 72 km/h, vlat = 0.2 - 0.6 m/s in 0.1 m/s steps, R = 1200 m (unintentional)
* measured from driver side edge v0 = 72 km/h, vlat = 0.5 - 0.7 m/s in 0.1 m/s steps, R = 800 m (intentional)
v = ① 60 km/h / ② 80 km/h

Overtaking Motorcycle:
Fully marked lane,
Impact at rear axle
(CMovertaking) ① v0 = 50 km/h, vlat = 0.2 - 0.6 m/s in 0.1 m/s steps, R = 1200 m (unintentional)
① v0 = 50 km/h, vlat = 0.5 - 0.7 m/s in 0.1 m/s steps, R = 400 m (intentional)
② v0 = 72 km/h, vlat = 0.2 - 0.6 m/s in 0.1 m/s steps, R = 1200 m (unintentional)
② v0 = 72 km/h, vlat = 0.5 - 0.7 m/s in 0.1 m/s steps, R = 800 m (intentional)
daylight testing
Prerequisites for Scoring:
The AEB system must be default ON at the start of every journey. It may not be possible to switch off the system with a
momentary single push on a button.
The system may not automatically switch off at a speed < 80 km/h.
55
valid from 2023
v0 Sce- CM CM
(km/h) nario CMRs CMRb CMFtap CMRs CMRb oncom. overtaking
configuration 50 % 25 % 25 % 30 45 25 % 25 % 72 60 80
12 m 40 m km/h km/h 60 km/h 50 % 12 m 40 m km/h km/h km/h
!
light conditions day

function assessed AEB FCW LSS
10 1 1 1 1
15 1 1 1 1
20 1 1 1 1
25 1
30 1 1
35 1 1
40 1 1
45 1 1
Euro NCAP / ANCAP AEB / LSS PTW
50 1 1 1 1 1 1 11
55 1 1
60 1 1
72 2 11
max. total scenario score (1) 11 2 9 7 2 2 2
Wissen

scenario points (3) 1 1 3 0.5 0.5 2 1
AEB/LSS Motorcyclist total
Σ (2)·(3) max. 9 points
points
Scoring method:
AEB VRU Test Speed (km/h)
SafetyWissen.com
score = Points according to AEB VRU Points table

Points table 10 15 20 25 30 35 - 60
Impact Speed
pass / fail: Points are awarded if Forward Collision Warning (FCW) is >0 0 0.25 0.25 0.50 0.50 0.75
(Relative)
issued @ TTC ≥ 1.7 s. > 10 0 0 0.25 0.25 0.50
(km/h)
1 Intentional 0.5 points + unintentional 0.5 points. > 20 0 0 0.25
> 30 0
56
ACTIVE SAFETY | UFOmicro
EURO NCAP APPROVED TEST PLATFORM
Our UFOmicro has been developed specifically for PTW

and VRU tests, allowing for:
» The ability to confi gure and test complex scenarios with

multiple robots like the UFOnano and UFOpro
» Speeds up to 90 kph with dummy
» Test scenarios to meet Global NCAP testing needs

up to 2025 and beyond
» Remarkable side accuracy of less than 50 mm, due to

stable four-wheel drive
humaneticsatd.com
Event
NEW
Euro NCAP UpDate 2022

Get ready for Euro NCAP‘s latest rating revision!
Image: Thatcham Research
The Roadmap 2025 systematically expands and updates all areas of the Euro NCAP rating.
After a series of new and changed assessment procedures had already been implemented in 2020,
many innovations are scheduled for 2023. Meanwhile the next Roadmap (2030) is currently under
development. At the Euro NCAP UpDate, experts from the respective working groups provide
detailed information on the current status of these new procedures.
Find out the current state of discussion on the upcoming protocols and roadmaps.
Take advantage of the discussion with the experts active in the Euro NCAP working groups.
Contents
Roadmap 2025 Who should attend?
New requirements for 2023 The Euro NCAP UpDate is suited for
New requirements for 2025 everyone who wants to be prepared
Roadmap 2030 for Euro NCAP's upcoming requirements.
Status of the new Roadmap
#TestingAutomation
Assessment of automated driving functions
Virtual Testing
Occupant Monitoring
Field reports on the current test procedures
DATE 13.-14.12.2022
Facts
VENUE Hanau, GERMANY & ONLINE
HOMEPAGE www.carhs.de/euroncap
LANGUAGE English
PRICE 1.490,- EUR till 15.11.2022, thereafter 1.750,- EUR, ONLINE 990,- EUR
58
Euro NCAP / ANCAP Test Method for Assessment Protocol 10.1
AEB Car-to-Car
!
Test Protocol 4.1
valid from 2023
Prerequisites for Scoring in AEB Car-to-Car:
AEB system needs to be default ON at the start of every journey and de-activation should not be possible with a single push
on a button
AEB and/or FCW must be operational up to speeds of at least 130 km/h, excluding stationary targets
performance in CCRm scenario at v0 = 130 km/h / vtarget = 70 km/h must be within one colour band difference from a test
at v0 = 80 km/h / vtarget = 20 km/h
audible component of FCW needs to be loud and clear
for CCRs only: Whiplash score for front seat must be at least “good”, full avoidance must be achieved for speeds ≤ 20 km/h
in all overlap situations
Car-to-Car Rear
Target with ± 50 % / ± 75 % /
100 % Overlap
AEB + FCW v0 = 10 km/h ... 80 km/h in 5 km/h steps v = 0 km/h
AEB CCR
Target with ± 50 % / ± 75 % /
100 % Overlap
AEB v0 = 30 km/h ... 80 km/h in 5 km/h steps v = 20 km/h
CCRb*: d0
Approach to braking Target
100 % Overlap v0 = 50 km/h d0 = 12 m v0 = 50 km/h, a = -2 m/s²
AEB v0 = 50 km/h d0 = 40 m v0 = 50 km/h, a = -2 m/s²
* CCR: Car-to-Car Rear; s: stationary;
m: moving; b: braking
v0 = 50 km/h d0 = 12 m v0 = 50 km/h, a = -6 m/s²
v0 = 50 km/h d0 = 40 m v0 = 50 km/h, a = -6 m/s²
Scoring Table: Points Points
remaining impact speed available remaining relative impact speed available
vimpact (km/h) CCRs CCRb v relative impact (km/h) CCRm
v0 (km/h)
AEB FCW AEB AEB
10 0 >0 1
15 0 >0 2
20 0 >0 2
25 <5 < 15 ≥ 15 2
30 <5 < 15 < 25 ≥ 25 2 <5 ≥5 1
35 <5 < 15 < 25 ≥ 25 2 <5 ≥5 1
40 <5 < 15 < 25 < 35 ≥ 35 1 <5 < 15 ≥ 15 1
45 <5 < 15 < 25 < 35 ≥ 35 1 <5 < 15 ≥ 15 1
50 <5 < 15 < 30 < 40 ≥ 40 1 1x4 < 5 < 15 < 25 ≥ 25 1
55 <5 < 15 < 30 < 45 ≥ 45 1 < 5 < 15 < 25 ≥ 25 1
60 <5 < 20 < 35 < 50 ≥ 50 1 < 5 < 15 < 25 < 35 ≥ 35 1
65 <5 < 20 < 40 < 55 ≥ 55 1 < 5 < 15 < 25 < 35 ≥ 35 2
70 <5 < 20 < 40 < 60 ≥ 60 1 < 5 < 15 < 30 < 40 ≥ 40 2
75 <5 < 25 < 45 < 65 ≥ 65 1 < 5 < 15 < 30 < 45 ≥ 45 2
80 <5 < 25 < 50 < 70 ≥ 70 1 < 5 < 20 < 35 < 50 ≥ 50 2
Grid point score 1.0 0.75 0.5 0.25 0 ∑=14 ∑=6 ∑=4 1.0 0.75 0.5 0.25 0 ∑=15
Scenario points 1.0 0.5 1.0 1.0
59
AEB Car-to-Car Test Protocol 4.1
For each test speed 5 grid points representing the 5 overlap scenarios (-75 %, -50 %, 100 %, +50 %, +75 %) are evaluated.
The score per test speed v0 for AEB and FCW is calculated as ∑ grid point scores1 x points available / 6
The score per scenario and system (AEB/FCW) is calculated as ∑ score per test speed v0 / ∑ points available
The score per system (AEB/FCW) is the average score per scenario of that system. The score per system is multiplied with
1.0 scenario points for AEB and 0.5 scenario points for FCW.
Where FCW does not result in full avoidance in the - 50 % overlap2 grid points, the manufacturer can alternatively demonstrate
that their EES (Emergency Steering Support) system functions to avoid the collision.
Manufacturers are expected to provide a prediction of the grid point scores. This predicted score per system is multiplied with
the correction factor resulting from 10 verification tests for that system conducted by Euro NCAP3:
Correction factor = actual tested score / predicted score
1
where the score of the 100 % overlap grid point is double counted
2
+ 50 % overlap for RHD vehicles
3
plus up to 10 additional tests sponsored by the manufacturer
Car-to-Car Front turn across path

AEB CCFtap
CCFtap: Front turn across path GVT

Impact at 50 % Overlap
AEB
v0 = 10 km/h ... 20 km/h v = 30 / 45 / 55 km/h

in 5 km/h steps

v0 (km/h) vGVT 30 km/h 45 km/h 55 km/h
10 1 1 1
15 1 1 1
20 1 1 1
max. total score (1) 9
scenario points (3) 1
AEB CCFtap total points Σ (2)·(3) max. 1 point
Scoring method:
pass / fail: Points are awarded for full avoidance
Car-to-Car Crossing straight crossing path
v = 20 - 60 km/h
GVT
in 10 km/h steps
AEB CCCscp
CCCscp: Crossing straight cross-

ing path
Impact at 25 % of GVT lenght
AEB + FCW
v0 = Start from stop & 20 - 60 km/h

in 10 km/h steps
60
AEB Car-to-Car Test Protocol 4.1

v0 (km/h) vGVT (km/h) 20 30 40 50 60 20 30 40 50 60
function assessed AEB FCW
Start from stop 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
20 1 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25
30 1 1 0.25 0.25 0.25
40 1 1 1 0.25 0.25 1 1 1 0.25 0.25
50 1 1 1 1 0.25 1 1 1 1 0.25
60 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
max. total score (1) 20 12.75
scenario points (3) 2 1
AEB CCCscp total points Σ (2)·(3) max. 2 points Σ (2)·(3) max. 1 point
Scoring method:
pass / fail: Points are awarded for full avoidance
Full points are awarded for full avoidance / half points are awarded if speed is reduced by ≥ 30 km/h. Where
a scenario is fully avoided by AEB, the points are automatically awarded for the corresponding FCW scenario.
Car-to-Car Front head on
CCFhos: Front head on straight
AEB
GVT
AEB CCFho
v0 = 50 / 70 km/h v = 50 / 70 km/h
CCFhol: Front head on lane
change GVT
AEB
v0 = 50 / 70 km/h v = 50 / 70 km/h

Scenario CCFhos CCFhol
v0 (km/h) vGVT (km/h) 50 70 50 70
function assessed AEB
50 0.25 0.25
70 0.25 0.25
max. total score (1) 1
scenario points (3) 1
AEB CCFho total points Σ (2)·(3) max. 1 point
Scoring method:
Full points are awarded for if speed is reduced by ≥ 20 km/h. Full points are awarded for if speed is reduced
by ≥ 10 km/h
61
AEB Car-to-Car Technical Bulletin 037
Human Machine Interface

HMI points are added if there is a supplementary warning (other than audiovisual) for FCW (1 point) and if there is a reversible
belt pre-pretensioning in the pre-crash phase (1 point). The HMI score is scaled down to a max. of 0.5 points.
Items assessed Points
Supplementary warning for FCW System: 1 point
Supplementary warning (other than audiovisual)
Issued at TTC > 1.2 s (in all CCRs 55 - 80 km/h scenarios)
In case of using braking as a warning:
a brake jerk is accepted if it is issued > 0.5 s before the main AEB intervention and with a
peak acceleration < -2 m/s
a partial deceleration step is accepted if a constant acceleration ≤ -2 m/s2 is seen for a
duration of ≥ 0.5 s before the main AEB intervention
Alternatively the supplementary warning point is awarded if all CCR scenarios
are avoided up to 80 km/h
The supplementary warning is not available for AEB only systems
Reversible belt pre-pretensioning in the pre-crash phase: 1 point
Alternatively this HMI point can be scored if the vehicle is equipped with ESS meeting
the requirements of TB037
Total HMI score 2 points
Total AEB Car-to-Car Score

Multiply nomalized scores (i.e. percentages of max. points) with correction factors (where applicable) and scaling factors to
obtain the points for each assessment item:
correction factor scaling max. points
CCRs AEB x 1.0 1.0
CCRm AEB x 1.0 1.0
CCRb AEB 1.0 1.0
CCRs FCW x 0.5 0.5
CCFtap 1.0 1.0
CCCscp AEB 2.0 2.0
CCCscp FCW 1.0 1.0
CCFha 1.0 1.0
HMI 0.5 0.5
max. total points 9.0
62
Speed and Position.
Anywhere.
Industry leading suppliers of GNSS, Inertial Navigation
and Indoor Positioning solutions.
VBOX systems are used by vehicle and tyre manufacturers around the world
for testing and validating a vehicle’s performance, handling and safety
systems in any location.
Accurate measurement of speed, position and attitude at test

facilities and tracks.
Extend AV and ADAS testing to the open road with mobile RTK
solutions.
Centimetre-level indoor positioning with seamless indoor/

outdoor transition.
vboxautomotive.co.uk
Lane Support Systems

! valid from 2023 Test Protocol 4.1
Dashed Line
LDW
v0 = 72 km/h, vlat = 0.6 - 1.0 m/s in 0.1 m/s steps, R = 1200 m

Solid Line

Blind Spot Monitoring v = 80 km/h
Fully Marked Lane GVT
GVT
GVT
v = 80 km/h
BSM
v0 = 72 km/h v0 = 72 km/h
Blind Spot Monitoring v = 80 km/h
Fully Marked Lane
EMT or real motorcycle
v = 80 km/h
v0 = 72 km/h v0 = 72 km/h
Lane Keep Assist

Dashed Line:
Single Line

LKA
Lane Keep Assist

Solid Line:
Single Line

Road Edge: no Centerline & no
Line next to Road Edge
ELK

64

Road Edge: Dashed/Solid
Centerline & no Line next to
Road Edge

Solid Line:
Fully Marked Lane

Solid Line:
Fully Marked Lane
ELK

Oncoming Vehicle: GVT
Fully Marked Lane
v0 = 72 km/h, vlat = 0.2 - 0.6 m/s in 0.1 m/s steps, R = 1200 m v = 72 km/h
Emergency Lane Keeping v = 72 km/h / 80 km/h

Overtaking Vehicle: GVT
Fully Marked Lane
v0 = 72 km/h, vlat = 0.2 - 0.6 m/s in 0.1 m/s steps, R = 1200 m (unintentional)
v0 = 72 km/h, vlat = 0.5 - 0.7 m/s in 0.1 m/s steps, R = 800 m (intentional)
Lane Support Systems (LSS) DTLE1 Points
Human Machine Lane Departure Warning (LDW) > -0.2 m 0.50
0.502
Interface (HMI) Blind Spot Monitoring (BSM) - 0.50
Lane Keep Assist Dashed Line single line > -0.3 m 0.25
0.50
(LKA) Solid Line single line > -0.3 m 0.25
Centerline Road edge
Road Edge no line no line > -0.1 m 0.25
Emergency Lane dashed no line > -0.1 m 0.25
2.00
Keeping (ELK) Solid Line fully marked lane > -0.3 m 0.50
Oncoming Vehicle fully marked lane 0.50
Overtaking Vehicle fully marked lane 0.50
Distance To Lane Edge
1
2
max. HMI score limited to 0.50 points
65
Euro NCAP / ANCAP Safe Driving Assessment Assessment Protocol 10.1
Technical Bulletin 036
Seat Belt Reminder ! valid from 2023 Technical Bulletin 039
Requirement Total Points

SBR on rear seats with occupant detection (n = number of rear seating positions) 1.0/n per seat
Driver State Monitoring
Distraction Movement
Inattention Type Warning Intervention Sub Total Total Points
Scenario Type
Owl 0.03 0.03 0.06
Away from road /
Lizard 0.03 0.03 0.06
Long non driving task
Body Lean 0.03 0.03 0.06 0.30
Distraction
Owl 0.03 0.03 0.06
Driving task
Lizard 0.03 0.03 0.06
Away from road / Owl 0.03 0.03 0.06
non driving task Lizard 0.03 0.03 0.06
Short
Distraction Owl 0.03 0.03 0.06
Distraction Driving task 0.30
(VATS) Lizard 0.03 0.03 0.06
Away from road
Lizard 0.03 0.03 0.06
(multi-location)
Phone Use Owl +
0.05 0.10 0.15
Detection - Basic Lizard
Phone Use Phone Use 0.30
Detection - Ad- Lizard 0.05 0.10 0.15
vanced
Drowsy 0.25 0.10 0.35 0.35
Fatigue Microsleep 0.20 0.10 0.30 0.30
Sleep 0.05 0.20 0.25 0.25
Unresponsive Driver 0.20 0.20 0.20
Driver State Monitoring Total 2.00
Speed Assist Systems

SPEED LIMIT INFORMATION FUNCTION Points
Basic SLIF (GSR compliant) 0.50
Conditional Speed Limits 0.25
Road Features 0.25
Local Hazards 0.25
System Updates 0.25
SLIF TOTAL 1.50
SPEED CONTROL FUNCTION Points
Speed Limitation Function 0.50
Intelligent Speed Limiter 1.00
Intelligent ACC 1.50
SPEED CONTROL FUNCTION TOTAL 1.50
Speed Assist System Total 3.00
66
NEW
Stuttgart 470 km
Your ADAS testing 250 km

Munich Testtrack
Vienna
partner in the Graz
heart of Europe!
www.safetylabs.at Accreditation 2022
SAFETYWISSEN.com
Know anything you need,
any�me, anywhere!
www.safetywissen.com
Seminar
this course
Euro NCAP - Compact

The overview of the current requirements, criteria and assess- Overview Euro NCAP
ment rules at Euro NCAP in one day. Reading the NCAP proto- Organization
cols takes longer than this course - there is no more efficient Current protocols
Vehicle selection
way to familiarize yourself with this complex topic!
Dual rating
The aim of this course is to impart up-to-date safety knowl- Sliding scale
edge with maximum efficiency. We summarize the current Modifier
Euro NCAP test and assessment protocols for you and present The Euro NCAP rating categories
them clearly and comprehensibly. In contrast to our other Adult Occupant Protection
seminars, we consistently avoid background information here Frontal Impacts
and limit our outlook to the future rating changes that have Barrier Side Impact
already been decided. For customers who need precisely Pole Side Impact
Far Side
these facts, the compact seminar is the ideal way to acquire
Whiplash
or refresh their knowledge. For all those who want to know Rescue, Extrication & Safety
more, understand the background and take a valuable look Child Occupant Protection
behind the scenes of the consumer protection agencies, we Dynamic Tests
recommend our detailed seminar on consumer protection Child Seat Installation
tests. Vehicle Based Assessment
The Euro NCAP compact seminar summarizes the test config- Child Presence Detection
VRU Protection
urations, assessment criteria and modifiers for all Euro NCAP
Leg Impact
assessment categories (Adult Occupant, Child Occupant, VRU, Upper leg Impact
Safety Assist) and shows how the overall rating is calculated Head Impact
from the individual assessment. AEB VRU
The course focuses on the requirements that are currently Safety Assist
in place. It also provides an outlook on the changes already Occupant Status Monitoring
adopted as part of the Roadmap 2025. Speed Assist Systems

LSS
The seminar materials are a practical and clear manual for
AEB Car-to-Car
daily work.
Overall rating: The star rating
Who should attend? Scaling
The compact course is aimed at anyone who would like to gain Normalizing
an overview of the current Euro NCAP requirements in order Weighting
to be able to develop products in line with these requirements Balancing
Rounding Rules
in day-to-day practice. Examples
Planned changes - Roadmap 2025/2030
Ralf Reuter (carhs.training gmbh) studied mechanical engineering and business administration at
Instructor
the technical universities of Darmstadt and Eindhoven. Since 1997 he has worked for carhs in various manage-
ment positions. He deals with vehicle safety issues intensively, in particular with the latest developments in
rules and regulations as well as consumer testing. As he is in charge of the SafetyWissen which has been
published by carhs for many years, he keeps his knowledge up-to-date and profits from the inputs of carhs'
trainer and expert network.

