Recognition of Advanced Safety Vehicles

Our industry is in revolutionary times. Smart systems are being used to significantly improve safety and productivity. New design rules are in force that require Vehicle Stability Controls (VSC, 2019), Autonomous Emergency Braking (AEB, 2025) and Lane Departure Warnings (LDW, 2027) for motor vehicles. Australia should take the lead in optimising the performance of these systems on long combination vehicles.

My vision is that we can define ‘Advanced Safety Vehicles’ (ASVs). An ASV has a coordinated smart safety system that works on a combination vehicle. Each part of the combination vehicle has a two-way CAN databus that shares dynamic information between vehicles. It allows the smart systems on each vehicle part to be fully appraised of the actions being taken by the other parts. Thereby the ASV could achieve best-case dynamic performance. I would go further than is mandated and require lane departure control on a semi-trailer.

A lane departure control on a semi-trailer (including a lead trailer) applies brake steer to stop lane overshoot during a lane change manoeuvre. This is related to the PBS technical standard C13, High Speed Transient Offtracking. The Trailer EBS (TEBS) brake system could apply the inner wheel brakes to damp the movement and prevent overshooting when changing lanes. This feature is particularly important for multi-combinations because the overshoot can be cumulative. The current generation TEBS systems could deal with lane change trajectory, but it is not mandated by the ADRs. Indeed, the ADRs do not consider many combination vehicle dynamic performance issues.

I would finally fix-up the brake compatibility problem. ADRs 35 and 38 have a brake compatibility test for fully laden vehicles. This is intended to achieve acceptable combination brake balance on laden combinations. Each vehicle should retard the mass carried by its wheels. But the brake rules do not require brake compatibility on mid- or lightly laden vehicles.

The European prime mover EBS systems do take account of the load when determining how much brake effort to instruct the trailers to apply. That is, the European truck system applies Electronic Brake Distribution (EBD) that flows onto the trailer brake coupling. The North American truck systems do not. This is a fundamental problem with the Australian brake rules because good brake balance minimises interventions by safety systems.

An Advanced Safety Vehicle AVS should apply EBD on the prime mover, and this should flow through to the trailers. The trailer brake TEBS systems should be smart enough to apply EBD itself, so communication between the truck and the trailers is essential. The lack of any interface standard for electronic communication between combination vehicles is a glaring omission from the Australian Design Rules.

So why does Australia need to define the features and performance of an Advanced Safety Vehicle? Australia is a world leader in the application of High Productivity Freight Vehicles (HPFVs). The achievement has been significant. HPFVs now run through the centres of major cities. The community gets the benefit of the safety and productivity performance of these vehicles. This achievement also underpins a substantial manufacturing industry in Australia – HPFV vehicle manufacture.

Australia did not invent any of the technologies that are used on HPFVs. Australia adapted and developed the technologies. The regulatory reforms that were necessary to allow HPFVs to operate, rested on community acceptance that these vehicles are safe. To justify the safety credentials, the Performance Based Standards were adopted.

The PBS standards were necessary because they could be applied to individual combination vehicles, whereas the ADRs do not. Now we have reached the next stage. The challenge is to get co-operative performance between intelligent safety systems on a combination vehicle. This is now about intelligent control systems working together. New thinking and new technical standards are needed to deliver the next stage. An Advanced Safety Vehicle should be deemed to comply with many PBS ‘dynamics standards’.

The next decade will see adoption of electric drives on trucks and trailers. The capability of electric technology is advancing dramatically year by year. Coincidentally, the reliance of Australian heavy transport on diesel fuel is currently on display. Inevitably adoption of electric traction will dramatically increase. Safety and economy are not negotiable. Because Australia is the world leader in the use of multi-combination vehicles, Australia will need to develop the interface standards. The UN ECE technical standards that Australia follows are not focused on HPFVs. The Europeans are a decade behind.

The age profile of the main Australian vehicle types is shown in the graphs. The mandated introduction dates of ABS and VSC are also shown. It is not possible to make an Advanced Safety Vehicle from arbitrary combinations of existing vehicle types. We need new national rules that can deliver ASVs.

I envisage that a new design rule, ‘ADR ASV’ be developed, with the assistance of the Transport Certification Agency (TCA), that defines the co-operative performance of new combination vehicles with advanced safety systems. The TCA has the world-leading capacity to develop technical standards for electronic systems and is a local authority. The intention of ADR ASV is to allow an arbitrary combination of parts to be formed that will have superior safety performance. I would identify these parts by having a different coloured national registration plate for new vehicles that are certified to ADR ASV. An AVSR must have coloured plates on all vehicle parts.

So, what features should an Advanced Safety Vehicle have? Here is my list. All technologies exist but many are not mandated: