據(jù)了解，Euro NCAP新車評估組織將專門針對自動駕駛汽車出臺一套新的評估標準，但可能并不會要求車輛能夠絕對避免交通致死或嚴重致傷情況的發(fā)生。Thatcham Research公司保險研究主管Matthew Avery猜測，盡管目前的全球測試系統(tǒng)可能并不會在最近趨于統(tǒng)一并節(jié)省開支，但不排除未來會出現(xiàn)這種可能性。
據(jù)Euro NCAP新車評估組織秘書長Michielvan Ratingen表示，安全系統(tǒng)的演進似乎有“慢下來”的跡象。保險專家Avery表示，這里的原因可能并不在于沒有新的想法。
“我們?nèi)匀豢吹胶芏嘀卮筮M展，”他告訴《汽車工程》，被動安全系統(tǒng)的開發(fā)（安全帶、安全帶收緊器及安全氣囊）已經(jīng)進入瓶頸期。過去20年來，汽車行業(yè)對這些系統(tǒng)的應(yīng)用已經(jīng)成功減少了63%的交通事故致死或嚴重致傷情況。與此同時，“主動”安全技術(shù)已呈現(xiàn)出加速發(fā)展的態(tài)勢，未來將與被動安全系統(tǒng)相互配合，一起為車上人員提供一張“安全網(wǎng)”。
“歸根結(jié)底，提前主動準備總比事后被動補救強，”Avery表示，“從投資和成本效益方面來說，直接預(yù)防碰撞的發(fā)生，也總是比優(yōu)化車輛在碰撞中的表現(xiàn)更有意義。”
歐洲與北美標準趨于一致
最近，最新款福特野馬（Ford Mustang）僅在Euro NCAP測試中拿到2星（滿分5星），這也導(dǎo)致一些安全專家開始呼吁建立全球統(tǒng)一標準的必要性。他們認為，目前各區(qū)域的獨立評分標準會增加廠商的工程復(fù)雜度、增加成本并制造一定程度的混亂。
然而，Avery并不這樣認為。“盡管仿佛會增加很多沒必要的工作量，但我們也可以換個角度想，為了應(yīng)對各種各樣的要求，車輛的健壯性一定會更強。”Avery表示，“在歐洲和美國采用不同的測試標準能夠在一定程度上增加終端產(chǎn)品的健壯/耐用性，因為我們必須有能力應(yīng)對不同標準中的碰撞類型測試。”
Avery表示，美國的測試不會關(guān)注不同駕駛員的駕駛風格，僅設(shè)置了一些非常常見的碰撞環(huán)境。
“我們美國的測試標準并不像歐洲測試那么具體，但基本也可以覆蓋最常見的一些碰撞類型。如果你能夠同時結(jié)合美國和歐洲標準，就一定能夠打造一個更健壯的車輛安全系統(tǒng)，”Avery表示，這是否意味著汽車廠商將承擔更高的成本？是的。但這也意味著消費者可以使用一套更加穩(wěn)健的安全系統(tǒng)。
目前，汽車行業(yè)很少、甚至完全沒有統(tǒng)一的全球新車評估標準，各地區(qū)的測試標準均主要反映當?shù)厥袌龅沫h(huán)境及主要汽車類型。Avery斷言，因此可以說在歐洲設(shè)置大型皮卡測試或在美國設(shè)置A級城市微型車測試，都不適用于真實的市場環(huán)境。他指出，在2008年的Euro NCAP測試中，一系列美國皮卡的整體得分均不高，這已經(jīng)反映了一些問題。
然而，未來，汽車行業(yè)將有機會建立一套全球統(tǒng)一標準，或者說，這套統(tǒng)一標準已經(jīng)開發(fā)至一定程度。“舉個例子，Thatcham Research公司開發(fā)的自動緊急制動（AEB）測試是美國測試系統(tǒng)的重要組成部分，但現(xiàn)在也已經(jīng)加入了Euro NCAP整體測試。”他解釋道，配合一套同樣是由Thacham工程師聯(lián)合開發(fā)的新型全球汽車目標測試，自動緊急制動測試，將同時造福路上行人、車輛與城市。
Avery表示，“理想情況下，我們應(yīng)當從標準的醞釀階段，就開始全球標準統(tǒng)一的問題。”
自動駕駛汽車的獨立“星級”評分體系
未來將出現(xiàn)一套針對自動駕駛汽車的獨立“星級”評分系統(tǒng)嗎？又會出現(xiàn)哪些新的自動駕駛技術(shù)，協(xié)助這種新型汽車獲得滿星評分？
“未來，除了五星測試標準外，未來可能還將出現(xiàn)一套專門針對自動駕駛汽車的獨立評分標準。”Avery指出，目前，一些針對自動駕駛汽車的測試更多關(guān)注車輛的制動和轉(zhuǎn)向系統(tǒng)，比如車輛的緊急車道保持系統(tǒng)就是測試的必備項目之一。Avery認為，全球大約93%的交通事故均是由于人為原因造成的，也就是說這部分錯誤完全可以通過采用更先進的如ADAS傳感器和算法等方案得到避免或有效控制。
Avery認為，轉(zhuǎn)向干預(yù)安全技術(shù)將很有可能協(xié)助車輛獲得滿星評分。他說，“我們將在2018年啟動針對緊急車道保持系統(tǒng)的功能性測試，并在21世紀20年代中期開始針對自動應(yīng)急轉(zhuǎn)向系統(tǒng)(AES)的評估。”
對于真正的自動駕駛汽車而言，緊急車道保持系統(tǒng)和自動應(yīng)急轉(zhuǎn)向系統(tǒng)都是必不可少且真正有可能避免大量事故的發(fā)生。Avery表示，在有些情況下，這兩種系統(tǒng)同時存在更好，但另外一些情況下還是這兩種系統(tǒng)獨立工作才能更好地避免事故的發(fā)生。
盡管目前沃爾沃已經(jīng)表示將在2020年后實現(xiàn)車上人員“零傷亡”的目標，但整個汽車行業(yè)的進度將如何？這樣的目標是否可能成為Euro NCAP滿星的必要條件？
“完全避免死亡或嚴重傷害將不會成為Euro NCAP測試的基本要求。”Avery斷言，然而，“從市場營銷方面考慮，其他汽車制造商肯定也會緊盯著沃爾沃，并隨時準備跟上。”
盡管如此，Euro NCAP將不會提出“零傷亡”的目標，因為這需要對歐洲的全部歷史事故進行規(guī)模龐大的分析。Avery說，“更何況還有一些‘天災(zāi)’根本無法通過安全技術(shù)的手段控制，無論是主動還是被動安全系統(tǒng)。”
Euro NCAP will establish a separate category for autonomous vehicles, but there is not likely to be one for cars that are claimed to protect all occupants from serious injury or death. And while there is currently little sign of a harmonized engineering and cost saving global test system, there may be an opportunity in the future, reckons Matthew Avery, Director of Insurance Research at Thatcham Research, which carries out Euro NCAP tests in the U.K.