Dates
68
IIHS AEB / Front Crash Prevention Test AEB Test Protocol, V. I, Oct 2013
l = 3.05 m d = 9.14 m
Approach to stationary target w = 3.66 m
v 0 = 20 km/h v = 0 km/h
v 0 = 40 km/h v = 0 km/h
Assessment:
20 km/h Test 40 km/h Test FCW
Speed reduction < 8 km/h 8 - 14 km/h ≥ 15 km/h < 8 km/h 8 - 14 km/h 15 - 34 km/h ≥ 35 km/h
Points 0 1 2 0 1 2 3 1
Rating Scheme:
Points
1 2-4 >5
Rating BASIC ADVANCED SUPERIOR
IIHS Test Scenarios for AEB Pedestrian Pedestrian AEB Test Protocol, V. III DRAFT
Adult, Nearside, Impact at
(CPNA-25) day + night
AEB
v 0 = 20 / 40 km/h v = 5 km/h
Child, Obstruction, Nearside,
Width (CPNC-50) day
AEB 1m 1m
v 0 = 20 / 40 km/h v = 5 km/h
Adult, Longitudinal, Impact
at 25 % of the Vehicle Width
(CPLA-25) day + night
AEB FCW (@ 60 km/h only)
v 0 = 40 / 60 km/h v = 0 km/h
Speed reduction [km/h] 0 ... 8 9 ... 18 19 ... 28 29 ... 38 39 ... 48 49 ... 58 59 ... 61
Points 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
1.0 points are awarded if a FCW is given ≥ 2.1 s time to collision in the CPLA-2560 km/h scenario
Daytime Scoring
Overall Score = 0.7 · ( CPNA-2520 + CPNA-2540 + CPNC-5020 + CPNC-5040) + 0.3 · (CPLA-2540 + CPLA-2560 + FCW60)
Nightime Scoring
Points are awarded for both scenarios (CPNA/CPLA) at both speeds with low and high beams. For vehicles with high beam assist,
individual scores are multiplied by two based on the activation speed of the high beam assist (low beam scores below the activa-
tion speed and high beam scores above the activation speed.
Overalls Score = (2 · (CPNA-2520 LOW + CPNA-2540 LOW + CPNA-2520 HIGH + CPNA-2540 HIGH) + CPLA-2540 LOW + CPLA-2560 LOW
+ FCW60 LOW + CPLA-2540 HIGH + CPLA-2560 HIGH + FCW60 HIGH) / 6
Overall score <1 <3 <5 ≥5
Rating Scale
No Credit Basic Advanced Superior
69
U.S. NCAP Crash Imminent Braking

CRASH IMMINENT BRAKE SYSTEM PERFORMANCE EVALUTION, Oct 2015
LVS (Lead Vehicle Stopped)

Approach to stationary target v 0 = 25 mph (40.2 km/h) v = 0 mph
LVM (Lead Vehicle Moving)

Approach to slower target v 0 = 25 mph (40.2 km/h) v = 10 mph (16.1 km/h)
v 0 = 45 mph (72.4 km/h) v = 20 mph (32.2 km/h)
d0
LVD (Lead Vehicle Decelerating)
Approach to braking target v 0 = 35 mph (56.3 km/h) d0 = 45.3 ft (13.8 m) v 0 = 35 mph (56.3 km/h)
± 8 ft (2.4 m) a = -0.3 g
False Positive Test

Approach to steel trench plate v 0 = 25 mph (40.2 km/h) 8 ft x 12 ft x 1 in (2.4 m x 3.7 m x 25 mm)
v 0 = 45 mph (72.4 km/h)
Requirements
Scenario LVS LVM 25 mph LVM 45 mph LVD False Positive

Requirement Δv ≥ 9.8 mph no impact Δv ≥ 9.8 mph Δv ≥ 10.5 mph deceleration ≤ 0.5 g
(15.8 km/h) (15.8 km/h) (16.9 km/h)
U.S. NCAP Forward Collision Warning

FORWARD COLLISION WARNING SYSTEM CONFIRMATION TEST, Feb 2013
LVS (Lead Vehicle Stopped)

Approach to stationary target v 0 = 45 mph (72.4 km/h) v = 0 mph
LVM (Lead Vehicle Moving)

Approach to slower target v 0 = 45 mph (72.4 km/h) v = 20 mph (32.2 km/h)
d0
LVD (Lead Vehicle Decelerating)
Approach to braking target v 0 = 45 mph (72.4 km/h) d0 = 89.4 ft (30 m) v 0 = 45 mph (72.4 km/h).
± 8.2 ft (2.5 m) a = -0.3 g
Requirements
Scenario LVS LVM LVD

Requirement Alert no later than Alert no later than Alert no later than
2.1 s TTC 2.0 s TTC 2.4 s TTC
70
U.S. NCAP Rear Automatic Braking

Rear Automatic Braking Feature Confirmation Test Procedure (Working Draft), Dec 2015
Child, 20 ft (6.096 m) -2 ft
behind rearmost point 0
of bumper @ 0/+2/-2 +2 ft
ft from centerline 20 ft
Dummy
4a Euro NCAP Pedestrian - Child Dummy static
Test Procedure*
Place the direction selector in reverse while maintaining full pressure on the brake pedal.
Release the vehicle’s brake pedal and allow the vehicle to coast backward while maintaining the vehicle’s centerline within
+/- 1 inch of the longitudinal line marked on the ground.
Allow the vehicle to coast until the rear automatic braking feature intervenes by automatically engaging the service brakes
bring the vehicle to a stop or until the vehicle strikes the test object. Once either of these two outcomes occurs, the
vehicle’s brake pedal should be depressed to end the test trial. Every effort must be made to safely conduct this test. If
testing indoors, proper ventilation must be provided. No personnel shall be located to the rear of a test vehicle at any time
during the test trial.
Requirements*
A positive test outcome would involve the vehicle coming to a stop before it reaches the location of the test object and with
no physical contact with the test object for each of the three test object locations assessed.
* Please note: The rear automatic brake test is part of the planned U.S. NCAP upgrade. The test procedure and requirements are based
on “Rear Automatic Braking Feature Confirmation Test Procedure (Working Draft), December 2015”. Docket NHTSA-2015-0119.
4activePS - 2years child

Ready for upcoming NCAP and ISO ABLS requirements!
ABLS: Automated Braking during Low Speed maneuvering
 robust and modular system
 realistic response for RADAR-,

LIDAR-, Camera- and Ultrasonic-
Systems
 extremely light and soft structure

to prevent damage on VUT
 designed according to upcoming

ISO 19206-9
I N P H Y S I C S W E T R U S T
71
U.S. NCAP Roadmap

Request for Comment (RFC) March 2022
2021
Proposals to add
LKS, BSD, BSI and
PAEB
Pedestrian protection
impact tests
(head-to-hood, Proposals to
upper leg-to-hood use THOR-50M and
2022
leading edge, WS-50M

lower leg-to-bumper) add frontal oblique test
add adaptive driving
beam headlights,
upgraded lower
beam headlights,
semiautomatic
2023
headlamp beam
switching and rear
automatic braking for Proposals to
pedestrians update Monroney
label
revise 5-star rating
system
2024
2031 2030 2029 2028 2027 2026 2025
Assessment and test

development for:
Intersection safety
assist
Opposing traffic safety
assist
AEB for all VRU
including bicyclists
and motorcyclists
72
KNCAP AEB Tests

nighttime testing low beam
daylight testing
with streetlights headlights
AEB Car-to-Car
CCRs*: Approach to stationary Target
with ± 50 / ± 75 / 100 % Overlap
AEB + FCW
v0 = 10 - 50 km/h v = 0 km/h
CCRm*: Approach to slower Target

with ± 50 / ± 75 / 100 % Overlap
AEB + FCW
v0 = 30 - 70 km/h v = 20 km/h
CCRb*: Approach to braking Target d0

with 100 % Overlap
AEB + FCW
v0 = 50 km/h d0 = 12/40 m v0 = 50 km/h, a = -2/-6 m/s²
AEB Pedestrian
Adult, Farside, Impact at 50 % of the
50 %
Vehicle Width
(CPFA-50)
v0 = 20 - 60 km/h v = 8 km/h
Adult, Nearside, Impact at 25 & 75 % 25 % / 75 %

of the Vehicle Width
(CPNA-25/75)
v0 = 20 - 60 km/h v = 5 km/h
Child, Obstruction, Nearside, Im- 50 %

pact at 50 % of the Vehicle Width 1m 1m 1m
(CPNCO-50)
v0 = 20 - 60 km/h v = 5 km/h
AEB Cyclist
Cyclist,
Nearside, Impact at 50 % of the 50 %
Vehicle Width
(CBNA-50)
v0 = 20 km/h ... 60 km/h v = 15 km/h
Cyclist, Longitudinal, Impact at 50 %

of the Vehicle Width 50 %
(CBLA-50)
v0 = 25 km/h ... 60 km/h v = 15 km/h
73
JNCAP Preventive Safety Performance Evaluation

Test Protocol CCR 2022 Test Protocol Ped Day 2022 Test Protocol Ped Night 2022 Test Protocol Cyc 2022
Evaluation Item Max. Score Ranking

AEB Car-to-Car 11 points A Rank ≥ 73.60 points
Pedestrian daytime 15 points B Rank ≥ 53.32 points
C Rank ≥ 35.28 points
Pedestrian night 38 points D Rank ≥ 17.56 points
Cyclist 9 points E Rank < 17.56 points
Lane Support 11 points
Rearview Monitoring System 2 points
Headlights 4 points
Pedal misapplication 1 point
max. total score 91 points

AEB CCR
AEB + FCW
v0 = 10 - 60 km/h v = 0 km/h

AEB + FCW
v0 = 35 - 60 km/h v = 20 km/h
Adult/Child, Nearside, Impact
at 25, 50 & 75 % of the Vehicle
Width (CPN-25/50/75)
AEB + FCW v0 = 10 - 60 km/h v = 5/8 km/h
Adult/Child, Nearside, Ob-
struction, Impact at 50 % of
the Vehicle Width (CPNO-50)
AEB + FCW v0 = 25 - 45 km/h v = 5 km/h
Adult, Farside, Impact at 25, 50
& 75 % of the Vehicle Width
(CPF-25/50/75 Night)
AEB + FCW v0 = 30 - 60 km/h v = 5/8 km/h
AEB VRU
Adult, Farside, Obstruction

Width (CPFO-50 Night)
AEB + FCW v0 = 30 - 60 km/h v = 5 km/h
Cyclist, Farside, Impact at
(CBF-50)
AEB + FCW v0 = 10 - 60 km/h v = 15 km/h
Cyclist, Nearside, Obstruction,
Width (CBNO-50)
AEB + FCW v0 = 10 - 50 km/h v = 10 km/h
Cyclist, Longitudinal, Impact
at 50 % of the Vehicle Width
(CBL-50)
AEB + FCW v 0 = 40 - 60 km/h v = 15 km/h
74
C-NCAP Active Safety Rating Management Regulation 2021
CCRs*: Approach to station-

ary target with ± 50 % / 100 %
overlap
AEB + FCW AEB v0 = 20 / 30 / 40 km/h v = 0 km/h
AEB CCR
FCW v0 = 50 / 60 / 70 / 80 km/h
target with ± 50 % / 100 %
overlap
AEB + FCW AEB v0 = 30 / 40 / 50 km/h v = 20 km/h
* CCR: Car-to-Car Rear; s: stationary; m: moving FCW v0 = 60 / 70 / 80 km/h
11 Points
Adult, Farside, Impact at 25
(CPFA-25 Day & Night / 50 Day)
AEB v 0 = 20 / 30 /40 / 50 / 60 km/h v = 6.5 km/h
Adult, Nearside, Impact at 25
(CPNA-25/75)
AEB v 0 = 20 / 30 /40 / 50 / 60 km/h v = 5 km/h
Adult, Longitudinal, Impact at

25 & 50 % of the Vehicle Width
(CPLA-25/50)
AEB + FCW CPLA-25 v 0 = 50 / 60 / 70 / 80 km/h (FCW) v = 5 km/h
CPLA-50 v 0 = 20 / 30 /40 / 50 / 60 km/h (AEB) v = 5 km/h
AEB VRU
Cyclist, Nearside, Impact at

(CBNA-50)
AEB
v 0 = 20 / 30 /40 / 50 / 60 km/h v = 15 km/h
Cyclist, Longitudinal, Impact at

25 & 50 % of the Vehicle Width
(CBLA-25/50)
AEB + FCW CBLA-25 v 0 = 50 / 60 / 70 / 80 km/h (FCW) v = 15 km/h
CBLA-50 v 0 = 20 / 30 /40 / 50 / 60 km/h (AEB) v = 15 km/h
Scooter, Farside, Impact at

(CSFA-50)
AEB
v 0 = 30 /40 / 50 / 60 km/h v = 20 km/h
21 Points (10 Pedestrian + 11 Two-wheelers)
75
C-NCAP Active Safety Rating Management Regulation 2021
Lane Keep Assist

Dashed Line:
Single Line

LKA
Lane Keep Assist

Solid Line:
Single Line
3 Points
Requirement AEB Car-to-Car AEB Car-to- AEB Car-to-
Pedestrian Two-wheeler
de-activation not possible with a single push on a button   
HMI
supplementary warning (other than audiovisual)  
reversible belt pre-pretensioning in the pre-crash phase 
6 Points
ESC System must meet the requirements of GB/T 30677-2014. Performance test report issued by a qualified third
party institution must be submitted to C-NCAP. Alternatively the test report can be based on GTR 8, UN R13H (R140) or
ESC
FMVSS 126 but should not be in violation of GB/T 30677-2014.
8 Points
Optional ADAS Systems: Lane Departure Warning: 2 points, Speed Assistance System: 2 points, Blind Spot Detection
(Car-to-Car): 2 points, Blind Spot Detection (Car-to-Two-wheeler): 3 points
Opt
Max. 7 Points total

Total 56 Points ADAS - Weight 80 %
Test item Evaluation of
straight line illumination, corner illumination, pedestrian visibility on the left, pedestrian visibility
Low Beam
Headlights
at intersection, width of curve lighting

High Beam illumination range, pedestrian visibility at intersection
adaptive low beam function, adaptive high beam function, automatic low beam turn on function,
Bonus
automatic headlight leveling system
Demerits glare
10 Points
Total 10 Points Headlights - Weight 20 %
76
C-NCAP Active Safety Roadmap 2025

Test item
2021 2025
AEB Car-to-Car Rear  
Turn across path 
Crossing 
AEB Car-to-Pedestrian Crossing  
Longitudinal  
Turn across path 
Reverse 
AEB Car-to-Two-wheeler Cycle crossing  
Scooter crossing  
Cycle longitudinal  
Turn across path of cycle 
Turn across path of PTW 
Lane Support Emergency Lane Keeping 
Curve LDW 
Dooring 
Rear Cross Traffic Alert 
Driver Monitoring 
Trafic Signal Pre-Warning 
High Speed FCW 
77
i-VISTA Intelligent Vehicle Integrated Systems Test Area

AEB Car-to-Car Test Protocol A0-2020 Rating Protocol A0-2020
System Scenario v0 (km/h) vTarget Criteria Points Σ Σ
(km/h)
CCRs 72 0 Warning issued @ ≥ 2.1 s TTC 1
FCW CCRb 72 72 @ -3m/s² Warning issued @ ≥ 2.4 s TTC 1 3
CCRm 72 30 Warning issued @ ≥ 2.0 s TTC 1
CCRs 30 0 3
50 0 5
AEB Speed reduction 16
CCRm 50 20 3
70 20 5 22
Additional warning: head-up
50 20 display, seat belt vibration, tactile 1
CCRm
Advanced warning
3
Assistance 70 20 Pre-pretensioner 1
AES (Autonomous Emergency Steering)
Collision Avoidance 1
ESA (Emergency Steering Assist)
Test Protocol A0-2020 Rating Protocol A0-2020

AEB VRU
System Scenario v0 (km/h) vTarget Light Criteria Points Σ Σ
(km/h) Condition
20 2
CPNA-25 40 4 8
60 2
20 2
Day
CPNSOC-50 40 4 8
60 2
20 2
AEB CPNDOC-50 5
30 5 3
Pedestrian
20 2
CPNA-25 40 Night 4 8
Speed reduction
60 2
56
CPLA-25 25 2
Day 6
45 4
CPFOA-50 20 2
Night 5
30 3
20 2
CBNA-50 40 4 8
60 2
AEB Cyclist 35 15 Day 2
CBLA-50 6
55 4
CBLA-50 FCW: Warning issued
55 2 2
(FCW) @ ≥ 1.7 s TTC
78
Safety
Testing
Services
& More...
www.digauto.biz
Check our website for
cutomized ICV testing
equipment & solutions
We Support Intelligent Vehicle Safety With

Professional Testing Solutions & Services
Shanghai Digauto Automobile Technology Co., LTD., is a leading intelligent vehicle testing
solution provider located in Shanghai, China, devoted in support ADAS, ADS and ICV
safety with innovative, professional and comprehensive testing and verification.
Innovative ADAS & ADS

