在COMVEC 17 SAE 商用車大會的開場主旨演講中，博世集團商用車和工程機械部門總裁Johannes-Joerg Rueger博士表示，完全自動駕駛系統(tǒng)大約需要1億行代碼，差不多是波音787夢想客機的6倍。對此，Rueger還調侃道，“看起來，腳踏實地難于上青天啊。”其實他的觀點很明確——要打造出全自動駕駛商用車，是一項極其艱巨的任務。
對此，Rueger同與會來賓進行了交流，就自動駕駛的趨勢、益處以及解決方案等問題分享了他的看法，尤其談到了用于公路駕駛的自動駕駛輔助系統(tǒng)（ADAS）以及公路與非公路車輛所采用的自動駕駛技術。
SAE：商用車是否比乘用車更需要自動駕駛技術？
Rueger：商用車有可能比乘用車更需要采用自動駕駛技術。德國的相關數(shù)據(jù)顯示，在由重型卡車引起的有傷亡交通事故中，如果借助已有的科技手段——包括緊急制動以及變道預警等，有一半以上是完全可以避免的。而另有40%的事故，也有望通過幾年后上市的駕駛輔助系統(tǒng)化險為夷。而除了安全方面的需求之外，沒有事故也意味著道路將更加通暢。而對于乘用車來說，自動駕駛可以帶來更多的方便。如果在駕駛過程中不用一直緊握方向盤，而是可以騰出手來做些其他的事，那就太棒了。
但從經(jīng)濟效益的角度來看，在商用車上普及自動駕駛的意義更為重大。如果一輛卡車能夠平安地從A地行駛到B地，而不需要駕駛員操作的話，就既解決了道路安全問題，又解決了駕駛員短缺的問題，更重要的是駕駛員人力成本和物流成本都將大大降低。所以我們更加關注的是SAE四級和五級自動駕駛技術，希望使卡車實現(xiàn)完全自動駕駛。這是一個宏偉的目標，所以也要花上不少時間才能實現(xiàn)。對于三級自動駕駛汽車而言，我們已經(jīng)要用到一整套傳感器和各種電子設備。而如果仍需要駕駛員進行操作的話，新技術帶來的效益就很有限，而成本也幾乎不會降低。從這一角度看，四級和五級自動駕駛技術顯然更有吸力，當然也需要從長計議。
SAE：博世在這個領域做了哪些工作？
Rueger：一直以來，在乘用車領域，博世都是知名的駕駛輔助系統(tǒng)和自動駕駛技術提供者，但我得承認，直到兩年前我們才開始真正開始研究商用車的自動駕駛。為此我們成立了一個新的團隊，由我主管，試圖在這一領域奮起趕上。我們正將（與乘用車）相同的技術應用到商用車上。因為所研究的系統(tǒng)非常先進，我們必須十分謹慎，確保所有的技術都經(jīng)過嚴格測試并且能夠真正發(fā)揮作用。商用車自動駕駛技術所使用的軟件算法十分復雜，這也就意味著測試所需時間很長。如果要實現(xiàn)完全自動駕駛，還要有一套備用的數(shù)據(jù)傳感器，并且進行傳感器傳輸數(shù)據(jù)的融合，所涉及的范圍不僅是車輛前部，而是全車覆蓋。如果我們技術一下傳感器的個數(shù)（參見博世的示意圖），就會知道車身前后左右共有24個不同功能的傳感器，這樣才能很好地觀察卡車周圍的路況，而這還沒算上拖車所使用的傳感器。這是很大的一筆投入，所以也自然希望獲得相應的回報。從邏輯上而言，應該先（在商用車上）使用一級自動駕駛技術，然后是二級、三級，再接下來是四級和五級自動駕駛。但如果對三級自動駕駛的投資就已經(jīng)十分龐大了的話（必須同時考慮傳感器及其備份裝置，以及駕駛員的人力成本），我們就必須關注收益問題，看看能否實現(xiàn)收支平衡了。
SAE：未來的電力電子架構將會如何發(fā)展？
Rueger：電子技術是所有功能應用的基礎。很顯然，我們必須考慮清楚整套電子系統(tǒng)的架構，并且讓整個架構能夠滿足未來七到八年的各種技術要求。如果每一家公司都僅僅埋頭研發(fā)自己的技術，只顧眼前兩三年而不著眼于大局，那么這些技術很可能在三年后就會遭到淘汰，然后推倒重來。考慮到如今的研發(fā)工作量之大，恐怕很難有人能夠承受這樣的損失。即便是乘用車來說，這也并不合適，對商用車就更不用說了。所以關于未來的電力電子架構，我們現(xiàn)在就要考慮清楚。這也是為什么我們要花很多精力來弄清未來的需求，并同客戶一起進行了大量研究，以求在這一問題上達成共識……總的來說，我對專用型系統(tǒng)和封閉式架構其實并不青睞。相比之下，我更欣賞開放式的設計，因為這可以讓更多人參與其中，就特定環(huán)節(jié)做針對性的研發(fā)?？紤]到系統(tǒng)的復雜程度，我認為這恐怕是唯一正確的選擇。
SAE：對采用升級改造的方式來實現(xiàn)汽車駕駛自動化，您怎么看？
Rueger：市場上確實有一些升級改造的方案。從系統(tǒng)復雜程度來看，我們已經(jīng)談過了傳感器，但還需要執(zhí)行機構——比如制動和轉向。這是一套組合，需要電動化的轉向裝置來控制方向盤。我們也一直試圖找出適合升級改造的方案，至少需要在理論上站得住腳。目前看來，要實現(xiàn)SAE五級自動駕駛，升級改造的是行不通的，因為五級自動駕駛需要（在車身周圍）總共設置24個傳感器，并實現(xiàn)電動轉向，這在卡車上是無法通過升級改造實現(xiàn)的。在自動化程度相對較低的階段，升級改造可能有所作為，比如實現(xiàn)一級范圍內(nèi)的列隊行駛，但對真正的自動駕駛技術而言，升級改造確實并不適用，因為這對車輛效率和安全產(chǎn)生的影響更大。
SAE：非公路車輛方面進展如何？
Rueger：可以想見，適用于公路自動駕駛汽車的原理和技術，同樣也會適用于非公路領域，因為其核心都是環(huán)境的可視化、目標物體的分類、對障礙物做出及時反應以及操作的自動化，這都是自動駕駛技術的先進之處。而當我們談論非公路領域的自動駕駛應用時，并不僅僅是說駕駛自動化的問題，也包括作業(yè)的自動化，而從長遠看，后者可能更加重要。公路車輛所使用傳感技術，比如攝像頭、雷達，有時還包括超聲波傳感器，也可以運用到非公路車輛上。比如在差車上，可以通過傳感器實現(xiàn)俯視觀察，這樣即便駕駛員在搬運大型貨物時無法看見前方，也能通過鏡頭了解作業(yè)情況。
SAE：還有沒有其他已經(jīng)成熟的非公路車輛自動駕駛技術？