According to Michiel van Ratingen, the Euro NCAP General Secretary, there has been a “slow down” in new safety systems’ progress. According to Avery, this isn't due to lack of ideas.
"We continue to see significant progress," he told Automotive Engineering. Development of passive safety systems (seatbelts, belt tensioners and airbags) has plateaued; industry penetration of these innovations has resulted in a 63% reduction in killed and serious injured (KSI) over the past 20 years. Meanwhile, there as been a dramatic acceleration in ‘active’ safety technology, which works hand-in-hand with the passive safety net.
"Ultimately, prevention is better than cure," Avery said. "When it comes to investment and cost benefit, there’s much more that can be done to prevent the crash entirely than there is to improve how a car behaves during a crash."
Harmonizing Euro and U.S. standards
Recently the latest generation Ford Mustang scored only a 2-star result in Euro NCAP tests. leading some safety experts to amplify the call for global test harmonization. They argue that the present individual regional standards make for engineering complexity, increased costs and an element of confusion.
"Unnecessary engineering complexity could be looked at in a different way, as an opportunity for increased engineering robustness," Avery observed. "Having different tests in Europe and the U.S. delivers a more robust end product because we have to be able to accommodate different crash types.
He said the U.S. does not test differently as a result of idiosyncratic driver behavior; rather, it designs for a very common crash situation.
"What we do is not unique to Europe per se, but it is also in response to one of the most common types of injurious crash. If you put the two together, you have a more robust system," he noted. Does that mean it’s more costly for OEMs? Yes. But it also means that the engineering is more robust for the consumer.
Presently there is little or no global harmonization of the NCAP standard; the tests reflect individual markets and prominence of specific types of vehicles. So for Europe to have to engineer for large pickup trucks—or for the U.S. to engineer for A-segment city cars—wouldn't be right for either market, Avery asserted. He noted that in 2008 such a scenario actually was played play out in Euro NCAP testing when a series of U.S.-style pickups performed poorly as a group.
In the future, however, there is an opportunity for harmonization and that is already in process to some degree. "The Autonomous Emergency Braking (AEB) testing we developed at Thatcham Research, for example, is now part of Euro NCAP’s overall testing regime and has also become an essential part of the U.S. testing system," he explained. The process exists for pedestrian, car-to-car, city and inter-urban AEB, along with a new Global Vehicle Target test also co-developed by Thatcham engineers.
"Harmonization ideally needs to come at the embryonic ideas stage," Avery stated.
Separate 'star' rating for autonomous vehicles
Will there be a separate “star” rating system for autonomous vehicles—and are there likely to be new safety technologies for autonomous vehicles that would allow them to achieve maximum star rating?
"We are likely to see a separate rating beyond the 5-star system, to help drivers understand how well the autonomous system of any given vehicle performs in relation to others," Avery noted. At present, autonomy is about braking and steering assistance, for example Emergency Lane Keeping (ELK), a subsystem of the wider testing program. He believes that because 93% of accidents are a result of human error, it is possible to eradicate the human error element completely through the integration of increasingly capable ADAS sensors and algorithms.
Steering intervention is a safety technology that Avery believes is likely to help vehicles achieve maximum safety ratings. "ELK will be a feature of testing for 2018 and by the early to mid-2020s we will be looking at Autonomous Emergency Steering (AES)," he noted.
These systems are required for true vehicle autonomy and they introduce a whole host of new opportunities to avoid the crash. There are occasions where the two operating in tandem are better, Avery said, and others when they operate individually to avoid an accident.
While Volvo is aiming for occupants of its post-2020 models not to suffer death or serious injuries, what about the entire industry achieving such a standard? Would this goal likely become a Euro NCAP requirement for a maximum star rating?
"Avoiding death or serious injury completely will not be a standard which comes into Euro NCAP testing," Avery asserted. "Other vehicle manufacturers however will be keeping a keen eye on Volvo and how successful it has been, especially where a marketing advantage can be gained."
However, Euro NCAP won’t look at that because it would require a huge, well orchestrated analysis of pan-European crashes. "It also fails to account for “Acts of God” which are beyond the means of any safety technology, passive or active," he said.
Author: Stuart Birch
Source: SAE Automotive Engineering Magazine
2款正在進行Euro NCAP測試的車輛，上方為一款現(xiàn)行版本田Jazz，下方為一款1997款Rover100。SAE 4級和5級自動駕駛汽車如果進行Euro NCAP測試將變成什么樣子？