Laboratory Solution For
Efficient & Controllable
Scenario Based Tests
Vehicle, Environment, Traffic, Hardware-in-the-loop

solution for realistic validation
Road Test Licensing

Authority & Experienced
ADAS & ADS Field Test
Service Provider
Comprehensive engineering services in NCAP, customized ADAS and ICV function testings
Authorized Dealer
& ADAS Service
Center China
i-VISTA Intelligent Vehicle Integrated Systems Test Area

Lane Support Systems Test Protocol A0-2020 Rating Protocol A0-2020
System Scenario v0 (km/h) vlat (m/s) Criteria Points Σ Σ
LDP
0.2
Lane
Straight lane 72 DTLE > - 0.3 m 8 8
Departure
0.5
Prevention
14
LDW 0.2
Straight lane 72 4
Lane 0.5 Warning issued before
6
Departure 0.2 DTLE < - 0.3 m
Warning Curve 72 2
0.5
Side Support Systems Test Protocol A0-2020 Rating Protocol A0-2020
System Scenario v0 (km/h) vTarget Criteria Points Σ Σ

(km/h)
70 2
Left side 90 1 4
Overtaking 120 1
BSD 60
car 70 2
Blind Spot
Right side 90 1 4
Detection
120 1
Overtaking Left side 1
20 30 Alarm issued within speci- 2
two-wheeler Right side 1
Left front fied interval
1 15
door
15
DOW Left rear
0.5
Door Overtaking door
0 3
Opening two-wheeler Left front
1
Warning door
30
Left rear
0.5
door
RCW Rear Collision Warning 0.5
Advanced
RCTA Rear Cross Traffic Alert Feature availability 0.5 2
Assistance
DOW Rear Independent Warning 1
Bonus Points
If all models across the model range are equipped with the rated systems as standard, bonus points are awarded. Bonus points
do not increase the maximum score per system.
System equipped as standard Bonus
AEB Car-to-Car 1
AEB VRU 3
LDP or LDW 1
BSD or DOW 1
Overall Rating
Rating Protocol A0-2020
The overall rating is based on the normalized total score:
Normalized score =
total points / ≥ 75 % ≥ 65 % ≥ 50 % < 50 %
max. total points
Rating Good Acceptable Marginal Poor
80
Event
NEW
Safety Requirements & Technologies for the

intelligent, autonomous and electrified Automobile
of the Future.
Since 2014, the »Automotive Safety Summit Shanghai« is attracting every year more
than 300 automotive safety experts from China and beyond to discuss the latest
requirements and innovations in active and passive safety. Accompanied by a com-
prehensive trade show with the worldwide vendors in development technologies
and services, the summit is the leading event for everyone involved in automotive
safety. The 2022 event will focus on automotive safety in the context of the dominat-
ing megatrends: ADAS, ADS and NEV.
Join »Automotive Safety Summit Shanghai« at the Kerry Hotel in Pudong, Shanghai,
China.
Keynotes from international experts, presentations on requirements and innova-
tions, the latest developments in testing and simulation for active and passive sys-
tems will make this event a true highlight for every decision maker and engineer in
the fields of active and passive safety.
The event will have dedicated sessions on the following topics:
Safety in Autonomous Driving Systems
Legal Requirements for Level 3 and beyond
Advances in World-wide NCAP Programs
Safety of New Energy Vehicles
Vulnerable Road Users
New Testing Technology for ADAS and ADS
Safety Assurance for ADS
Human Modeling and Simulation for Safety
Who should attend?

»Automotive Safety Summit Shanghai« is addressing decision makers and experts at all
stages of the development phase, managers during the conceptual phase who need to
understand upcoming global requirements, design engineers, testing and simulation
specialists.
DATE 01.-02.12.2022
Facts
VENUE Shanghai, CHINA & ONLINE
HOMEPAGE www.carhs.de/safetysummit
LANGUAGE English / Chinese with simultaneous translation

81
Latin NCAP Safety Assist

Seat Belt Reminder - SBR Assessment Protocol 1.1.2
! valid from 2023

SBR for driver seating position meets the assessment criteria 3
SBR for passenger seating position meets the assessment criteria AND 3 points have been
3
awarded for the driver position
SBR for ALL rear seating positions meet the assessment criteria AND 6 points have been awarded
4
for all front seating positions
max. total 10
Speed Assist Systems -SAS
Manual Speed Assistance (MSA)with visual and supplementary warning 1
Enhanced speed control funtion AND 1 point has been awarded for MSA 2
max. total 3
Electronic Stability Control - ESC
Scenario A 15 m 45 m 52.5 m 75 m
ESC 4.7 m
2.7 m
0m
Moose Test
-3.5 m
v0 = 60 / 65 / 70 km/h
Scenario B 6m 19.5 m 30.5 m 44 m 50 m
ESC 4m
0m 1m
-3m
v0 = 60 / 65 / 70 km/h

ESC system meets the UN R13H, UN R 140 or GTR8 requirements 15
Failure in a 60 km/h moose test (Scenario A or B) -5
max. total 15
Lane Support Systems - LSS
Lane Keep Assist
Dashed Line:
Single Line
LKA/LDW
Lane Keep Assist

Solid Line:
Single Line
82
Latin NCAP Safety Assist ! valid from 2023

VUT passes 3 out of 4 lateral LDW test speeds (on both left and right side) on both line marking
scenarios for each speed. LDW pass criterion: audible and/or haptic warning before DTLE of less 1
than 0.2 m
VUT passes 3 out of 4 lateral LKA test speeds (on both left and right side), on both line marking
scenarios for each speed. LKA pass criterion: LKS system must not permit the VUT to cross the 1
inner edge (DTLE) of the lane marking by a distance greater than 0.3 m.
VUT passes 1 out of 4 lateral RED test speeds. RED pass criterion: RED system must not permit
1
the VUT to cross the road edge (DTLE) by a distance greater than 0.1 m.
max. total 3
When LKA scenarios are all pass, LDW point is automatically awarded.
Blind Spot Detection - BSD
VUT overtakes Motorcyle
left / right
Dlat
BSD
vMotorcycle = 41 / 50 / 60 km/h, Dlat = ± 3 / 1.5 / 3 m v0 ≥ 56 / 65 / 75 km/h
VUT overtaken by Motorcyle

left / right
Dlat
vMotorcycle ≥ 56 / 65 / 75 km/h , Dlat = ± 3 / 1.5 / 3 m v0 = 41 / 50 / 60 km/h

Passing or passed motorcycle is detected in at least 2 out of 3 speeds in each of the 4 scenarios
1
within a short range (i.e. 3 m behind the rear end of the VUT)
Passing or passed motorcycle is detected in at least 2 out of 3 speeds in each of the 4 scenarios
2
within a longer range (i.e. more than 3 m behind the rear end of the VUT)
max. total 3
E-Call
System cannot be disabled by the driver
System makes the e-call automatically without any action by the vehicle occupants
System automatically sends the GPS location of the accident to the car manufacturer´s call 2
center and to the emergency services the GPS location of the accident
Prerequisite for scoring: ≥ 28 points in the Adult Occupant Protection Box of the rating
max. total 2
E-Call points are bonus points that do not increase the maximum total Safety Assist score of 43.
83
Latin NCAP Safety Assist ! valid from 2023
AEB Inter Urban
CCRs*:
Approach to stationary target v 0=30 km/h ... 80 km/h v=0 km/h
CCRm*:
Approach to slower target v 0=30 km/h ... 80 km/h v=20 km/h
d0
CCRb*:
Approach to braking target v 0=50 km/h d0=12 m v 0=50 km/h, a=-2 m/s²
v 0=50 km/h d0=40 m v 0=50 km/h, a=-2 m/s²
* CCR: Car-To-Car Rear; s: standing; v 0=50 km/h d0=12 m v 0=50 km/h, a=-6 m/s²
m: moving; b: braking
v 0=50 km/h d0=40 m v 0=50 km/h, a=-6 m/s²
stationary target (CCRs) slower target (CCRm) braking target
v0 (km/h) Points for FCW Points for AEB Points for FCW (CCRb)
30 2 1 -
AEB Inter-Urban
35 2 1 -
40 2 1 -
45 2 1 -
50 3 1 1 1 point each
for AEB and
55 2 1 1
for FCW per
60 1 1 1 scenario
65 1 2 2
70 1 2 2
75 1 - 2
80 1 - 2
Ʃ 18 11 11 2x4
Preconditions for HMI points: AEB and/or FCW system are default ON at the start of every

journey and the FCW alert (if available) is loud and clear.
Systems that can not be de-activated with a single push on a button are awarded 2 Points
HMI Assessment
Supplementary warning for the FCW system (e.g. head-up display, belt jerk, brake jerk): 1
Point
Reversible pre-tensioning of the belt in the pre-crash phase: 1 Point
To be eligible for scoring points in AEB Inter-Urban, the AEB and/or FCW system must operate up to speeds of at least 80
km/h at least.
The AEBscore (respectively FCWscore) is the average score from all the scenarios.
For systems that only offer the AEB function, the results of tests at all speeds (covering AEB and FCW) are used to calcu-
late separate normalized AEB and FCW scores for each scenario. Where AEB and FCW test speeds are overlapping, the
test result of AEB is duplicated for FCW.
The total AEB Inter-Urban score results from the following weighting of the normalized scores (%):
AEB Inter-Urban = FCWscore x 3.0 + AEBscore x 4.5 + HMIscore x 1.5
This results in a maximum total score of 9 points for AEB Inter-Urban, which is part of the Safety Assist assessment.
84
Latin NCAP AEB Pedestrian ! valid from 2023
Euro NCAP Test Protocol 1.0.1
Adult, Farside, Impact at daylight testing

50 % of the Vehicle Width 50 %
(CPFA-50)
v 0 = 20 km/h ... 60 km/h v = 8 km/h
Adult, Nearside, Impact at

25 % / 75 %
25 & 75 % of the Vehicle
Width (CPNA-25/75)
v 0 = 20 km/h ... 60 km/h v = 5 km/h
Child, Obstruction, Near- 50 %
side, Impact at 50 % of the
Vehicle Width (CPNCO-50) 1m 1m 1m
v 0 = 20 km/h ... 60 km/h v = 5 km/h

Prerequistes for Scoring:
The AEB system must be default ON at the start of every journey.
MANAGING THE COMPLEXITY

MANAGING
OF ADAS/AD THESYSTEMS
COMPLEXITY OF ADAS/AD
ADAS/AD features can’t be handled as isolated
SYSTEMS AND
units. They will not onlySW
interact with all vehicle
domains — such as steering, braking, powertrain
SCENARIO-BASED
or infotainment —DEVELOPMENT
but also with an intelligent
FROM SYSTEMS ENGINEERING
infrastructure TO
and digital maps.
VEHICLE FLEET TESTING
Through our scenario based systems engineering
approach, we support our customers to manage
this complexity.
Digitalizing Mobility, Connecting People.

Digitalizing Mobility,
Connecting People.
Find out more at

www.fev.io
www.fev.io
85
ADASCompanion_136x96mm_2022_Ausgabe1_EN-new.indd 1 29.07.2022 12:08:23
Wissen
Code of Practice for the Design and Evaluation of ADAS

by ACEA (Association des Constructeurs Européens d’Automobiles), Brussels, Belgium
The Code of Practice applies to advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS). It is not specifically intended to be applied to sys-
tems providing vehicle stabilisation (such as ABS and ESP) or mere information and communication systems (such as navigation
systems and telephones). It may be applicable to systems including vehicle to vehicle communication, but will not cover these
completely.
ADAS are designed to actively support the driver in the primary driving task to either increase comfortable or safe driving. (see
Table 7 in Annex E for a list of systems). Systems that support the driver by issuing warnings without intervention are not within
the scope of this CoP although the recommended approach and the provided checklists may prove valuable also for these kinds
of systems.
In contrast to conventional driver assistance systems, ADAS require the detection and evaluation of the vehicle environment with
the respective sensors and a complex signal processing depending on the driving task to be supported. This also includes col-
lection and evaluation of infrastructure data if available. This functional extension means a significant increase in system design
complexity since the vehicle environment is incorporated into the assistance function. Due to the system limits of environmental
sensing systems, the usage of the assistance functionality will also be limited. This implies that a direct interaction between the
driver and the system is necessary. This interaction has to be controllable also with regard to current legislation (Vienna Conven-
tion).
The CoP serves as a support tool for the engineer engaged in the development of ADAS. CoP not only means a compilation of
currently available procedures, but also offers clues for determining activities to be performed during the individual development
phases.
Focus of the CoP is the system design against the background of system controllability and the total vehicle from the field of view
of Human Machine Interaction. Of course system influences due to occurring defects/errors do play an important role as well as
ADAS behaviour at system limits and foreseeable misuse.
Moreover, the CoP is also intended for automotive manufacturers and suppliers dealing with specification, realisation and
assessment of ADAS. The CoP has been compiled by gathering best practices of the partner companies and also considers legal
requirements and the RESPONSE 2 results.
The CoP deals with specification and assessment of advanced driver assistance systems during the entire development phase.
Therefore, it will not address issues arising after SOP (start of production).
The CoP structure allows implementation as part of a company specific development or quality process. Requirements are sup-
plied for each development stage and are clearly separated from checklists and method descriptions in the document in order to
provide an overview for each task. The use of the checklist procedure assists in the specification of ADAS in order to also consider
aspects which may not be obvious right from the beginning. The hazard and risk analysis procedure provides assistance in setting
up a systematic analysis of driving situations in order to determine potential risks.
The CoP also comprises the description of methods and tools for the assessment of ADAS safety.
The CoP should not stipulate a uniform ADAS design. It should be valid for various vehicle types and systems with many complex-
ity and integration levels for the application in all ADAS.
All in all the CoP aims at serving as a guideline assisting persons involved in ADAS development to adhere to the state-of-the-art
knowledge with respect to risk identification and risk assessment as well as methodology for the evaluation of driver control-
lability.
Status:
Version number: V5.0
Release Date: Aug. 2009
Link
https://www.acea.auto/files/20090831_Code_of_Practice_ADAS.pdf
86
Wissen
ASAM OpenSCENARIO®
Overview
ASAM OpenSCENARIO defines a file format for the description of the dynamic content of driving and traffic simulators. The
primary use-case of OpenSCENARIO is to describe complex, synchronized maneuvers that involve multiple entities like vehicles,
pedestrians and other traffic participants. The description of a maneuver may be based on driver actions (e.g. performing a lane
change) or on trajectories (e.g. derived from a recorded driving maneuver). Other content, such as the description of the ego
vehicle, driver appearance, pedestrians, traffic and environment conditions, is included in the standard as well.
The standard describes vehicle maneuvers in a storyboard, which is subdivided in stories, acts and sequences. A story can
describe the driving maneuvers of one single vehicle or specify the dynamic behavior of several entities (e.g. vehicles perform a
lane change once they reach a specific position). Stories consist of acts, which are triggered when a specific condition is met, such
as exceeding a defined speed, reaching a defined distance to a vehicle ahead or going off-road. By using the notion of sequences,
the standard allows to define the maneuvers of multiple vehicles in response to that. The maneuver of one car could be a lane
change, overtaking another car or driving in a traffic jam while creating a corridor for emergency vehicles. The detailed driving
behavior of the vehicle is described via events (i.e. when does it happen?) and actions (i.e. what happens?). Actions may be
related to one vehicle and can include speed changes, lane changes or drive to a specified position. Routes and trajectories can
be defined that the vehicle shall follow. Actions may also be related to the environment and can include the change of a traffic
light or the occurrence of a traffic jam.
Maneuvers, actions, trajectories and other elements can be organized in catalogs and can be parameterized. Additionally, com-
plete scenario descriptions support parameterization, which allows test automation without the need to create a large amount
of scenario files.
The data for maneuver descriptions in ASAM OpenSCENARIO is organized in a hierarchical structure and serialized in an XML
file format. The schema is provided with the standard. The XML file can be easily validated, edited, imported and exported by
simulation tools and content editors. The format is technology and vendor independent.
Maneuver descriptions are an essential part in an effort to test, validate and certify the safety of driver assistance systems
and autonomous driving cars. The industry, certification agencies and government authorities jointly work on the definition
of maneuver libraries, which can be used to ensure the safe operation of such systems. A publicly developed and vendor-inde-
pendent standard, such as ASAM OpenSCENARIO, is well suited for this purpose. However, despite the clear and unambiguous
maneuver descriptions through a standardized format, it is common understanding that simulation results will not necessarily
be the same on different simulators.
The standard is used together with road network descriptions from ASAM OpenDRIVE and can use road surface profiles from
ASAM OpenCRG. The three standards complement each other and cover the static and dynamic content of in-the-loop vehicle
simulation applications.
Status:
Current Version: ASAM OpenSCENARIO 2.0.0
Release Date: 20 July 2022
Domain: Simulation
Link
https://www.asam.net/standards/detail/openscenario/
Permission for reprint granted by ASAM e. V.
87
Wissen
ASAM OSI®
Overview
ASAM OSI (Open Simulation Interface) provides easy and straightforward compatibility between automated driving functions
and the variety of driving simulation frameworks available. It allows users to connect any sensor, via a standardized interface, to
any automated driving function and to any driving simulator tooling. It simplifies integration and thus significantly strengthens
the accessibility and usefulness of virtual testing.
ASAM OSI started as a generic data exchange interface compliant with the ISO 23150 logic interface for the environmental
perception of automated driving functions in virtual scenarios. In tandem with packaging specifications, such as the ASAM OSI
Sensor Model Packaging (OSMP) specification, the standard provides solutions for simulation model data exchange across dif-
ferent implementations.
ASAM OSI contains an object-based environment description using the message format of the protocol buffer library developed
and maintained by Google. It defines top-level messages that are used to exchange data between separate models. Top-level
messages define the GroundTruth interface, the SensorData interface, and, since V3.0.0, the SensorView/Sensor-View configura-
tion interfaces and the FeatureData interface. The GroundTruth interface provides an exact view on the simulated objects in a
global coordinate system, the ground truth world coordinate system. The FeatureData interface provides a list of simple features
in the reference frame of the respective sensor of a vehicle for environmental perception. It is generated from a GroundTruth
message and may serve as input for a sensor model that simulates object detection or feature fusion of multiple sensors.
ASAM OSI also defines interfaces for traffic participant models. The TrafficCommand interface makes it possible to send com-
mands to traffic participant models. The TrafficUpdate interface makes it possible to receive the updated state from traffic par-
ticipant models. The following figure shows the interfaces of a generic traffic participant.
Traffic participant models may use other ASAM OSI interfaces internally, for example to model autonomous vehicles. The follow-
ing figure shows a more advanced use case for traffic participants.
Status:
Current Version: ASAM OSI 3.5.0
Release Date: 29 July 2022
Domain: Simulation
Link
https://www.asam.net/standards/detail/osi/
88
Wissen
ASAM OpenODD®
Overview
ASAM OpenODD (Operational Design Domain) is still a very young standardization initiative within the ASAM Simulation domain.
The aim is to provide a format that is capable of representing a defined Operational Design Domain for connected automated
vehicles (CAV).
An Operational Design Domain Definition (ODD) should be valid throughout the entire operating life of a vehicle and is part of its
safety and operational concept. The ODD is used for the functional specification of connected automated vehicles. It specifies
what environment parameters (static and dynamic) the CAV must be able to manage. They include all types of traffic participants,
the weather conditions, the infrastructure, the location, the time of day and everything else that can have an impact on the
driving situation.
The goal of the ASAM OpenODD concept project was to create a machine-interpretable format to represent the ODD specifica-
tion. With this format an ODD description becomes exchangeable, comparable and processable. This new format will enable for
example the following use case:
A city defines an ODD for its inner city, using the ASAM OpenODD format. Now car manufactures can compare vehicle
ODDs, defined in ASAM OpenODD, to their vehicle to find out if it is allowed to drive in this specific inner city. The advantage
for homologation bodies will be that they can define ODDs against which they can check the vehicle’s ODD.
A second use case which will support the development of ADAS and AD systems is the use of the ODD to define the
testcases that are necessary to validate the vehicle. There can be obvious limitations e.g. if the vehicle is not capable of
speeds above 50 km/h, therefore highway tests are not necessary. This application of an ODD will help to focus the limited
validation resources on the really needed scenarios.
The ODD must be represented so it can easily be used for simulation and other machine processed environments. The content
of ASAM OpenODD will be derived from an abstract „Vehicle ODD“, that provides the information in a usable manner. For the
purpose of using an abstract vehicle ODD description (represented in ASAM OpenODD) for simulations and post-processing the
format must fulfil the following requirements:
searchability
exchangeability
extensibility
machine readability
measurability and verification
human readability / constrained natural language
Status:
Current Version: Concept
Release Date: 01 Oct 2021
Domain: Simulation
Link
https://www.asam.net/standards/detail/openodd/
89
Wissen
ASAM OpenDRIVE®
Overview
The ASAM OpenDRIVE format provides a common base for describing road networks with extensible markup language (XML)
syntax, using the file extension xodr. The data that is stored in an ASAM OpenDRIVE file describes the geometry of roads, lanes
and objects, such as roadmarks on the road, as well as features along the roads, like signals. The road networks that are described
in the ASAM OpenDRIVE file can either be synthetic or based on real data.
The main purpose of ASAM OpenDRIVE is to provide a road network description that can be fed into simulations to develop
and validate ADAS and AD features. With the help of ASAM OpenDRIVE, these road network descriptions can be exchanged
between different simulators. Providing a standardized format for road descriptions also enables the industry to reduce the cost
of creating and converting these files for their development and testing purposes. Road data may be manually created from road
network editors, conversion of map data, or originate from converted scans of real-world roads.
Nodes
The format is organized in nodes that can be extended with user defined data. This facilitates a high degree of specialization
for individual applications (usually simulations) while maintaining the interoperability that is required for the exchange of data
between different applications.
Reference Line
The ASAM OpenDRIVE road network is modelled along the reference line, which is the core piece of every road. Roads, lanes, incl.
their elevation profiles are all attached to the reference line.
Elements of ASAM OpenDRIVE
Objects representing features, such as signals, can be placed by using either the reference line or the global coordinate system,
the road network is placed in. This can be seen in the above image. The reference line (blue line in the middle) is in the center
of the road, the lanes (blue and light green) are attached to this reference line. The signs next to the road are placed in the s/t-
coordinate system.
In ASAM OpenDRIVE several roads form a road network and can be connected. ASAM OpenDRIVE can be seen as a construction
kit of different road sections. The overall road network is composed of individual sections interconnected with each other.
Relation to Other Standards

