Driver assistance technologies

[GregLocock]

AAA tested 5 systems that are available and didn't think much of them. I use adaptive cruise control a lot, but I wish it had Automatic Emergency Braking as well. My car is fitted with lane keeping warning, but it does not claim to have lane keeping control, and reading the full report I'm a bit surprised it is marketed at all. I'd estimate mine picks up the edges of the lane maybe half the time, probably less.

https://newsroom.aaa.com/2020/08/aa...less-to-assist-drivers-and-more-to-interfere/

includes a link to the full report



Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

 

[MikeHalloran]

My '18 Yukon has lane keeping warning symbols, too small and too far below my line of sight to really notice, and irregularly active.

It also has 'adaptive' cruise control, which enables you to set one of three following distances.
I can't make it adapt as documented.
I think it's triggered BIG TIME just once. I don't know what set it off.

I'd consider each a work in progress.

The Yukon also has a modern version of the old Guide automatic dimmer, which works flawlessly. ... after you spend a month reading the book and experimenting to figure out how to make it start working.

The Human interface is grossly inferior to that of my 2010 Mountaineer, as was my 2013 Navigator.
I think Ford closed the wrong division.



Mike Halloran
Corinth, NY, USA

 

[drawoh]

What about a piece of paper blowing in the wind?
...

I worked this out roughly somewhere in thread815-436809. Since then, I have done a detailed calculation which I have just posted to my website. This is preliminary and I am not sure what to do with it. It does show that a robot on a highway at 100kph, can detect an object 104m in front, and decelerate to a halt at a rate such that a reasonably attentive, responsible driver in a reasonably functional vehicle behind them, can decelerate, and not hit them. The object is viewed as a raster scan with a resolution of 180mm. The robot can see small objects, but it probably cannot identify them.

Your assumption is that there is a list of objects we can safely decide to run into. I claim that the robot's ability to identify objects is not sufficient or reliable enough to make this decision. No thing can be run into safely by a robot.

Note how at 104m and 100kph, the robot must start taking evasive action. On my robot, the forward LiDAR actually has a range of 250m, but out there, the resolution is around 440mm.

I too check my rear view mirror when I hit the brakes. There have been a number of horrific car accidents where fully halted vehicle was rear-ended by drivers who made no attempt to slow down. They were asleep at the wheel or something. The accident is their fault, and they should be charged with dangerous driving.

--
JHG

 

[IRstuff]

As for the unknown object being damaged or damaging the car. The computer had no idea what the object was so how could it determine if damage was possible?

Again, the Arizona Uber knew, more than once, the object detected was not allowed to be hit.

https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/HAR1903.pdf[/URL] ]It initially classified the pedestrian as a vehicle, and subsequently also as an unknown object and a bicyclist.

The clear fatal flaw was that every time the classification changed, it drops the track history. The initial vehicle detected suddenly disappears, but an unknown target appears in about the same place 0.4 seconds later and approximate 1.5 ft away; the next detection 1 second after that was vehicle again, but track history dropped again. That is just plain stupid, since we've know since the 60s not to do that in ICBM warhead tracking; it's illogical for physical objects to disappear and reappear, and trackers have been developed to deal with those sorts of scenarios, decades ago.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[drawoh]

This has popped up on Slashdot.

Cory Doctorow: 'Self-Driving Cars are BS'

The article is classified under "entertainment". He seems to be addressing issues other than robot control. I have argued in other threads that autonomous robot cars will be a service, not a possession, which negates some other issues he has here.

Interesting stuff though.

--
JHG

 

[human909]

The article is classified under "entertainment". He seems to be addressing issues other than robot control. I have argued in other threads that autonomous robot cars will be a service, not a possession, which negates some other issues he has here.

Congestion is the killer in the cities. Large scale private ownership of self driving cars is unmanageable. Their use would require heavy regulation.

The only thing that currently makes congestion manageable is the time cost of the driver. Remove that and the tragedy of the commons would be extreme.