Rueger：采用GPS導航的拖拉機或收割機并不新鮮，市場上早就有了。但GPS導航并不能清楚顯示車輛周圍的情況，所以如果突然出現(xiàn)障礙物，就需要傳感器來探測了。目前我們正在研究如何減少除草劑和殺蟲劑的使用，這不僅是為了環(huán)保，也是為了節(jié)省成本。這就需要用到攝像頭。攝像頭可用于可視化和障礙物探測，在這里則可以幫助識別小麥，甚至能辨別小麥的種類。當車子經(jīng)過麥田時，噴霧器可以對準最合適的位置，可以只在探測到有小麥的地方噴灑除草劑，甚至能做到只對某種特定的小麥噴灑合適的除草劑。如果能做到這一點，除草劑成本就能降低三成到四成，這絕對是個大數(shù)目。另一個例子則是關于挖掘機動臂的輔助控制，現(xiàn)在市場上已經(jīng)有了這樣的系統(tǒng)，但價格昂貴，所以我們的目標就是降低成本，讓該技術獲得更廣闊的市場。因此，不僅車輛駕駛輔助系統(tǒng)非常重要，作業(yè)自動化也是如此，因而也自然會涌現(xiàn)出各種不同的自動化解決方案。
“For Level 3, a whole redundant sensor set and electronics are already needed and the driver is still in the loop. From that perspective, Level 4 and 5 are more attractive,” said Bosch's Dr. Johannes-Joerg Rueger at SAE COMVEC 17. (image: SAE International)
Level 3 automation not attractive for trucks
2017-09-19 Ryan Gehm
In his opening keynote address at SAE COMVEC 17 on Sept. 18, Dr. Johannes-Joerg Rueger, President, Commercial Vehicle and Off-Road, Robert Bosch GmbH, noted that a fully autonomous vehicle would have approximately 100 million lines of code—about six times that for the flight software of a Boeing 787 Dreamliner. “Apparently [automation] is easier in the air than on the road,” he quipped. His point was clear—getting to fully autonomous commercial vehicles is an extremely complex undertaking.
Rueger addressed a standing room-only crowd, sharing his thoughts on the trends, benefits and solutions related to advanced driver assistance (ADAS) for on-highway vehicles and automation in both on- and off-highway operations.
Is automation more important for commercial vehicles than passenger cars?
Commercial vehicles play maybe even a more important role in automation [than passenger cars]...Analyzing data from Germany, more than 50% of accidents with casualties caused by heavy-duty trucks can be avoided with technology which currently is available—functionalities like emergency braking and lane departure warning—and another almost 40% with driver-assistance functions which will come to market in the next couple of years. [In addition to] addressing road safety, no accidents means uptime...For passenger cars it's a question of convenience; it's nice if you don't need to have your hands on the steering wheel and have leeway to do something else. But the money lies in the commercial vehicle sector. If a truck could eventually go from A to B safely without any driver, it would address road safety on the one hand and the driver shortage on the other, and particularly driver costs and logistic costs in total. So we are talking about [SAE] Level 4 and Level 5 automation, where you really have autonomous trucks. It's a big idea so it's going to take some time. For Level 3 a whole redundant sensor set and electronics are already needed; if then the driver is still in the loop, the benefit is limited and the costs are almost the same. From that perspective, Level 4 and 5 are more attractive and need to be addressed long term.