The ASAM OpenDRIVE description format contains all static objects of a road network that allow realistic simulation of vehicles
driving on roads. In order to render the complete environment, additional description formats for static 3D roadside objects,
such as trees and buildings, are needed. Road surface profiles are included from the ASAM OpenCRG file format. The dynamic
content of driving simulations, such as vehicle maneuvers, can be described with ASAM OpenSCENARIO. The three standards
complement each other and cover the static and dynamic content of in-the-loop vehicle simulation applications.
Market Relevance
ASAM OpenDRIVE is a well established standard for the description of road networks. It is already in use by many well-known
manufacturers and companies developing ADAS and AD functions or performing high-accuracy kinematic surveying worldwide.
It is being used for road and rail networks.
Status:
Current Version: ASAM OpenDRIVE 1.7.0
Release Date: 03 Aug 2021
Domain: Simulation
Link
https://www.asam.net/standards/detail/opendrive/
90
ASAM
INTERNATIONAL
CONFERENCE
Nov. 29–30, 2022

Dresden, Germany
TOWARDS AD
CERTIFICATION
Integrated development and
testing based on standards
This conference series has driven the establish-

ment of ASAM,s new domain “Simulation” and
led to the expansion of the ASAM OpenX
standards portfolio for AD development. Join
us to learn more about what has happened in
the past two years and how ADAS, AD and ASAM
OpenX will continue to advance in the future.
www.asam.net
Wissen
British Standards Institute (BSI) ADAS/ADS Standards
Overview
BSI is recognised as the UK National Standards Body (NSB) by the UK Government. This status is formally codified in the Memo-
randum of Understanding (MoU) between the United Kingdom Government and the British Standards Institution in respect of
its activities as the United Kingdom’s National Standards Body.
The following is an overview of standards in the area of ADAS/ADS that go beyond the ISO Standards (BS ISO …..) to which BSI
adheres to.
PAS 1881:2022 PAS 1882:2021 PAS 1883:2020
Data collection and

Operational Design Domain
Assuring the operational management for auto-
(ODD) taxonomy for an
safety of automated mated vehicle trials for
automated driving system
vehicles the purpose of incident
Published on: 30 Apr 2022 (ADS)
investigation Published on: 31 Aug 2020
Published on: 31 Mar 2021
PAS 1884:2021 PAS 1885:2018 BSI Flex 1889 v1.0:2022-07
Natural language descrip-

Safety operators in The fundamental prin-
tion for abstract scenarios
automated vehicle testing ciples of automotive cyber
for automated driving
and trialling. security
Published on: 30 Nov. 2021 Published on: 31 Dec. 2018 systems
Published on: 28 July 2022
BSI Flex 1890 v4.0:2022-03 PAS 11281:2018
Connected automotive
Connected and automated ecosystems. Impact of
vehicles – Vocabulary security on safety. Code of
Published on: 31 March 2022 practice
Published on: 31 Dec 2018
Link
https://www.bsigroup.com/en-GB/CAV
92
Wissen
IEEE Standard 2846-2022 - Assumptions in Safety-Related Models

for Automated Driving Systems
Overview
IEEE Standard 2846-2022 defines a minimum set of reasonable assumptions and foreseeable scenarios that shall be considered
in the development of safety related models that are part of an automated driving system (ADS).
This standard applies to road vehicles. For a set of scenarios, a minimum set of assumptions regarding reasonably foreseeable
behaviors of other road users are defined that shall be considered in the development of safety-related models for automated
driving systems (ADS).
This standard further defines a list of attributes common to contributed safety-related models and methods to help verify
whether a safety-related model takes the minimum set of assumptions into consideration. An informative annex instantiates
several examples of how the proposed minimum set of assumptions could be employed in ADS development. Sources of uncer-
tainty, such as prediction or perception errors, are out of scope to this standard. This standard does not guarantee the safety of
the overall system in all scenarios.
Government and Industry alike need an open, transparent, and technology-neutral standard that provides guidance useful for
evaluating the performance of an ADS. This guidance consists of a minimum set of assumptions with bounds on reasonably
foreseeable behaviors of other road users used in the development of safety-related models.
Status
Date of Publication: 22 April 2022
Link
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9761121
Source: IEEE Standard for Assumptions in Safety-Related Models for Automated Driving Systems,” in IEEE Std 2846-2022 , vol.,
no., pp.1-59, 22 April 2022, doi: 10.1109/IEEESTD.2022.9761121

any�me, anywhere.
Daily SafetyNews
93
Wissen
ISO 21448:2022
Road vehicles — Safety of the Intended Functionality (SOTIF)
Overview
The ISO 21448:2022 standard provides a framework and guidance on measures to ensure the safety of the intended functional-
ity (SOTIF), which is defined as the absence of unreasonable risk due to a hazard caused by functional insufficiencies, i.e.:
a) the insufficiencies of specification of the intended functionality at the vehicle level; or

b) the insufficiencies of specification or performance insufficiencies in the implementation of electric and/or electronic (E/E)
elements in the system.
This document provides guidance on the applicable design, verification and validation measures, as well as activities during the
operation phase, that are needed to achieve and maintain the SOTIF.
The standard is applicable to intended functionalities where proper situational awareness is essential to safety and where such
situational awareness is derived from complex sensors and processing algorithms, especially functionalities of emergency inter-
vention systems and systems having levels of driving automation from 1 to 5 according to SAE J3016
This document is applicable to intended functionalities that include one or more E/E systems installed in series production road
vehicles, excluding mopeds.
Reasonably foreseeable misuse is in the scope of this document. In addition, operation or assistance of a vehicle by a remote
user or communication with a back office that can affect vehicle decision making is in scope of this document when it can lead
to safety hazards.
This document does not apply to:

faults covered by the ISO 26262 series;
cybersecurity threats;
hazards directly caused by the system technology (e.g. eye damage from the beam of a lidar);
hazards related to electric shock, fire, smoke, heat, radiation, toxicity, flammability, reactivity, release of energy and similar
hazards, unless directly caused by the intended functionality of E/E systems; and
deliberate actions that clearly violate the system’s intended use, (which are considered feature abuse).
This document is not intended for functions of existing systems for which well-established and well-trusted design, verification
and validation (V&V) measures exist (e.g. dynamic stability control systems, airbags).
Status:
Published on 2022-06
Link
https://www.iso.org/standard/77490.html
Source: www.iso.org
94
Wissen
ISO 26262 - Road vehicles — Functional Safety
Overview
ISO 26262 is an international standard for functional safety of electrical and/or electronic systems that are installed in serial
production road vehicles (excluding mopeds), defined by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) in 2011, and
revised in 2018.
Functional safety features form an integral part of each automotive product development phase, ranging from the specification,
to design, implementation, integration, verification, validation, and production release. The standard ISO 26262 is an adaptation
of the Functional Safety standard IEC 61508 for Automotive Electric/Electronic Systems. ISO 26262 defines functional safety for
automotive equipment applicable throughout the lifecycle of all automotive electronic and electrical safety-related systems.
The first edition (ISO 26262:2011), published on 11 November 2011, was limited to electrical and/or electronic systems installed
in "series production passenger cars" with a maximum gross weight of 3,500 kg. The second edition (ISO 26262:2018), published
in December 2018, extended the scope from passenger cars to all road vehicles except mopeds.
The standard aims to address possible hazards caused by the malfunctioning behaviour of electronic and electrical systems in
vehicles. Although entitled "Road vehicles – Functional safety" the standard relates to the functional safety of Electrical and
Electronic systems as well as that of systems as a whole or of their mechanical subsystems.
Like its parent standard, IEC 61508, ISO 26262 is a risk-based safety standard, where the risk of hazardous operational situations
is qualitatively assessed and safety measures are defined to avoid or control systematic failures and to detect or control random
hardware failures, or mitigate their effects.
Goals of ISO 26262:
Provides an automotive safety lifecycle (management, development, production, operation, service, decommissioning) and
supports tailoring the necessary activities during these lifecycle phases.
Covers functional safety aspects of the entire development process (including such activities as requirements specification,
design, implementation, integration, verification, validation, and configuration).
Provides an automotive-specific risk-based approach for determining risk classes (Automotive Safety Integrity Levels, ASILs).
Uses ASILs for specifying the item's necessary safety requirements for achieving an acceptable residual risk.
Provides requirements for validation and confirmation measures to ensure a sufficient and acceptable level of safety is
being achieved.
Parts of ISO 26262
ISO 26262:2018 consists of twelve parts, ten normative parts (parts 1 to 9 and 12) and two guidelines (parts 10 and 11):
1. Vocabulary
2. Management of functional safety
3. Concept phase
4. Product development at the system level
5. Product development at the hardware level
6. Product development at the software level
7. Production, operation, service and decommissioning
8. Supporting processes
9. Automotive Safety Integrity Level (ASIL)-oriented and safety-oriented analysis
10. Guidelines on ISO 26262
11. Guidelines on application of ISO 26262 to semiconductors
12. Adaptation of ISO 26262 for motorcycles
Status
Published 2018-12
Link
Source: www.iso.org
95
Wissen
ISO/CD TS 22133
Road vehicles — Test object monitoring and control for active
safety and automated/autonomous vehicle testing
Overview
The standard specifies requirements, procedures, and message formats for the controlling and monitoring of test targets, used
for the testing of active safety functions and autonomous vehicles. The standard specifies functionality and messaging for the
monitoring and controlling of test objects by a control center facilitating an interoperable test object environment. The standard
does not specify the internal architecture of the test object and control center nor does it specify how the testing of the vehicles
shall be performed.
The testing of collision avoidance systems, active safety functions, and more advanced autonomous functions in vehicles requires
testing on proving grounds. The purpose is to expose the vehicle under test to potentially dangerous traffic situations in a safe
manner. The evaluation is done during development, and in voluntary and mandatory test procedures.
To orchestrate these traffic scenarios, various impactable targets representing traffic actors have to be controlled. The number
of controlled targets may be one or many depending on the required traffic scenario. Multiple requirements are important, such
as safety, position and speed precision, and logging capabilities.
The standard specifies requirements, functionality, and a protocol allowing for multi-vendor target carrier systems to be con-
trolled according to the required traffic scenario, to report expected information for logging purposes and other functions
required.
ISO 22133 consists of the following parts, under the general title “Road Vehicles – Test Object Monitoring and Control for Active
Safety and Automated/Autonomous Vehicle Testing”:
Part 1: Functional Requirements, Specifications, and Communication Protocol

Part 2: Test Scenario Description Formats
Status:
Under Development
Link
Source: www.iso.org
96
Wissen
Further ISO Standards in ADAS/ADS Development and Validation

Status of the standard: published under development
ISO/DIS 4273 Intelligent transport systems — Automated braking during low speed manoeuvring (ABLS) — Re-
quirements and test procedures
ISO/TR 4804:2020 Road vehicles — Safety and cybersecurity for automated driving systems — Design, verification and
validation
ISO/TS 5255-1:2022 Intelligent transport systems — Low-speed automated driving system (LSADS) service — Part 1: Role
and functional model
ISO/DTR 5255-2 Intelligent transport systems — Low-speed automated driving system (LSADS) service — Part 2: Gap
analysis
ISO 11067:2015 Intelligent transport systems — Curve speed warning systems (CSWS) — Performance requirements
and test procedures
ISO 11270:2014 Intelligent transport systems — Lane keeping assistance systems (LKAS) — Performance require-
ments and test procedures
ISO/AWI PAS 11585 Road vehicles — Partial driving automation — Technical characteristics of conditional hands-free
driving systems
ISO 16787:2017 Intelligent transport systems — Assisted parking system (APS) — Performance requirements and
test procedures
ISO 17361:2017 Intelligent transport systems — Lane departure warning systems — Performance requirements and
test procedures
ISO 19206-1:2018 Road vehicles — Test devices for target vehicles, vulnerable road users and other objects, for assess-
ment of active safety functions — Part 1: Requirements for passenger vehicle rear-end targets
ment of active safety functions — Part 2: Requirements for pedestrian targets
ment of active safety functions — Part 3: Requirements for passenger vehicle 3D targets
ment of active safety functions — Part 4: Requirements for bicyclist targets
ISO/AWI 19206-5 Road vehicles — Test devices for target vehicles, vulnerable road users and other objects, for assess-
ment of active safety functions — Part 5: Requirements for Powered Two-Wheeler targets
ISO/AWI TR 19206-6 Road vehicles — Test devices for target vehicles, vulnerable road users and other objects, for assess-
ment of active safety functions — Part 6: Research data and guidelines for surrogate animal targets
ISO/AWI TS 19206-7 Road vehicles — Test devices for target vehicles, vulnerable road users and other objects, for assess-
ment of active safety functions — Part 7: Test method for target carrier system behaviour
ISO/PWI 19206-8 Road vehicles — Test devices for target vehicles, vulnerable road users and other objects, for assess-
ment of active safety functions — Part 8: Specification of stationary roadside surrogate targets
ISO/PWI TS 19206-9 Road vehicles — Test devices for target vehicles, vulnerable road users and other objects, for assess-
ment of active safety functions — Part 9: Requirements for small child targets
ISO 19237:2017 Intelligent transport systems — Pedestrian detection and collision mitigation systems (PDCMS) —
Performance requirements and test procedures
ISO 19638:2018 Intelligent transport systems — Road boundary departure prevention systems (RBDPS) — Perfor-
mance requirements and test procedures
ISO 20900:2019 Intelligent transport systems — Partially automated parking systems (PAPS) — Performance require-
ISO 21202:2020 Intelligent transport systems — Partially automated lane change systems (PALS) — Functional /
operational requirements and test procedures
ISO 21717:2018 Intelligent transport systems — Partially Automated In-Lane Driving Systems (PADS) — Performance
requirements and test procedures
97
Wissen
Status of the standard: published under development
ISO/TR Road vehicles — Human performance and state in the context of automated driving — Part 1: Com-
21959-1:2020 mon underlying concepts
ISO/TR Road vehicles — Human performance and state in the context of automated driving — Part 2: Con-
21959-2:2020 siderations in designing experiments to investigate transition processes
ISO/FDIS 21994 Passenger cars — Stopping distance at straight-line braking with ABS — Open-loop test method
ISO 22078:2020 Intelligent transport systems — Bicyclist detection and collision mitigation systems (BDCMS) — Per-
formance requirements and test procedures
ISO/AWI TS 22726-1 Intelligent transport systems — Dynamic data and map database specification for connected and
automated driving system applications — Part 1: Architecture and logical data model for harmoniza-
tion of static map data
ISO/AWI TS 22726-2 Intelligent transport systems — Dynamic data and map database specification for connected and
automated driving system applications — Part 2: Logical data model of dynamic data
ISO 22733-1:2021 Road vehicles — Test method to evaluate the performance of autonomous emergency braking
systems — Part 1: Car-to-car
ISO 22733-1 Road vehicles — Test method to evaluate the performance of autonomous emergency braking
systems — Part 1: Car-to-car
ISO/CD 22733-2 Road vehicles — Test method to evaluate the performance of autonomous emergency braking
systems — Part 2: Car to pedestrian
ISO 22735:2021 Road vehicles — Test method to evaluate the performance of lane-keeping assistance systems
ISO/SAE PAS Taxonomy and definitions for terms related to driving automation systems for on-road motor ve-
22736:2021 hicles
ISO 22737:2021 Intelligent transport systems — Low-speed automated driving (LSAD) systems for predefined routes
— Performance requirements, system requirements and performance test procedures
ISO/TR 23049:2018 Road Vehicles — Ergonomic aspects of external visual communication from automated vehicles
to other road users
ISO/DIS 23375 Intelligent transport systems — Collision Evasive Lateral Manoeuvre Systems (CELM) — Require-
ISO 23376:2021 Intelligent transport systems — Vehicle-to-vehicle intersection collision warning systems (VVICW)
— Performance requirements and test procedures
ISO/AWI 23793-1 Intelligent transport systems — Minimal Risk Maneuver (MRM) for automated driving — Part 1:
Framework, straight-stop and in-lane stop
ISO/DIS 24089 Road vehicles — Software update engineering
ISO 26684:2015 Intelligent transport systems (ITS) — Cooperative intersection signal information and violation
warning systems (CIWS) — Performance requirements and test procedures
ISO/FDIS 34501 Road vehicles — Test scenarios for automated driving systems — Vocabulary
ISO/FDIS 34502 Road vehicles — Test scenarios for automated driving systems - Scenario based safety evaluation
framework
ISO/FDIS 34503 Road Vehicles — Test scenarios for automated driving systems — Taxonomy for operational design
domain
ISO/CD 34504 Road vehicles — Test scenarios for automated driving systems - Scenario categorization
ISO process status acronyms:

