Page 44 - Occupational Health & Safety, March 2018

TRANSPORTATION SAFETY
Preparing for Automated Driving Systems
Weighty questions about the technologies include how the current standard for stability control testing can be amended for ADS vehicles that have no steering wheel.
BY JERRY LAWS
Three U.S. Department of Transportation units published requests for comments in January 2018, input meant to help DOT de- fine the requirements standards needed for efficient, safe Automated Driving Systems (ADS). At the same time, Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao discussed the department’s progress on preparing for automated vehicles at the CES 2018 show in Las Vegas: “Autonomous vehicle technologies will have a tremendous impact on society in terms of safety, mo- bility, and security,” she said in comments addressing Federal Automated Vehicle Policy 3.0, also known as A Vision for Safety 3.0. It will emphasize a unified, in- termodal approach to ADS policy and will allow for the safe integration of automated transportation sys- tems, including cars, trucks, light rail, infrastructure, and port operations, according to DOT.
The automated vehicle notices published in Janu- ary by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administra- tion (NHTSA) ask for comments by mid-March 2018 from the public and from stakeholders such as state and local agencies, vehicle manufacturers, and soft- ware developers to identify barriers to implementing automated technologies and to help shape initiatives. (The third request from the Federal Transit Admin- istration concerns transit bus automation, not ad- dressed in this article.)
The outreach from FHWA and NHTSA gives a sense of the many challenges these emerging technol- ogies pose for current standards and infrastructure. An example in NHTSA’s request is its question about automated vehicles with controls accessed through smart phones and with unconventional interiors— how, it asks, should the agency address those?
Infrastructure Issues
For example, the FHWA request1 asks whether there are certain infrastructure elements (such as signage, signals, and lane markings) that are necessary for ADS and, if so, what challenges exist for ADS to in- terpret them. Other key questions FHWA is asking at this point include:
■ What roadway characteristics are important for influencing the safety, efficiency, and performance of ADS?
■ What challenges do non-uniform traffic con- trol devices present for automated technologies, and how does this affect the costs of ADS systems?
■ What types of data transmission between ADS and roadside infrastructure could enhance safe and efficient ADS operation?
What concerns do state and local agencies have about ADS infrastructure planning and investment, “given the level of uncertainty around the timing and development of this technology.”
■ What are the priority issues that road owners and operators need to consider in terms of infrastruc- ture requirements, modifications, investment, and planning, to accommodate ADS integration?
■ What variable information or data would ADS benefit from obtaining, and how should those data (such as incidents, special event routing, bottleneck locations, weather conditions, etc.) be best obtained?
■ What issues do road owners and operators need to consider in terms of infrastructure modifica- tions and traffic operation as they encounter a mixed vehicle fleet—such as fully automated, partially au- tomated, and non-automated; as well as cooperative and unconnected? And what are the most likely sig- nificant impacts of ADS on other motorized and non- motorized users of public roads?
Vehicle Issues
The NHTSA request2 is significantly longer at 30 pag- es, as to be expected because it concerns the motor vehicles rather than the infrastructure.
38 Occupational Health & Safety | MARCH 2018
www.ohsonline.com
■
Have a nice day Photo/Shutterstock.com