What is Bosch doing in this area?
We're a well-known supplier of driver-assistance and automation technologies in the passenger car sector, but until about two years back we didn't address commercial vehicle properly, I have to admit, and we changed that with a new organization that I'm heading. We are adapting the same functionalities to commercial vehicles...[With advanced systems], we need to be very careful that whatever is being introduced is properly tested and really works; the complexity of the software algorithms we're talking about here is really huge—that indicates that testing will take some time. If you really want to go autonomously, you need to have a redundant data sensor set and you need to have sensor data fusion, not just in the front but all around the vehicle. If you calculate the number of sensors [shown on a Bosch graphic], it's 24 different sensors for front, rear, left and right observation of the truck's surroundings, and that's even without the trailer which would need sensors there as well. So that is a significant investment. The benefit must be appropriate. If you go logically, you introduce Level 1 functionalities, then Level 2, Level 3 and then later on Level 4 and 5. But if the step to investment for Level 3 is already really significant [for the redundant layer, and the driver is still in the loop], you need to look at the benefits and whether those outweigh the costs associated with the automation.
What does the future E/E architecture look like?
Electronics is the backbone for the whole functionality. Clearly we need to think about how the structure of the electronics will look, and to build the whole architecture towards what is needed in, say, 7 to 8 years from now. If everybody develops his own little functionality by himself, and does not think about the big picture [but only] what's needed for the next 2 or 3 years, it probably will need to be thrown away in 3 years and be redeveloped. Nobody can afford that with the volumes we have. Even for passenger car, that's not really a good idea; for commercial vehicles, certainly not. It is essential to think now about the E/E architecture of the future. That's the reason why we've put a lot of effort into understanding what is needed and doing studies with our customers to come to a common understanding…In general, I'm not a big fan of proprietary systems and a closed architecture. I’m a fan of an architecture which is open in a way that gives the possibility of different parties to develop their specific content. Given the complexity we are talking about, I believe it’s the only option.
What about retrofit solutions for automated vehicles?
There are retrofit solutions in the market. If you look at the complexity, I’ve talked about sensor set but you need actuators—brakes and steering, basically—to act as well, it's a combination, and you need electrified steering to have an influence on the steering wheel. We’ve tried to indicate for which solutions, in theory at least, retrofit could be a possibility. Certainly not for Level 5 because then you have the whole sensor set—the 24 sensors [surrounding the truck]—and electric steering, and that's nothing you want to retrofit on a truck. Retrofit solutions might be a possibility for the lower-level functionalities and maybe for Level 1 platooning, but certainly not for the real autonomous driving solutions, which have a bigger impact on efficiency and safety.
What's happening on the off-road side?
Not surprisingly, the same automation principles and technologies apply for off-road operations as for on-road, because it's always about visualization of the environment, classification of objects, reactions to those obstacles, and automation, which is the distinguishing factor. When we talk about off-road operations, it is typically not just the driving which is automated but the operation of the machine itself, and potentially that's even more important. The same basic sensor set, which is camera-based, radar-based, maybe ultrasonic depending on the application, can be applied to off-road operations. Maybe for a forklift truck, sensors can be stitched together so you have a top view and the operator can easily see what's around him even if he's carrying a large good and can't really see what's in front of him.
Any other off-road applications ripe for automation?
GPS-steered tractors or harvesters—that's nothing new, they are in the market. GPS-steer doesn't control the surroundings though, so if there's an unexpected obstacle, you still need sensors to detect that. What we are working on is to reduce herbicides and pesticides use, and that is not just because we want to do something for the environment, it is a huge cost factor as well. The technology here is the use of cameras, and remember it's all about visualization and obstacle detection—in this case, wheat recognition—and maybe you can even classify what kind of wheat. When you pass over the wheat, the sprayer nozzles are in the right place and you are in a position to spray only in spots where we have detected wheat and only that kind of herbicide which is for that wheat variety. If you can do that, you can reduce costs for herbicide use by approximately 30-40%. That's really significant. Another example in earthmoving is assisted control of an excavator boom. High-priced systems are in the market already, so the target here would be to bring it on a broader scale for more affordable prices. So assistance of not just driving the machine but also of the operations is a huge topic and of course has a wide variety of different solutions.
Author: Ryan Gehm
Source: SAE Truck & Off-highway Engineering Magazine
在SAECOMVEC 17大會上，博世集團的Johannes-Joerg Rueger博士表示，“對于SAE三級自動駕駛汽車而言，我們已經(jīng)需要用到一整套傳感器和各種電子設備，如果在這種情況下仍需要駕駛員進行操作的話，那么似乎四級和五級自動駕駛技術更具吸引力?！保▓D片來源：SAEInternational）