WD = Working Draft, CD = Committee Draft, DIS = Draft International Standard, FDIS = Final Draft International Standard
more information www.iso.org
98
Wissen
NHTSA’s Automated Driving Systems Voluntary Safety

Self-Assessment (VSSA)
Scope and purpose
Through this Voluntary Guidance, NHTSA is supporting entities that are designing ADSs for use on public roadways in the United
States.
This includes traditional vehicle manufacturers as well as other entities involved with manufacturing, designing, supplying,
testing, selling, operating, or deploying ADSs, including equipment designers and suppliers; entities that outfit any vehicle with
automated capabilities or equipment for testing, for commercial sale, and/or for use on public roadways; transit companies;
automated fleet operators; “driverless” taxi companies; and any other individual or entity that offers services utilizing ADS tech-
nology (referred to collectively as “entities” or “industry”).
This Voluntary Guidance applies to the design aspects of motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment under NHTSA’s juris-
diction, including low-speed vehicles, motorcycles, passenger vehicles, medium-duty vehicles, and heavy-duty CMVs such as
large trucks and buses. These entities are subject to NHTSA’s defect, recall, and enforcement authority. For entities seeking to
request regulatory action (e.g., petition for exemption or interpretation) from NHTSA, an informational resource is available on
the Agency’s website at https://www.nhtsa.gov/technology-innovation/automated-vehicles-safety, along with other associated
references and resources.
Interstate motor carrier operations and CMV drivers fall under the jurisdiction of FMCSA and are not within the scope of this
Voluntary Guidance. Currently, per the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs), a trained commercial driver must
be behind the wheel at all times, regardless of any automated driving technologies available on the CMV, unless a petition for a
waiver or exemption has been granted. For more information regarding CMV operations and automated driving technologies,
including guidance on FMCSA’s petition process, see www.fmcsa.dot.gov.
This Voluntary Guidance focuses on vehicles that incorporate SAE Automation Levels 3 through 5 – Automated Driving Systems
(ADSs). ADSs may include systems for which there is no human driver or for which the human driver can give control to the ADS
and would not be expected to perform any driving-related tasks for a period of time. It is an entity’s responsibility to determine
its system’s automation level in conformity with SAE International’s published definitions.
The purpose of this Voluntary Guidance is to help designers of ADSs analyze, identify, and resolve safety considerations prior
to deployment using their own, industry, and other best practices. It outlines 12 safety elements, which the Agency believes
represent the consensus across the industry, that are generally considered to be the most salient design aspects to consider
and address when developing, testing, and deploying ADSs on public roadways. Within each safety design element, entities are
encouraged to consider and document their use of industry standards, best practices, company policies, or other methods they
have employed to provide for increased system safety in real-world conditions. The 12 safety design elements apply to both ADS
original equipment and to replacement equipment or updates (including software updates/ upgrades) to ADSs.
This Voluntary Guidance provides recommendations and suggestions for industry’s consideration and discussion. This Guid-
ance is entirely voluntary, with no compliance requirement or enforcement mechanism. The sole purpose of this Guidance is
to support the industry as it develops best practices in the design, development, testing, and deployment of automated vehicle
technologies.
Status
Version: September 12, 2017
DOT HS 812 442
Link
https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/13069a-ads2.0_090617_v9a_tag.pdf
99
Wissen
UL 4600 - Standard for Safety for the Evaluation
UPDATE of Autonomous
Products
UL 4600 - Standard for Safety for the Evaluation of Autonomous
Overview
Products
The standard’s scope includes safety principles and processes for evaluating autonomous products with no human driver super-
vision, e.g. fully autonomous vehicles.
Overview
The standard’s
The standard usesscope includes safety
a goal-based principles
approach whichand processes
prescribes for evaluating
topics that mustautonomous
be addressedproducts with
in creating no human
a safety case.driver supervi-
It is intended
sion, e.g. fully
to address autonomous
changes vehicles.
required from traditional safety practices to accommodate autonomy, such as lack of human operator to
take fault mitigation actions.
The standard uses a goal-based approach which prescribes topics that must be addressed in creating a safety case. It is intended
to address changes
Traditional requiredin
safety standards from traditional
contrast safety
describe thepractices
process toto achieve
accommodate
safety. autonomy, such as lack of human operator to take
fault mitigation actions.
Traditional
The standard safety standards
include safety in contrast
case describerisk
construction, theanalysis,
processsafety
to achieve safety.
relevant aspects of design process, testing, tool qualification,
The standard
autonomy include data
validation, safetyintegrity,
case construction,
human-machine risk analysis, safety
interaction relevant
(for aspectslife
non-drivers), ofcycle
design process,metrics
concerns, testing,and
toolconformance
qualification,
autonomy validation, data integrity, human-machine interaction (for non-drivers), life cycle concerns, metrics and conformance
assessment.
assessment.
UL 4600 is technology neutral, meaning that it does not mandate the use of any specific technology in creating the autonomous
UL 4600and
system, is technology neutral,
it also permits meaning
design process that it does not mandate the use of any specific technology in creating the autonomous
flexibility.
system, and it also permits design process flexibility.
Also UL 4600
Also UL 4600 does
does not
not define
define performance
performance or or pass/fail
pass/fail criteria
criteria for
for safety,
safety, nor
nor does
doesititcover
coverroad
roadtesting
testingor
oracceptable
acceptableriskrisklevels.
levels.
Furthermore, the
Furthermore, the Standard
Standard does
doesnot
notset
setforth
forthrequirements
requirementsfor forethical
ethicalproduct
productrelease
releasedecisions
decisionsororany
anyethical
ethicalaspects
aspectsofofproduct
prod-
behavior.
uct behavior.
The standard include the concept of Safety Performance Indicators (SPI) which are metrics like KPI’s but specific to safety. In
addition UL4600
The standard includes
includes thefeedback
concept loops thatPerformance
of Safety allow to manage and improve
Indicators imperfections
(SPI) which are metrics that
likewere
KPI’snot
butconsidered
specific to in the first
safety. In
design
additionofUL4600
the safety case. feedback loops that allow to manage and improve imperfections that were not considered in the first
includes
Compliance
design of thewith
safetyULcase.
4600 permits (but does not require conformance to) other safety standards such as ISO 26262, ISO/PAS
21448, IEC 61508, MIL STD 882, etc., as well as security standards where such conformity is demonstrated.
Compliance with UL 4600 permits (but does not require conformance to) other safety standards such as ISO 26262, IEC 61508,
UL4600 is suited
MIL-STD-882, forasself-certification
etc., well as security and assessment
standards whereby third
such parties. is demonstrated.
conformity
Status is suited for self-certification and assessment by third parties.

UL4600
Latest Version: 2, published 15 March 2022
A version 3 of UL4600 is under development and will in particular include the coverage of heavy trucks.
Status
A version 3 of UL4600 is under development and will in particular include the coverage of heavy trucks.
Link
Link
https://ulse.org/UL4600
https://ulse.org/UL4600
CLAIM
Example of a Safety Case ARGUMENT 1 ARGUMENT 2

CLAIM - a property of the system
"System avoids pedestrians"
ARGUMENT - why this is true
"Detect & manueuver to avoid" EVIDENCE 1 Sub-CLAIM 2a Sub-CLAIM 2b
EVIDENCE - supports argument
Tests, analysis, simulations
Sub-CLAIMS/ARGUMENTS adress complexity Sub-ARGUMENT 2a Sub-ARGUMENT 2b
"Detects pedestrians" // evidence
"Manueuvers around detected pedestrians" // evidence
"Stops if can't manueuver" // evidence

EVIDENCE 2a EVIDENCE 2b
100
Wissen
What is a Scenario and a Scenario-based Approach in the

Development and Validation of ADAS/ADS Systems?
A scenario is the interactive play of dynamic and static objects In scenario-based development and validation, one repre-
and systems (also system-of-systems) in a specific constella- sents the desired/required, compliant behavior of a system in
tion, taking into account the relevant influencing factors, envi- a set of scenarios that are relevant for the (safe) use of the
ronmental conditions and system configurations. Thereby, the system. For this purpose, the environmental and surrounding
objects and systems of the scenario are in a temporally and conditions, the interactive behavior patterns as well as the
spatially limited context. configurations and constellations of the involved objects and
systems are usually varied in such a way that the desired and
Accordingly, the scenario description includes on the one hand possible operating and deployment conditions are sufficiently
the listing of the involved objects, systems, constellations and covered by relevant scenarios and span at least the "Opera-
system contexts. On the other hand, the parameters and their tional Design Domain". Scenario-based development is of
ranges of values and properties of the objects and systems as particular importance in the case of complex systems, when
well as various initial and boundary conditions of the scenario. these cannot be fully captured and dealt with by purely ana-
This is done by specifying distributions and value ranges of the lytical reasoning, reductionist approaches or individual expert
respective parameters. knowledge.
In case of a concrete execution of a scenario with fixed or Scenario management encompasses the entire and compre-
given constellations, parameter values and configurations we hensive process (tool chain) of scenario-based development
speak of a concrete case or instance, no matter whether it is and validation from
an executed virtual simulation (simulation case),
the experimental design and definition of the relevant
an execution of a real test/experiment (test case) or
scenarios,
the concrete observation/measurement from the real
the systematic generation and collection of the data,
world (real case). the compilation and arrangement of the scenario data,
The transition from the abstract, formal scenario description the plausibility check and quality assurance of the data,
to the concrete cases in simulations and tests is made using the analysis and evaluation of the scenarios
sampling methods. Typical procedures include Monte Carlo the ongoing improvement and adaptation of the systems
methods or design-of-experiments. up to
the ongoing, iterative repetition.
In a scenario catalog or scenario database, different scenarios
and cases are combined in a standardized format, regardless Derived from https://www.andata.at/en/answer/what-is-
of the source of the data. The scenarios are suitably param- a-scenario-and-a-scenario-based-approach-in-the-develop-
eterized and attributed so that selected subsets of the catalog ment-and-validation-of-complex-systems.html
can be accessed according to the analyses of interest, such
as certain operational domains of a system for effectiveness
evaluation.
Scenario Management Process Steps
Data Generation & Data Composition &

Collection Labeling
System
Data Plausibilization &
Implementation & Scenario Catalogue Quality Assurance
Operation
System Development Analysis &

& Assessment Evaluation
101
Wissen
PEGASUS 6-Layer Model
Scenario Description Layer 4 - Dynamic Objects

Verification and validation of automated driving systems (ADS) Examples:
requires a structured description of the environments. The Vehicles (moving and non-moving)
PEGASUS project (xx) layed the groundwork by establishing a Pedestrians (moving and non-moving)
6-layer model for the description and categorization of high- Trailers
way scenarios. This PEGASUS description has been extended Animals
by other groups to be more general, i.e. apply to general envi- Falling trees
ronments (xx) or by adding a layer for the actor, e.g. VUT (XX). Misc. objects like balls, coke cans, paper bags etc.
Layer 1 - Road Network and Traffic Guidance Objects Layer 5 - Environmental Conditions
Examples: Examples:
Roads including shoulders, sidewalks, parking spaces etc. (Artificial) Illumination
Road markings Precipitation
Traffic signs and traffic lights Road conditions (dry, wet, icy etc.)
Wind
Layer 2 - Roadside Structures

Examples: Layer 6 - Digital Information
Buildings Examples:
Vegetation State of traffic lights and switchable traffic signs
Guardrails V2X messages
Street lamps Cellular network coverage
Advertising boards and pillars
The CAICV - Smart Connected Vehicle Expected Functional

Layer 3 - Temporary Modifications of Layer 1 and Layer 2 Safety Working Group introduced a 7th layer in the definition
Examples: of SOTIF specifications:
Roadwork signs
Layer 7 - Self-Car Status
Temporary markings
Examples:
Covered markings
Vehicle hardware equipment
Fallen trees laying on the street
Driver and occupant status
Layer 1 Layer 2 Layer 3 Layer 4 Layer 5 Layer 6 Layer 7

Road Network Roadside Temporary Dynamic Environmental Digital Self-Car
and Traffic Structures Modifications Objects Conditions Information Status
Guidance of Layer 1 and
Objects Layer 2

30


102
Wissen
Scenario Databases
A scenario database is a structured and curated collection of relevent traffic scenarios for ADS development, validation and
certification. The Pegasus project has provided a first data model. Typically the databases will be accessible via standardized
interfaces like OpenScenario.
The following table provides and overview of publically accessible databases.
Name Description Available Scenarios Link
SafetyPoolTM The Scenario Database contains over 250,000 https://www.safetypool.ai/
a diverse set of curated scenarios database
generated from multiple sources such
as expert knowledge, accident database
and naturalistic data.
Scenarios are organized and tagged
based on their specific Operational
Design Domain following the BSI PAS
1883 ODD Taxonomy and the ASAM
Open ODD standard (under develop-
ment).
Waymo Open The Waymo Open Dataset is composed over 100,000 https://waymo.com/open/
Dataset of two datasets - the perception dataset
with high resolution sensor data and
labels for 2,030 segments, and the
motion dataset with object trajectories
and corresponding 3D maps for 103,354
segments.
CAICV - SOTIF Shared library of Chinese SOTIF over 1,800 http://www.scstsv.tech/home
Scenario Library scenarios for supporting of test and
verification.
MOOVE/MOSAR A structured library as common 30 functional, 130 https://mosar.irt-systemx.fr
reference, with open export format to logical, over 2.5
initialize the combinatory for exhaustive million concrete
simulation. The „ADScene scenarios scenarios
library” is supported by French govern-
ment as French scenarios library for
AD&ADAS safety validation.
SAKURA Scenario The SAKURA project is a large-scale unkonwn https://www.sakura-prj.go.jp/
Database coordinated initiative funded by the project_info/tabid84.html
Japanes Ministry of Economy, Trade and
Industry (METI) that aims at harmonizing
data collection, developing research
methodologies and coordinating
standardization of activities through joint
efforts with vehicle manufacturers and
traffic research institutions.
levelXdata Real- Different datasets from different 346 ALKS https:// www.levelxdata.com
World Scenario countries with different infrastructure scenarios: 37 Lead
Data (city, highway, traffic circle, etc.) each Vehicle Brake, 136
with x-hundred scenarios, ALKS scenario Cut-In, 51 Swerv-
datasets extracted from highD data. ing Lead Vehicle,
122 Swerving Side
Vehicle
103
Safety Assurance
Wissen
Responsibility Sensitive Safety (RSS)

by Mobileye an Intel Company
Overview
Responsibility Sensitive Safety (RSS) is a formal model for the safety assurance of Automated Vehicle (AV) decision making that is
based on common sense human-centered knowledge of what it means to drive safely and avoid accidents.
RSS defines formal principles based on concepts of a “Dangerous Situation” and what a “Proper Response” is to that Dangerous
Situation. Using the definitions in the RSS Model, an Automated Vehicle’s driving policy is free to propose more assertive, human-
like driving decisions knowing that RSS will prevent any unsafe actions from being proposed.
RSS provides full coverage of multi-agent scenarios and also helps to clarify what happened and who did what in collisions involv-
ing automated vehicles in the real world.
The five rules of RSS
RULE 1 Define Safe Longitudinal Distance

1 (𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟 + 𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌𝛼𝛼𝛼𝛼𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 )2 𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓2
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 = �𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟 𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌 + 𝛼𝛼𝛼𝛼𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌2 + − �
2 2𝛼𝛼𝛼𝛼𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 2𝛼𝛼𝛼𝛼𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
Do not hit the car in front

�𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣1 + 𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣1,𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌 � dmin
2
𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣1,𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌 𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣2 + 𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣1,𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌 2
𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣2,𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌
(longitudinal distance)
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 = 𝜇𝜇𝜇𝜇 + � 𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌 + − �� 𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌 + ��
2 2𝛼𝛼𝛼𝛼1.𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙,𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 2 2𝛼𝛼𝛼𝛼2,𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙,𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
cr
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
1
= �𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟 𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌 + 𝛼𝛼𝛼𝛼𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌2 +
2
(𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟 + 𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌𝛼𝛼𝛼𝛼𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 )2
2𝛼𝛼𝛼𝛼𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
− cf
𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓2
2𝛼𝛼𝛼𝛼𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
�
RULE 2 Define Safe Lateral Distance

𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 = 𝜇𝜇𝜇𝜇 + �
�𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣1 + 𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣1,𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌 �
𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌 +
2
− ��
𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣2 + 𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣1,𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌
� 𝜌𝜌𝜌𝜌 +
2
��
2 2𝛼𝛼𝛼𝛼1.𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙,𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 2 2𝛼𝛼𝛼𝛼2,𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙,𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
Do not cut in recklessly

(lateral distance)
RULE 3 Right of Way
Right of way is given, not taken
RULE 4 Areas with Limited Visibilty
Be cautious in areas with limited visibility
RULE 5 Avoid a Collision Without

Causing Another
If the vehicle can avoid a crash without causing
another one, it must
Links
https://arxiv.org/abs/1708.06374 https://github.com/intel/ad-rss-lib
104
Safety Assurance
Wissen
Positive Risk Balance

▪
▪ Positive Risk Balance is an additional aspect to be considered in the development of automated driving systems which is in
The
response to ethical considerations of governments in Europe.
Safety of the
Functional Safety Cybersecurity Scenario Based Development Ethical Aspects
intended functionality
Positive Risk Balance

ISO 26262 ISO/PAS 21448 ISO/SAE 21434 ISO 3450x
ISO 5083 & ISO 21934
Road vehicles — Safety and cybersecurity for automated driving — Design, verification and validation
ISO TR 4804
The concept of the positive risk balance has to be considered during the entire product development cycle: in system design,
requirements definition, safety assessment and field monitoring.
The Risk Balance quantifies the positive and negative effects of a technology:
Potential positive effects: Potential negative effects:
Avoidance of collisions New collisions
Mitigation of collisions More critical situations
Avoidance of critical driving conditions False behaviour of the technology
The Risk Balance is a quantifiying approach. Therefore the boundary conditions and tools have to defined properly.
1. Which accidents should be considered?
2. What is the right metric?
3. Which accidents statistics should be used?
4. Safety Factors have to be considered
Virtual assessment methods are used for assessing the risk balance before and during the development. Once a car is in produc-
tion, field monitoring is used to increase confidence and validate the results.
References
Fahrenkrog, F., Drees, L., Raisch, F. Positive Risikobilanz: Methodisches Vorgehen und deren Rolle in der Entwicklung,
Auto[nom|Mobil, Würzburg, May 2022.
Kauffmann, N., Fahrenkrog, F., Drees, L. et al. Positive risk balance: a comprehensive framework to ensure vehicle safety. Ethics
Inf Technol 24, 15 (2022).
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-022-09625-2
https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10676-022-09625-2.pdf
105
Verification & Validation
Wissen
Validation of ADAS/ADS functionality and safety is a key part of the development of such systems. The V-Model illustrated a
popular systems development life cycle and positions the main validation activities in the development process.
Figure 1: V-Model (Source: Federal Highway Administration)
Validation technologies can be categorized into virtual and physical elements which fade into each other using x-in-the-loop
approaches. The following figure shows the relevance of such technologies in the validation of ADAS/ADS systems.
Figure 2: Virtual and Real Test Environments (Souce: Shanghai Digauto Automobile Technology)
MIL/SIL | Model-/Software-in-the-Loop
An approach which allows quick algorithmic development without involving dedicated hardware. Usually, this level of develop-
ment involves high-level abstraction software frameworks running on general-purpose computing systems.
HIL | Hardware-In-the-Loop
An approach which involves the final hardware of a specific vehicle sub-system running the final software with input and output
connected to a simulation environment to perform virtual testing. HIL testing provides a way of replicating sensors, actuators
and mechanical components in a way that connects all the I/O of the Electronic Control Units (ECU) being tested, long before the
final system is integrated.
VIL | Vehicle-In-the-Loop
A fusion environment of a real testing vehicle in the real-world and a virtual environment. It can reflect vehicle dynamics at the
same level as the real-world and it can be operated on a vehicle test bed or on a test track.
106
Wissen
PG | Proving Ground or Test-Track

A physical testing facility closed to the traffic where the performance of an ADS can be investigated on the real vehicle. Traffic
agents can be introduced via sensor stimulation or via dummy devices positioned on the track.
FOT | Field Operational Testing or Real World Testing
Fully equipped vehicles travel with test drivers in real traffic trying to cover as many scenarios as possible under varying environ-
mental conditions.
New Assessment/Test Method for Automated Driving (NATM) Guidelines for Validating Automated Driving System
(ADS)
The guidelines were prepared by the Informal Working Group (IWG) on Validation Methods for Automated Driving (VMAD).
They have been submitted to the World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations (WP.29) for information at its June
2022 session, subject to confirmation by Working Party on Automated/Autonomous and Connected Vehicles (GRVA) at its May
2022 session.
In the following some of the key concepts of these guidelines are explained.
It is recommended to use a five pillar approach plus a scenario catalogue for the validation of ADS safety
(a) A scenario catalogue, consisting of descriptions of real-world driving situations that may occur during a given trip, will be a
tool used by the NATM-pillars to systematically validate the safety of an ADS;
(b) Simulation/virtual testing which uses different types of simulation toolchains to assess the compliance of an ADS with the
safety requirements on a wide range of virtual scenarios including some which would be extremely difficult if not impossible to
test in real-world settings. The aspect of credibility of simulation/virtual testing is included in this topic;
(c) Track testing uses a closed-access testing ground with various scenario elements to test the capabilities and functioning of
an ADS;
(d) Real world testing uses public roads to test and evaluate the performance of ADS related to its capacity to drive in real traffic
conditions;
(e) Audit/assessment procedures which establish how manufacturers will be required to demonstrate to safety authorities
using documentation, their simulation, test-track, and/or real-world testing of the capabilities of an ADS. The audit will validate
that hazards and risks relevant for the system have been identified and that a consistent safety- by-design concept has been put
in place. The audit will also verify that robust processes/ mechanisms/strategies (i.e., safety management system) are in place to
ensure the ADS meets the relevant safety requirements throughout the vehicle lifecycle. It shall also assess the complementarity
between the different pillars of the assessment and the overall scenario coverage;
(f) In-service monitoring and reporting addresses the in-service safety of the ADS after its placing on the market. It relies on
the collection of fleet data in the field to assess whether the ADS continues to be safe when operated on the road. This data
collection can also be used to fuel the common scenario database with new scenarios from the field and to allow the whole ADS
community to learn from major ADS accidents/ incidents.
NATM
Audit
Safety Management System

of the Manufacturer
Safety Assessment of ADS
Requirements
Test
Methods Real World Tests In-service
Monitoring &
Reporting
Track Tests
Simulation
Virtual Tool
Assessment
ODD Scenarios
Figure 3: Relationship between VMAD Pillars, Scenarios and FRAV Safety Requirements
107
Wissen
Simulation for ADAS/ADS Validation
The only way to evaluate both performance and safety of automated and autonomous functions and systems in the infinite
space of traffic situations or scenarios is virtual simulation.
A complete simulation toolchain to cover the full workflow of ADAS/ADS validation consists of many diverse elements which
today are either individual software packages or combinations of software packages. Such a generalized workflow is shown here:
Real-World Datasets
Virtual Environment
Generation
Driving Scenarios Driving Scenarios

Generation Databases
Scenario Selection
Generation of
Concrete Scenarios
Simulation of
Concrete Scenarios
Big Data Results

Processing
There are now numerous software packages to cover the workflows come from diverse organisations:
Software Organisation Website

aiSim aiMotive https://aimotive.com/aisim
ASM/AURELION dSpace https://www.dspace.com/en/pub/home/products/
sw/automotive_simulation_models.cfm
CARLA CARLA Team https://carla.org
CarMaker IPG Automotive https://ipg-automotive.com/de/produkte-loesun-
gen/software/carmaker/
Cognata Studio Cognata https://www.cognata.com
Foretify Platform Foretellix https://www.foretellix.com/technology/
Nvidia Drive Sim Nvidia https://developer.nvidia.com/drive#drive-sim
OpenPass Eclipse Foundation https://openpass.eclipse.org
Simcenter Prescan Siemens https://www.plm.automation.siemens.com/global/
de/products/simcenter/prescan.html
SCANeR studio AVSimulation https://www.avsimulation.com/scaner-studio/
SUMO Eclipse Foundation https://www.eclipse.org/sumo/
VIRES Virtual Test Drive Hexagon https://vires.mscsoftware.com
(VTD)
108
Wissen
Proving Ground Testing
Proving grounds are key components in the validation, verification, inspection and homologation of ADAS and ADS equipped
vehicles. Currently all legal and consumer assessments require physical tests to validate the functions.
Furthermore proving grounds play an important role in validating simulation models and in testing for robustness of the func-
tions.
ADAS and ADS functions pose new requirements to the design of proving grounds. Those requirements range from space, type
of road, surface, evenness to lighting and communication equipment. In addition the safety and security of running tests at high
velocity and together with robots has be ensured.
The number of proving grounds for ADAS/ADS testing has increased significantly over the last years and there is more growth
anticipated. Also the technical equipment of the proving grounds is further enhanced. Future editions of the ADAS/ADS Compan-
ion will provide overviews of the worldwide proving grounds.
Besides the Vehicle-Under-Test (VUT), proving ground use multiple surrogates to simulate stationary and moving traffic par-
ticipants. Those are representing humans, animals, two-wheelers and cars. The moving surrogate are positioned on robotic
platforms to be moved at trajectories and at speeds coming from requirements and/or scenario databases. GNSS is used to
syncronize the trajectories of VUTs and surrogates.
Images: 4activeSystems
109
Event
NEW
The requirements by New Car Assessment Programs regarding

safety-supporting driver assistance systems for passenger cars
are constantly increasing: Oncoming traffic scenarios, tests in
darkness and higher expected speed reductions are some of the
prerequisites for a 5-star rating in the Euro NCAP or an IIHS Top
Safety Pick.
The introduction of emergency brake assistants for passenger cars is being

driven forward by legislation: Since 2022 UN Regulation 152 has been applicable
for passenger cars in the EU. The lane departure warning functions have also been
incorporated into UN R 79.
At The ADAS Experience, the framework relevant for the development will be
presented: Requirements, technical principles, development and release meth-
ods on the Theory Day in the conference hotel, followed by hands-on experience
on the test track on the Demo Day. Various test scenarios will be performed and
examples of how the test technology is best used, will be shown live in the differ-
ent test setups.
This is what awaits you: Who should attend?

The presentation of current and future requirements on emergency braking, The ADAS Experience addresses
evasion and highly automated driving functions, as well as development everyone, who works in the field
strategies that lead to a robust system. of safety-related driver assistance
Face to face talk with the people who set the framework for the systems. The Praxis Conference is the
development of safety assist functions: Legislative representatives, consumer right place to broaden and deepen
protection organizations, OEM representatives and suppliers of simulation your network: You will meet key play-
and testing technologies. ers in development, system integration,
Practical experience with various test setups, targets, driving robots and regulation and verification of Safety
control software on the Demo Day. Assist Systems.
DATE September 2023

Facts
VENUE Klettwitz
HOMEPAGE www.carhs.de/adas
LANGUAGE English
110
Verification & Validation Latest info about
Seminar
this course
Introduction to Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning for

Advanced Driver Assistance Systems and Automated Driving Functions
The functions of automated driving - no matter what degree Introduction of data-based development versus analytical
of automation - usually require the application of modern and rule-based approaches
artificial intelligence techniques in order to be able to real- Overview of the different procedures and areas of
ize the desired functionalities at all. The aim of this seminar application
is to present the basic methods of Artificial Intelligence and Artificial Neural Networks, Deep Learning, various variants
Machine Learning. The methods should be demonstrated and architectures
with concrete examples from the fields of assisted and auto- Decision and regression trees
mated driving. Care is also taken about validation, verification Support Vector Machines
and safeguarding of the related models and AI-based software Validation and safeguarding of models, sampling
components. procedures, robustness assessment
Data preparation and problem parameterization
Course Objectives
Meta modeling and model committees
This seminar provides an overview and a brief introduction
to the relevant methods of Artificial Intelligence and Machine
Learning, so that both developers and managers can clearly
decide which methods and procedures are relevant for their
applications and which possible pitfalls they should consider
in the application.
Who should attend?
Developers and (project) managers who have not yet had
deep experience with the methodology and want to get a
quick overview and introduction to the use of artificial intel-
ligence.
Dr. Andreas Kuhn (Andata Entwicklungstechnologie GmbH) studied Technical Mathematics

Instructor
and Mechanical Engineering at the Technical University of Vienna. After his dissertation on the simulation of
special satellite formations for the European Space Agency, he began his professional career in crash simula-
tion at BMW. After further years as a consultant for stochastic simulation at EASI Engineering GmbH (today
carhs), he founded ANDATA in 2004, where he is responsible for development and research as managing
partner. Since 2009 he has also been co-owner of Automotive Safety Technologies GmbH in Gaimersheim. His
professional interests are founded in effective and efficient development, validation and assessment meth-
ods for complex, safety-critical systems. In particular, he has been working for more than 20 years on the
development and combined application of methods from the fields of artificial intelligence, machine learning,
advanced simulation methods, scenario-based approaches and according process models in the virtual devel-
opment of vehicles and autonomous robots. His current activities are the development and implementation
of cooperative, networked, automated driving strategies for effective traffic automation.

Dates
111
Latest info about Verification & Validation
Seminar
this course
Scenario-, Simulation- and Data-based Development, Validation

and Safeguarding of Automated Driving Functions
The complexity of modern driver assistance systems and auto- Overview of the basic functions of automated driving
mated driving functions sometimes requires completely new Basics of Scenario and Data-based development
methods and approaches for their development, validation Basics in Machine Learning, Data Mining and Artificial
and testing. In particular, the wide coverage and analysis of Intelligence
functions with numerical simulation over the entire operating Stochastic Simulation, Monte-Carlo-Simulation, Design-
range (the so-called Operational Design Domain) is an indis- of-Experiments
pensable tool for the effective and efficient development of Optimization and automated calibration
appropriate vehicle functions. The course is about presenting Robustness and complexity management
the basics of scenario-based and data-based development Anomaly and fault detection
and putting them in a holistic context. Development processes for complex systems and
Course Objectives software, top-down versus bottom-up

Functional requirements management
The course provides an overview and a brief introduction to
Validation and verification
the relevant scenario management methods for simulation
Definitions Operational Design Domain
and data-centric development and validation of automated
Effectiveness assessment of system functions and
driving functions. Some key basic principles in the develop-
ment of complex systems are to be taught. components
Quality management for simulation data
Who should attend?
The seminar addresses employees of automotive manufac-
turers, suppliers, engineering service providers, government
agencies and research institutions, who are engaged in the
development and validation of automated driving functions.
In particular, method and process developers, simulation
and test engineers are also addressed, who are responsible
to implement corresponding processes and methods in their
companies to ensure safe development and assessment of
automated driving functions.
Dr. Andreas Kuhn (Andata Entwicklungstechnologie GmbH) studied Technical Mathematics

Instructor
and Mechanical Engineering at the Technical University of Vienna. After his dissertation on the simulation of
special satellite formations for the European Space Agency, he began his professional career in crash simula-
tion at BMW. After further years as a consultant for stochastic simulation at EASI Engineering GmbH (today
carhs), he founded ANDATA in 2004, where he is responsible for development and research as managing
partner. Since 2009 he has also been co-owner of Automotive Safety Technologies GmbH in Gaimersheim. His
professional interests are founded in effective and efficient development, validation and assessment meth-
ods for complex, safety-critical systems. In particular, he has been working for more than 20 years on the
development and combined application of methods from the fields of artificial intelligence, machine learning,
advanced simulation methods, scenario-based approaches and according process models in the virtual devel-
opment of vehicles and autonomous robots. His current activities are the development and implementation
of cooperative, networked, automated driving strategies for effective traffic automation.

Dates
112
Event
NEW
April 25 – 26, 2023

Congress Park Hanau
Germany
Computer simulation has become an indispensable tool in automotive devel-
opment. Tremendous progress in software and computer technology makes
it possible today to assess product and process performance before physical
prototypes have been built. Despite of significant progress in simulation tech-
nology and impressive results in industrial application there remains a number
of challenges which prevent a “100 % digital prototyping”. We at carhs.training
call these Grand Challenges.
Automotive CAE Grand Challenge offers a Platform for Dialogue

The automotive CAE Grand Challenge stimulates the exchange between users,
scientists and software developers in order to solve these challenges. Annually
the current, critical challenges in automotive CAE are being identified through
a survey among the simulation experts of the international automotive indus-
try. In the conference one session is dedicated to each of the most critical
challenges, the so-called Grand Challenges. In each session CAE experts from
industry, research and software development will explain the importance of the
individual Challenge for the virtual development process and talk about their
efforts to solve the challenge.
Automotive CAE Grand Challenges 2023

The most important current challenges of automotive CAE - the so-called “Grand
Challenges” - will be determined through a survey among the CAE experts of the
international automotive industry. These "Grand Challenges" will form the topics of
the sessions of our automotive CAE Grand Challenge 2023 conference.
Who should attend?
The conference intends bringing together industrial users, researchers and
software developers to discuss these current, critical challenges of automotive
CAE and to initiate collaboration between these groups to help overcoming the
Grand Challenges of automotive CAE. The presentation program of the confer-
ence provides both experts and beginners valuable information for their daily
work. The possibility to meet and exchange with all stakeholders of automo-
tive CAE is a great opportunity. In the accompanying exhibition participants can
receive additional information from leading companies of CAE.
DATE 25.-26.04.2023
Facts
VENUE Hanau, GERMANY & ONLINE
HOMEPAGE www.carhs.de/grandchallenge
LANGUAGE
PRICE 990,- EUR till 28.03.2023, thereafter 1.280,- EUR, ONLINE 840,- EUR
113
Latest info about Verification & Validation
Seminar
this course
Introduction to Impact Biomechanics and Human Body Models

To prevent human injury in traffic it is necessary to under- This seminar addresses everyone who wants to obtain an up-
stand the biomechanics of impact. This can be done through to-date overview or who needs a deepened understanding of
experimental studies with human subjects, volunteers, or the field of impact biomechanics, such as university graduates,
post-mortem human subjects (PMHS), after ethical approval. career changers, management, project assistants, internal
The individual variation is large in experiments with human service providers, qualified technicians from the crash-test lab
subjects, due to the wide spread of anthropometry and mate- or anyone basing product development or decision-making on
rial properties that depend on factors such as gender, age, and simulation results with human body models.
health status. Mechanical anthropometric crash test dummies Course Contents
were developed to provide repetitive tools for develop- Introduction to impact biomechanics
ment and assessment of safety systems for specific loading Human anatomy & physiology
scenarios, representing mid-size males, large males, small Medical terminology
females and children of different ages. With the development Injury scaling scores
of advanced safety systems, the need for repetitive tools with Epidemiology
increased biofidelity and anatomical details, initiated devel- Human substitutes
opment of numerical human body models. With increasing Material properties
Soft tissues
computer capacity, human body models have become popu-
Hard tissues
lar tools for traffic safety research, crash simulations, safety
Injury mechanisms, tolerances & criteria
evaluations and to study the effects of population diversity Head and neck
on traffic safety. This course covers the basic topics of impact Thorax
biomechanics, such as human anatomy, population variance, Upper and lower extremities
mechanical properties of human tissues, and injury criteria. Population variability
Finally, it focuses on computational models of the human Biomechanics of children
body and their use to develop and evaluate safety systems. The aging population
Gender differences
Course Objectives Human body models
The objective of this course is to introduce impact biomechan- Introduction to numerical methods
ics, injury biomechanics, and to provide an overview of com- Methodology for model development
putational models of the human body. You will learn about the Validation of models
most important topics and get a chance to understand how it State of the art models
relates to your work and traffic safety in general. Strengths and limitations
Prof. Dr. Karin Brolin (Lightness by Design AB) has worked in the field of impact biomechanics
Instructor
throughout her career. Karin Brolin earned her PhD in 2002 at the Royal Institute of Technology, and since
then she has worked in both academia and industry on the topic of human body injury mechanisms and toler-
ances. The past ten years she led a research group focusing on human body simulations for traffic safety and
injury prevention, as Professor in Computational Impact Biomechanics at Chalmers University of Technology.
Since 2019 Dr. Brolin has worked as an independent consultant and researcher.

Dates
28.11.-01.12.2022 193/4070 online 4 Days 1.340,- EUR till 31.10.2022, thereafter 1.590,- EUR
114
Event
NEW
The application of numerical simulation incorporating digital human models offers

exciting opportunities in automotive development. Applying human models in com-
fort, ergonomics and safety allows to overcome limitations imposed by the use of
real humans or their mechanical surrogates and thus enables further optimization
of automotive designs.
Autonomous vehicles will bring significant comfort benefits to passengers.

However, safety cannot be compromised for alternative seating positions.
Human Modeling and Simulation is currently the only technology that will
allow assessment of occupant protection for new car interior architectures
with flexible seat arrangements.
In November 2022 the 9th International Symposium Human Modeling and
Simulation in Automotive Engineering will be held. The symposium intends to
continue and further advance the dialog between researchers, software developers
and industrial users of human models. Presentations from renowned researchers,
software manufacturers and industrial users on biomechanical research, digital
human models and their application in automotive development will make up a
most interesting conference.
The 9th symposium is again organized in cooperation with Wayne State University‘s
renowned Bioengineering Centre, which has been a pioneer and leading institution
in biomechanics research for automotive safety for 75 years.
Conference Topics
Biomechanical Research Image: Wiesbaden Congress & Marketing GmbH
Development of Human Models and Simulation Software

Industrial Applications of Human Models
Focus Topics:
Occupant Protection for Autonomous Vehicles
Virtual Testing with Human Body Models
Who should attend?

Engineers, researchers, software developers and managers involved in automotive
or software development will benefit from participating in the symposium.
DATE 16.-17.11.2022
Facts
VENUE Wiesbaden, GERMANY & ONLINE
HOMEPAGE www.carhs.de/humo
LANGUAGE English
PRICE 1.490,- EUR till 19.10.2022, thereafter 1.750,- EUR, ONLINE 990,- EUR
115
Wissen
Field monitoring, in-service monitoring and reporting

The assessment of the performance and functionality of connected and automated vehicles is very complex, as practical testing
of a large number of traffic scenarios can hardly be carried out comprehensively. Conventional test methods for the assessment
of CAV’s will therefore no longer be sufficient in the future. Therefore, new assessment methods must be developed to ensure
compliance of connected and automated vehicles during their operational lifetime. This includes a prospective safety assessment
on the one hand and a validation in operation as a retrospective safety assessment on the other hand.
validation in operation
(e.g. field monitoring, periodic technical inspection)
acceptance real driving

model tests
experiments
design
test rig /
principles
proving ground
requirements on
performance and simulation
operation
development & audits

design (e.g. ISO 26262,
CAV vehicle SOTIF)
Figure 1: scheme approval process of CAV’s
Figure 1 illustrates the approval process of CAV’s schematically. The left branch describes the requirements that connected and
automated systems have to fulfil. With the introduction of first regulations on automated driving systems, it is already apparent
today that constraint regulations with specific technical requirements will be replaced by generic, functional and technology-
neutral requirements for the vehicles and traffic systems. This enables the approval of innovative technologies, but also requires
an extensive evaluation of the performance of the systems.
As illustrated with the right branch, a prospective safety and risk assessment is necessary before a CAV can be approved. Lately,
a multi-pillar approach has been established that includes e.g. virtual (scenario-based) analyses to prove an increase in safety
potential with the corresponding driving function. In addition, auditing of a safety-compliant development process as well as
experimental verifications on test rigs, closed test areas and in real traffic are part of the assessment and approval process [1].
Although there are many novel developments concerning virtual testing and despite extensive and state-of-the-art safety analy-
ses – performed by the manufacturers, the technical services and the authorities – it seems impossible to represent completely
the complexity of all possible traffic scenarios and environmental conditions. Furthermore, future changes in road traffic regula-
tions cannot be assessed when approving connected and automated vehicles today. Additionally, it is not possible to assess
future adaptations to changing traffic conditions at the time of approval. Moreover, deterioration due to degradation, wear,
tampering or damage as well as modifications due to regularly (over-the-air) software updates cannot be comprehensively deter-
mined at the time of approval, i.e. at the beginning of the product life cycle. Hence, a validation in operation as a retrospective
safety assessment is vital to ensure road safety (as well as compliance with other requirements such as ethical, environmental
or security behaviour). Therefore, in-service monitoring and reporting (ISMR) performed by the manufacturers themselves is
mandatory to apply for a type-approval of the automated driving system (ADS) of fully automated vehicles according to the
Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/1426 [2].
In addition to ISMR performed by the vehicle manufacturers themselves, the validation of the performance of connected and
116
Wissen
automated vehicles should be performed by neutral, sovereign bodies as this supports a trusted third party principle and com-
plies with the market and field surveillance tasks of many countries. For example, the Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/1426
requires that the manufacturer must enable the transport service operator to provide the type-approval authorities, market
surveillance authorities or other authorities designated by the Member States with the selected vehicle data.
evaluation by the
authorities /
sovereign
public bodies
requirement
not fulfilled

evaluation of ADS
deactivation of
driving function
Dynamic determination of
minimum requirements
for CAV inactive
field data acquisition

possible criteria: requirement
 road safety
 conformity to regulations
fulfilled
 troubleshooting
 environmental protection - repair or
 acceptance - approved
 ... dynamic software update
assesment field monitoring
standard
changable Dynamic scale of reactivation of
provisions reference driving function
national/ a. normal driver
international b. ADS
active
Figure 2: scheme field monitoring
Figure 2 illustrated the field monitoring approach [3, 4, 5]. For implementation of a working process, driving and environmental
data (without reference to persons) must be recorded, transmitted and evaluated. If safety-relevant anomalies are detected, in
worst case, the deactivation of the corresponding automated driving functions can be initiated by the authorities. To reactivate
the functionalities, measures (such as hardware upgrades or software updates) can be demanded from the manufacturers.
This disruptive approach of a dynamic vehicle approval is comparable to an ordered recall by the authorities in case of safety-rel-
evant issues. Moreover, the procedure corresponds with regulatory law for human drivers. If a driver has committed an adminis-
trative offence, a driving ban can be imposed. In addition, a retraining can be demanded to obtain the drivers license. Transferred
to a technical system – that is responsible for the Dynamic Driving Task (DDT) – e.g. a software update can be demanded.
The left cycle of figure 2 illustrates the development of an adaptive assessment standard. Based on minimum requirements for
the performance of selected automated driving functions, the performance of the driving task must be evaluated by appropri-
ate algorithms. For this purpose, generally applicable, unambiguous and objective evaluation criteria and methods must be
developed for validating the automated driving functions. On the one hand, criteria can be derived from provisions (e.g. UNECE
or national traffic regulations), that are usually underlying changes. On the other hand, the normal driving behaviour of a good
human driver can be used as an initial evaluation benchmark. Therefore, a comprehensive analysis of real driving data is essential.
Only if nominal driving behaviour can be described comprehensively, incidents in driving behaviour can be detected and evalu-
ated.

Further development of periodic roadworthiness tests
The implementation of the periodic technical inspection (PTI) still contributes significantly to guarantee road safety of vehicles.
However, a PTI that focuses exclusively on mechanical components of the vehicle will no longer meet the safety requirements
of modern road traffic. It must be ensured that a proper and professional inspection of the performance and functionality of
connected and automated vehicle is carried out by a neutral third party to assure a high level of safety throughout the vehicle's
life cycle. Therefore, today's test content has to be extended and further developed.
One part is to test the performance and functionality of safety relevant driving systems digitally by the electronic vehicle inter-
117
Wissen
face. This includes to verify the conformity and integrity of software (as an elementary component of electronically controlled
vehicle systems) during the PTI. Thus, it becomes important to make in-vehicle data available, not only for mobility services,
but also for sovereign tasks. Self-determined and independent access to safety-relevant data and diagnostic functions in the
vehicle for administrative and sovereign tasks are the necessary basis for the definition of universally valid, unambiguous and
objective evaluation criteria and methods for independent roadworthiness testing during the whole vehicle life cycle. Neutral
and independent access to mobility and vehicle data (via OBD / Over-the-air vehicle interfaces) must be ensured and adapted to
the technical state of the art of the vehicles.
In addition to static and electronic condition tests, vehicle tests within the scope of PTI are becoming more dynamic. In particular
scenario-based test methods offer the possibility to test the reaction of a vehicle to a specific input by using an appropriate
representation of the traffic environment. The development of PTI-capable targets, as known from development projects, and
the implementation at inspection sites could be an effective solution to evaluate the performance and functionality of connected
and automated driving functions.
References
[1] United Nations, World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations, 184th session, Geneva, 22-24 June 2021: New
Assessment/Test Method for Automated Driving (NATM). ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2021/61,
Url: https://unece.org/sites/default/files/2021-04/ECE-TRANS-WP29-2021-61e.pdf.
[2] Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/1426 of 5 August 2022 laying down rules for the application of Regulation
(EU) 2019/2144 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards uniform procedures and technical specifications for
the type-approval of the automated driving system (ADS) of fully automated vehicles.
Url: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2022/1426/oj.
[3] Höpping, K.; Bönninger, J. (2020). Approval of automated vehicles. In Proceedings SafetyWeek 2020: Auto[nom]Mobil, Würz-
burg, Germany, 1-3 September 2020.
[4] Höpping, K.; Bönninger, J.; Prokop, G.; Mai, M. (2021). Driver’s license for automated vehicles – towards representative test
scenarios. In Proceedings SafetyWeek 2021: Auto[nom]Mobil, Würzburg, Germany, 1-2 September 2021.
[5] F. Blüthner, K. Höpping, T. Böhme, J. Bönninger und D. Bönninger, „A Federated Telematics System for access to in-vehicle
data – a trustworthy basis for field monitoring of automated vehicles,“ in 27th ITS World Congress, Hamburg, 2021.
SafetyWissen by courtesy of Dr. Kristian Höpping and Dr. Jürgen Bönninger, FSD Fahrzeugsystemdaten GmbH, Dresden,
Germany

any�me, anywhere.
Daily SafetyNews
118
SAFETY SafetyWissen
WISSEN SafetyWissen.com
Important Abbreviations
A CTA Cross Traffic Alert

CV Closing Velocity
aBAS Advanced Brake Assist System
CVFA Car to Vulnerable road user Farside Adult
ACC Adaptive Cruise Control
CVNA Car to Vulnerable road user Nearside Adult
ACEA Association of European Automobile
CVNC Car to Vulnerable road user Nearside Child
Manufacturers
ACN Automatic Collision Notification D
ACSF Automatically Commanded Steering Function
AD Automated Driving DAS Driving Automation System
ADAS Advanced Driver Assistance Systems DCAS Driver Contoll Assistance System
ADS Automated Driving System DDAW Driver Drowsiness and Attention Warning
AEB Autonomous Emergency Braking DDT Dynamic Driving Task
AEBS Autonomous Emergency Brake System DEN Decentralized Environmental Notification
AES Autonomous Emergency Steering DENM Decentralized Environmental Notification Message
AI Artificial Intelligence DGPS Differential Global Positioning System
ALKS Automated Lane Keeping System DMS Driver Monitoring System
ASAM Association for Standardization of Automation and DOW Door Opening Warning
Measuring systems DSM Driver Status Monitoring
ASCC Adaptive Speed Cruise Control DSSAD Data Storage System for Automated Driving
ASDE Authorized Self-Driving Entity
ASIL Automotive Safety Integrity Level (functional
E
safety) EBA Emergency Brake Assist
AV Automated Vehicle EBA Effective Braking & Avoidance (ASEAN NCAP)
EBT Euro NCAP Bicyclist Target
B ECE Economic Commision for Europe (United Nations)
BAS Brake Assist EDR Event Data Recorder
BOS Beginning of Steer ELK Emergency Lane Keeping
BSD Blind Spot Detection EPT Euro NCAP Pedestrian Target
BSI Blind Spot Intervention EPTa Euro NCAP Pedestrian Target adult
BSIS Blind Spot Information System EPTc Euro NCAP Pedestrian Target child
BSM Blind Spot Monitoring ESC Electronic Stability Control
BST Blind Spot Technology ESF Emergency Steering Function
BSW Blind Spot Warning ESS Emergency Steering Support
Euro NCAP European New Car Assessment Programme
C EVT Euro NCAP Vehicle Target
C-IASI China Insurance Automotive Safety Index F
C-NCAP China New Car Assessment Programme
C2C Car-to-Car FCTA Front Cross Traffic Alert
CA Crash Avoidance FCW Forward Collision Warning
CAV Connected and Automated Vehicle FCWS Forward Collision Warning System
CCFtap Car to Car-Front turn across path FMVSS Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards
CCR Car-to-Car Rear FOT Field Operational Trials
CCRb Car-to-Car Rear braking
CCRm Car-to-Car Rear moving
G
CCRs Car-to-Car Rear stationary GLOSA Green Light Optimized Speed Advisory
CDCF Corrective Directional Control Function GRSG Groupe de Rapporteurs sur la Sécurité Générale
CIB Crash Imminent Braking (WP.29 - General Safety Provisions)
COS Completion of Steer GSR General Safety Regulation
CP Contact Point GTR Global Technical Regulation
CSF Corrective Steering Function GVT Global Vehicle Target
CSMS Cyber Security Management System
119
SafetyWissen SAFETY
SafetyWissen.com WISSEN
Important Abbreviations
H PMA Parking and Maneuvering Assistant

PoC Point of Collision
HAD Highly Automated Driving
PRB Positive Risk Balance
HAV Highly Automated Vehicle
PTW Powered Two Wheeler
HMI Human Machine Interface
I R
Radar Radio Detection and Ranging
IHC Intelligent Headlight Control
RCTA Rear Cross Traffic Alert
ISA Intelligent Speed Assistance
RMF Risk Mitigation Function
ISM Intelligent Speed Management
RSS Responsibility-Sensitive Safety
ITS Intelligent Transport Systems
RTA Ready To Assist
J
S
JA Junction Assist
SA Safety Assist (Euro NCAP)
JNCAP Japan New Car Assessment Program
SAS Speed Assistance System
K SAT Safety Assist Technology
SLD Speed Limitation Device
KNCAP Korean New Car Assessment Program SLIF Speed Limit Information Function
SOTIF Safety Of The Intended Functionality
L
SSR Speed Sign Recognition
LDP Lane Departure Prevention SUMS Software Update Management System
LDWS Lane Departure Warning System
LIDAR Light Detection and Ranging T
LKAS Lane Keeping Assist System TA Type Approval
LKD Lane Keeping Device TCMV Technical Committee - Motor Vehicles (EU)
LKS Lane Keeping System/Support TOR Takeover Request
LSS Lane Support System TRT Total Reaction/Response Time
TTB Time to Brake
M
TTC Time to Collision
MCB Multi Collision Brake TTD Time to Decision
ML Machine Learning TTS Time to Steer
MRC Minimal Risk Condition
MRM Minimum Risk Maneuver U
MSA Manual Speed Assist U.S. NCAP United States New Car Assessment Program
UIC User-In-Charge
N
UN United Nations
NCAP New Car Assessment Program
NHTSA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration V
(USA) V2I Vehicle-to-Infrastructure
NUIC Non-User-In-Charge V2V Vehicle-to-Vehicle
V2X Vehicle-to-Everything
O
VAN Vehicle Area Network
ODD Operational Design Domain VATS Visual Attention Time Sharing
OEDR Object and Event Detection and Response VDC Vehicle Dynamics Control
OSM Occupant Status Monitoring VLOS Visual Line-Of-Sight
OTA Over-The-Air VRU Vulnerable Road User
VUT Vehicle under test
P
PAEB Pedestrian Automatic Emergency Braking
PBC Peak Braking Coefficient
PDC Park Distance Control
120
carhs.training gmbh
General Terms for the Participation in Seminars and Events i
Subject and Scope of Application able information and data. We cannot accept any liability for the content of the
These General Terms and Conditions (AGB) apply exclusively to participation in statements, for information and data or for the success of the training. We are
seminars and events organized and held by carhs.training GmbH (hereinafter not liable for loss of or damage to items brought to seminars or events unless
referred to as carhs.training), Siemensstraße 12, 63755 Alzenau, Germany. the loss or damage to these items is due to intentional or grossly negligent
General terms and conditions or other general contractual conditions of the conduct by our employees or other vicarious agents. We would therefore ask
customer or third parties are not valid, even if carhs.training does not expressly you not to leave any valuables or important materials in the conference room
object to them in individual cases. during breaks. We do not guarantee that the products, processes and names
Registration mentioned in seminars, events and documents are free of property rights.
You can register for the seminar, for the event directly via our webpage www. Copyrights
carhs.de, or send us the completed and signed registration page, which is The materials handed out within the context of our seminars and events are pro-
attached to each invitation, by mail, fax or e-mail. By signing the written regis- tected by copyright and may not be reproduced or commercially used, even in
tration or sending the e-mail/internet registration, the participant accepts the part, without the consent of carhs.training GmbH and the respective instructors.
conditions of participation. Your registration data will be stored for internal Image Recordings
purposes. carhs.training is entitled, within the framework of the seminar, the event, to cre-
Registration Confirmation / Invoice ate, reproduce, broadcast or have created, reproduce or have broadcast, make
You will receive a written registration confirmation and an invoice immediately available to the public or have made available to the public, as well as to use
after receipt of your registration. Invoices are due for payment 30 days after the or have used in any other way in audio-visual media, image recordings of the
invoice is issued, but no later than 7 days before the start of the seminar, before participants that go beyond the reproduction of an event of current events (right
the start of the event without deductions. We reserve the right to exclude par- to one's own image) without remuneration.
ticipants from the seminar if payment is not made in time. Partner Seminars and Events
Participation Fee At the seminars, events of our partner companies BGS - Böhme und Gehring
The participation fee for a seminar, an event is per person plus VAT and includes GmbH, Verkehrsunfallforschung an der TU Dresden GmbH and Vogel Communi-
training material, certificate of participation, food and drinks during breaks and cations Group GmbH & Co. KG we only act as a broker and forward your registra-
lunch. Since the place of performance for seminars and events held in Germany tion to the respective provider. Your contractual partner becomes the respective
is Germany (§ 3a Abs. 3 Nr. 3 lit. a German UStG), participants from abroad must seminar or event provider. Their conditions of participation apply exclusively.
also pay VAT (but it may be possible to apply to the German Federal Central Validity of the Conditions of Participation
Tax Office for a refund of VAT). Participation in our seminars and events only For all seminar bookings, event bookings (with the exception of partner semi-
temporarily does not entitle to a reduction of the participation fee. If you would nars, partner events) these terms and conditions of participation apply exclu-
like to book a larger number of seminar days and/or event days within a year, it is sively. Deviating terms and conditions of our clients shall not apply even if the
advisable to conclude a framework agreement. Please contact us in this regard! client refers to his own terms and conditions in the course of correspondence
Discount for Participants from Universities and Public Research Institu- required due to the contractual relationship.
tions Written Form, Validity of German Law and Place of Jurisdiction
We grant participants from universities and public research institutions a dis- 1. All agreements made at the time of the conclusion of the contract or there-
count of 40 % on the respective seminar prices, event prices. after, which deviate from the provisions of these AGB, must be in writing to be
Number of Participants legally effective. This also applies to a cancellation or waiver of the written form
The number of participants is limited in order to guarantee an efficient execution requirement. For the compliance with the written form it is also sufficient to
of the seminars, the events. Registrations will be considered in the order in which send it by fax or e-mail.
they are received. Early registration is therefore recommended. For registrations 2. The present AGB and all individual contracts concluded between carhs.train-
beyond this date, we will try to offer an alternative date. ing and the customer are subject exclusively to the laws of the Federal Republic
Cancellation of Germany, excluding the UN Convention on Contracts for the International
1. Cancellation of the registration up to 4 weeks before the seminar is free of Sale of Goods (CISG).
charge. For cancellations up to 2 weeks before the start of the seminar we have 3. If the customer is a merchant, legal entity under public law, or special fund
to charge a flat rate of 100 Euro. If a cancellation is made after this date or if under public law, or has no general place of jurisdiction in Germany, the exclu-
the participant does not appear at the seminar, the fee is to be paid in full. In sive place of jurisdiction is the headquarters of carhs.training.
this case, the participant has the right to participate in the next seminar without
further costs. Imprint
2. For the conferences and events listed under the heading "Events", the follow-
ing deviating cancellation conditions apply: Cancellation of registration up to 4 Published by
weeks before the start of the event is free of charge. Cancellation up to 2 weeks carhs.training gmbh, Siemensstrasse 12, D-63755 Alzenau, Germany
prior to the start of the event will be charged half the participation fee. If the Tel. +49 (0) 6023-9640-60, Fax +49 (0) 6023-9640-70
cancellation is made after this date or if the participant does not appear at the Managing Directors: Constantin Hoffmann, Rainer Hoffmann
event, the fee is payable in full. Commercial Register: Aschaffenburg HRB 9961
Replacement Participants Copyright

A substitute participant can be named at any time instead of the registered par- © 2022 by carhs.training gmbh. All details, including but not limited to,
ticipant at no additional cost. The same conditions of participation apply to this illustrations, product descriptions and documents published in this book are the
substitute as to the registered participant. If two persons share the participation sole property of carhs.training gmbh. Any copying or distribution in whole or in
(1 participant per day), both will receive the complete documents. A surcharge parts is subject to a written permit by carhs.training gmbh. All rights reserved.
of EUR 100 plus VAT will be charged. carhs is a registered trademark of carhs gmbh
Program Changes
carhs.training reserves the right to change the program of the seminar or event. Liability
No warranty is given, either expressly or tacitly, for the completeness or
Cancellation or Postponement of Seminars and Events correctness of the information in this publication or on websites referred to in
We reserve the right to cancel or postpone seminars and events for organiza- this publication. We can and will not be liable for any damages arising from the
tional reasons (e.g. if the minimum number of participants, which depends on use or in connection with the use of the information in this publication, being
direct or indirect damages, consequential damages and/or, but not limited to,
the type of seminar or event, is not reached or if the speaker is unavailable at damages such as loss of profit or loss of data. We reserve the right of changes
short notice). In case of cancellation by us, we will try to rebook you on another of the information contained without previous announcement. We can and
date and/or venue, if you wish so. Otherwise you will be refunded the fees will not be held liable nor responsible for the information contained in and on
already paid, further claims are excluded. webpages referred to in this publication. Furthermore we declare, that we do
not have any influence, outside of our domain, for the pages presented in the
Liability Internet. Should any illegal information be spread via one of our links, please be
Naturally, the speakers will present their own opinions, publish or make avail- so kind to inform us immediately, to enable us to remove said link.
121
carhs.training gmbh
i
Index Driver Assistance 111
Driver State Monitoring 66
A
ACSF 12, 24
E
Active Safety 19 Edge Case 12
ADAS 110 ELKS 36
ADS 12 Emergency Lane Keeping 64, 65
Advertisers Directory 124 Emergency Steering Support 51, 54, 60
AEB 26, 29, 50, 52, 55, 56, 59, 60, 61, 64, 69, 74, 75, 76, 78, Engel, Benjamin 9
84, 85 ESC 19, 27, 65
AEBS 12, 26, 29 ESF 12, 24
AES 12, 78 ESS 12
ALKS 12, 33 EU 2021/646 36
ANCAP 46 Euro NCAP 49
Artificial Intelligence 111
F
ASAM 87, 88, 89, 90
FCW 78
ASEAN NCAP 46
FMVSS 22, 39
ASIL 95
FMVSS 126 27
Automated Driving 23, 42, 48, 111
Forward Collision Warning 70
Automation Modes 18
Front Crash Prevention 69
Auto[nom]Mobil 42
Functional Safety 95
B G
BASt 16
General Safety Regulation 35
Biomechanics 114
General Terms 121
Blind Spot 28
Golowko, Kai 9
Bönninger, Jürgen 118
GRVA 20
Brolin, Karin 114
GTR 20, 22
C GTR 8 27
CAE Grand Challenge 113
H
Calendar 125
HIL 13, 106
CDCF 12
Höpping, Kristian 118
China 81
Human Body Models 114
C-NCAP 46, 49, 75
Human Modeling 115
C-NCAP Active Safety Roadmap 2025 77
Crash Imminent Braking 70, 72 I
Creamer, John 9, 22, 23, 39 IEEE Standard 2846 93
CSF 12, 24 IIHS 46, 49, 69
CSMS 12 Imprint 121
Cyber Security 31 Inhouse Seminars 11
Injury Mechanisms 114
D
ISO 21448:2022 94
Data-based Development 112
ISO 26262 40, 95
DCAS 12
ISO/CD TS 22133 96
DDAW 12
i-VISTA 78
DDT 12
Definitions 12 J
DIL 12 JNCAP 46, 74
122
carhs.training gmbh
i
K SafetyTesting Challenge 44
Kinsky, Thomas 22 SafetyUpDate 43
KNCAP 46, 73 SafetyWeek 41
Kompass, Klaus 9 Scenario 12
Koopman, Philip 18 Scenario-based Development 112
Kuhn, Andreas 9, 111, 112 Scenario Databases 103
Schlenkrich, Michael 9
L Seat Belt Reminder 66, 82
Lane Departure Warning 36, 64, 80 Seeck, Andre 49
Lane Keep Assist 64, 76, 82 Self-Certification 39
Latin NCAP 46, 85 SIL 13
Lohrmann, Hans-Georg 40 Simulation 108
Sine with Dwell 27
M Slowly-Increasing-Steer 27
Machine Learning 111 Software Updates 32
MIL 13 SOTIF 48, 94
Motor Vehicle Classification 15 Speed Assist Systems 66, 82
MRM 13 Steininger, Udo 9, 48
Müller, Gerd 19 SUMS 32
N T
NCAP 46, 49 Testing 44
New Energy Vehicles 81 Turn Across Path 60
NHTSA 16, 39
U
O UL 4600 100
ODD 13 UNECE 14, 20
OpenSCENARIO 87 UN R79 24
UN R131 26
P UN R140 27
PEGASUS 102 UN R151 28
Policies 23 UN R152 29
Positive Risk Balance 48, 105 UN R155 31
Product Liability 39, 40 UN R156 32
Proving Ground 109 UN R157 33
PTW 55 UN Regulations 14, 22
R U.S. NCAP 46, 70, 71, 72
Rear Automatic Braking 71 V
Regulations 22 Validation 106, 108, 112
Reuter, Ralf 68 Vehicle Classification 14
RMF 13 VIL 13, 106
Roadmap 2030 58 VRU 50, 52
RSS 104
W
S Wang, Hong 9
SAE 16 WP:29 20
SAE J3016 17
SafetyExpo 41
123
carhs.training gmbh
i
Advertisers Directory
4activeSystems GmbH FEV Europe GmbH

page 71 page 85
ASAM e. V. Humanetics
page 91 page 57
Austrian Light Vehicle Proving Region for Automated Driving
ALP.Lab GmbH iMAR Navigation GmbH

page 67 page 45
Bertrandt AG MESSRING GmbH

page 35 page 3
CSI Certificazione e Testing S. P. A. Oxford Technical Solutions Ltd.

page 53 page 2
Shanghai Digauto Automobile Technology Co., Ltd. Racelogic Ltd.

page 79 page 63
124
Seminar Calendar 2022/23
October 2022 November 2022 December 2022
04.-05.10.2022 Online carhs.de 07.11.2022 Alzenau carhs.de 05.-08.12.2022 Online carhs.de
Material Models of Metals for Crash Simulation Design for Additive Manufacturing Robust Design- Vehicle Development under Uncertainty
05.-06.10.2022 Alzenau carhs.de 07.-08.11.2022 Alzenau p. 112 07.-08.12.2022 Online p. 68
Side Impact- Requirements and Development Strategies Scenario-, Simulation- and Data-based Development, ... Euro NCAP - Compact
05.-06.10.2022 Wuerzburg carhs.de 07.-10.11.2022 Online carhs.de 13.-14.12.2022 Hanau p. 58
Automobil Industrie Lightweight Summit Introduction to the Python Programming Language
06.-07.10.2022 Online carhs.de 09.-10.11.2022 Alzenau p. 40
Design and Simulation of Vehicle Vibration Product Liability in the Automobile Industry
06.-07.10.2022 Online carhs.de 09.-10.11.2022 Alzenau carhs.de
Basics of Additive Manufacturing (3D-Printing) Introduction to Passive Safety of Vehicles Miss a Topic?
07.10.2022 Alzenau carhs.de 11.11.2022 Alzenau carhs.de We are always happy to receive suggesti-
Head Impact on Vehicle Interiors: FMVSS 201 and UN R21 Early Increase of Design Maturity of Restraint System Components ons for new seminar or conference topics
10.-11.10.2022 Alzenau carhs.de 14.11.2022 Alzenau carhs.de in the areas of automotive CAE and vehicle
Structural Optimization in Automotive Design Pedestrian Protection- Development Strategies safety.
10.-13.10.2022 Online carhs.de 14.-15.11.2022 Gaimersheim carhs.de Get in touch with ralf.reuter@carhs.de
Introduction to Data Acquisition in Safety Testing Development of Frontal Restraint Systems
13.-14.10.2022 Alzenau p. 49 14.-17.11.2022 Online carhs.de
NCAP - New Car Assessment Programs Python based Machine Learning with Automotive Applications
17.10.2022 Alzenau carhs.de 15.-16.11.2022 Alzenau p. 22
Workshop Pedestrian Protection and Low Speed Crash International Safety and Crash-Test Regulations
18.10.2022 Gaimersheim carhs.de 16.-17.11.2022 Wiesbaden p. 71
Development of Frontal Restraint Systems- Advanced
18.-19.10.2022 Alzenau p. 39
Vehicle Safety under Self-Certification
18.-19.10.2022 Landsberg am Lech carhs.de 17.-18.11.2022 Online carhs.de
Euro NCAP Passive Safety Workshop Design for Durability - Lightweight Car Bodies and Fatigue
19.10.2022 Alzenau carhs.de 21.11.2022 Alzenau carhs.de
Ejection Mitigation FMVSS 226 Rear Seat Occupant Protection in Frontal Impact
19.-20.10.2022 Online carhs.de 21.-24.11.2022 Online carhs.de
Modeling of Joints in Crash Simulation Crashworthy and Lightweight Car Body Design
20.10.2022 Alzenau p. 23 23.11.2022 Alzenau carhs.de
Briefing on the Worldwide Status of Automated Vehicle Policies Passenger Cars in Low-Speed Crashes
20.-21.10.2022 Alzenau carhs.de 24.11.2022 Alzenau carhs.de
Advanced Seminar Additive Manufacturing (3D printing) Static Vehicle Safety Tests in Automotive Development
Safety of Commercial Vehicles Crash Safety of Hybrid and Electric Vehicles
27.-28.10.2022 Alzenau p. 111 28.11.-01.12.2022 Online p. 114
Introduction to Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning Introduction to Impact Biomechanics and Human Body Models
30.11.2022 Alzenau p. 19
January 2023 February 2023 March 2023

03.02.2023 Alzenau carhs.de 09.-10.03.2023 Alzenau carhs.de
ON SITE or ONLINE - Your choice: Material Models of Composites for Crash Simulation Basics of Occupant Protection in Frontal Crashes
Our seminars are also available as 06.-09.02.2023 Online carhs.de 10.03.2023 Alzenau carhs.de
customer specific courses. You pick the Introduction of Reduced Order Modelling Design and Simulation of Vehicle Vibration
delivery mode, location, language and date 07.02.2023 Alzenau carhs.de 13.03.2023 Alzenau carhs.de
that suits your needs. We organize your Material Models of Metals for Crash Simulation Modeling of Joints in Crash Simulation
customer specific seminar for you. 07.-10.02.2023 Online p. 49 14.-15.03.2023 Online p. 111
Read more on pages 10 and 11. NCAP- New Car Assessment Programs: Tests, Assessment Introduction to Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning for Ad-
Methods, Ratings vanced Driver Assistance Systems & Automated Driving Functions
Structural Mechanics for Simulation Engineers Material Models of Plastics and Foams for Crash Simulation
20.-23.02.2023 Online p. 40 20.-21.03.2023 Alzenau carhs.de
Product Liability in the Automobile Industry NVH- Background, Practice and Simulation Methodology
23.-24.02.2023 Online carhs.de 24.03.2023 Alzenau carhs.de
Static and Dynamic Analysis of Long-Fibre-Reinforced Plastics Static Vehicle Safety Tests in Automotive Development
23.-24.02.2023 Online p. 48
Automated Driving- Safeguarding and Market Introduction
Seminar Calendar 2023
April 2023 May 2023 June 2023
04.-05.04.2022 Online p. 112 23.-25.05.2023 Wuerzburg p. 41 07.-08.06.2023 Online p. 23
Scenario-, Simulation- and Data-based Development, Validation Briefing on the Worldwide Status of Automated Vehicle Policies
and Safeguarding of Automated Driving Functions
13.-14.06.2023 Bergisch Gladbach carhs.de
19.-20.04.2023 Online p. 19
25.-26.04.2023 Hanau p. 113
14.06.2023 Alzenau p. 48
Automated Driving - Safeguarding and Market Introduction
26.-27.06.2023 Alzenau p. 49
New Car Assessment Programs: Tests, Assessment Methods,
Ratings
25.-28.04.2023 Online p. 39
Vehicle Safety under Self-Certification: Principles, Obligations,
Enforcement, and Remedies
July 2023 August 2023 September 2023

ON SITE or ONLINE - Your choice: 14.-15.09.202 Alzenau p. 49
New Car Assessment Programs: Tests, Assessment Methods,
Our seminars are also available as customer specific courses. You pick the delivery mode, location, Ratings
language and date that suits your needs. We organize your customer specific seminar
tba Graz p. 43
for you.
Read more on pages 10 and 11.
tba Klettwitz p. 110
Stay up-to-date:
Find the latest seminar & conference program at www.carhs.de
ADAS/ADS
COMPANION
Become part of the 2023 edi�on of the ADAS/ADS Companion

with an adver�sement in this unique publica�on that brings
structure to the informa�on on ADAS/ADS technologies,
development tools, processes, standards, laws and regula�ons
and also creates entry points to more specific informa�on
and resources.
Learn more at
www.carhs.de/media
Market leader in certified technologies, targets & platforms

ADAS ADS Companion-2022

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ADAS ADS Companion-2022

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ADAS/ADS

Knowledge for Tomorrowʼs Automotive Engineering

To ensure that all modern in-car assistance

Legal & NCAP

Processes & Standards

Scenarios & Databases

Page 101 - 103

Page 104 - 105

Page 106 - 115

Page 116 - 118

ADAS/ADS Companion 2022/23 36 SafetyWissen: EU 2021/646 Emergency Lane-

74 SafetyWissen: JNCAP Preventive Safety Scenarios & Databases

86 SafetyWissen: Code of Practice for the Design Verification & Validation

Your team at carhs.training

Rainer Hoffmann Ralf Reuter

John F. Creamer Benjamin Engel Kai Golowko

Prof. Klaus Kompass Dr. Andreas Kuhn Dr. Michael Schlenkrich

Udo Steininger Prof. Hong Wang

Seminar materials on paper & as PDF file

Fair cancellation policy

Early bird rates reduce your costs

All-round catering during the seminar

Small group sizes for maximum learning success

NEW: On Site & Online

1 Day Seminar 2 Day Seminar

Your contact at carhs.training

Abstract Scenario compensate a sudden, unexpected change in the side force of

pose the scenario (e.g. environmental conditions etc.). SIL | Software-In-the-Loop

UNECE Vehicle Classification R.E.3 Revision 6

Engine Maximum Unladen

U.S. Motor Vehicle Classification NHTSA New Manufacturers Handbook

The knowledge you need,

Levels of Driving Automation

Execution of Monitoring of Fallback System BASt / SAE Level NHTSA Level

SAE J3016 - SAE Levels

Vehicle Automation Modes

Introduction to Active Safety of Vehicles

Course Description Who should attend?

DATE ID VENUE DURATION PRICE LANGUAGE

UNECE Rulemaking Process

WP:29 World Forum For Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations

UN Economic Commission for Europe UNECE

Inland Transport Committee

WP-1 ... WP-15 ... WP-29

Working Parties of Experts (Groupes de Rapporteurs - GR)

GRSP GRSG GRVA GRE GRB GRP

GRVA Informal Working Groups

AEBS ALKS ADAS EDR/DSSAD FRAV VMAD

New Assessment/Test Method for Automated Driving (NATM)

Safety Management System

International Safety and Crash-Test Regulations

John Creamer (GlobalAutoRegs.com) is the founder of GlobalAutoRegs.com and a partner in The

DATE ID VENUE DURATION PRICE LANGUAGE

Briefing on the Worldwide Status of Automated Vehicle Policies

Course Description Who should attend?

John Creamer (GlobalAutoRegs.com) is the founder of GlobalAutoRegs.com and a partner in The

DATE ID VENUE DURATION PRICE LANGUAGE

UN R79 Commanded and Automatically Commanded Steering

ACSF Category B1: Lateral control hands on

UN R79 Commanded and Automatically Commanded Steering

UN R131 Advanced Emergency Braking System (AEBS)

Approach to stationary target

Approach to stationary targets

Stationary Target Moving Target

In-Door testing innovations for active safety