Tesla, BMW, Mercedes-Benz and others have received “poor” ratings in automated driving tests

Most electronic systems that perform some driving tasks for humans do not adequately ensure that drivers are paying attention and do not issue loud enough warnings or take other actions to get them to behave, according to an insurance industry study released Tuesday.

Only one of 14 partially automated systems tested by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety performed well enough to earn an “acceptable” overall rating. Two others were rated “marginal”, while the others were rated “poor”. No system received the maximum rating of “good”.

“Most do not include adequate measures to prevent abuse and keep drivers from losing focus on what is happening on the road,” IIHS President David Harkey said.

The institute, Harkey said, developed the new ratings to get automakers to follow standards, including how closely they watch drivers and how quickly cars issue warnings if drivers aren’t paying attention.

It also says it is trying to fill a “regulatory void” left by inaction on the systems by the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Harkey said the agency needs to do more to set standards for the systems, which cannot drive vehicles on their own.

The agency said Tuesday that it welcomes the IIHS research and will review the report.

IIHS safety ratings are followed closely by automakers, who often make changes to comply with them.

The 14 systems, which include several variations from individual automakers, are among the most sophisticated currently on the market, Harkey said.

Only one of the systems, the Teammate in the Lexus LS, earned the appropriate rating. General Motors’ Super Cruise on the GMC Sierra and Nissan’s Pro-Pilot Assist with Navi-Link on the Ariya electric vehicle were rated marginal.

Other systems from Nissan, Tesla, BMW, Ford, Genesis, Mercedes-Benz and Volvo were rated poor.

Harkey said the guidance systems initially were combinations of safety features such as automatic emergency braking, lane departure warnings, lane centering and blind spot detection. But they now give drivers the opportunity to be distracted for a certain period of time, increasing safety risks, she said in an interview.

“That’s why the focus is on how we can ensure the driver remains focused on the driving task,” Harkey said.

Some automakers, he said, market the systems so that drivers may think they are fully autonomous. “The one thing we don’t want is drivers to misinterpret what these things can and can’t do,” she said.

The systems, the IIHS said, should be able to see whether the driver’s head or eyes are not directed toward the road and whether his or her hands are on the steering wheel or ready to grab it if needed.

The institute also said that if a system does not detect the driver’s eyes on the road or hands are not ready to steer, audible and visual warnings should be issued within 10 seconds. Within 20 seconds, the system should add a third alarm or initiate an emergency procedure to slow the vehicle, the institute said.

Automakers should also make sure that safety systems such as seat belts and automatic emergency braking are activated before the guidance systems can be used.

None of the 14 systems met all driver monitoring requirements in the test, but Ford’s came very close, the group said.

Lexus’ Teammate system and GM’s Super Cruise met the alert requirements, while Nissan’s and Tesla’s systems were close.

Harkey said automakers are already responding to tests and preparing changes, many of which can be accomplished with software updates.

Toyota, which makes Lexus vehicles, said it considers IIHS ratings when setting safety standards, while GM said IIHS ratings are important. Nissan said it would work with the institute.

Mercedes said the company said it takes the findings seriously and relies on the system working together with the driver, while luxury brand Hyundai Genesis said it is rapidly improving its system, including adding a camera in the cabin. Volvo said it supports the IIHS’s efforts to reduce the misuse of driver assistance systems

BMW said it respects the IIHS’s efforts, but differs philosophically on how the systems should monitor drivers. A BMW system evaluated by the IIHS is not intended for drivers to take their hands off the steering wheel and only considers input from steering wheel sensors. BMW testing found no clear benefit to activating the driver monitoring camera, the company said. Another, more sophisticated system for drivers to take their hands off the wheel uses a camera to observe drivers, the company said.

Ford said its Blue Cruise system monitors drivers and sends repeated warnings. The company said it disagrees with the IIHS’s findings but will consider its feedback in updates.

Sign up for the new Fortune CEO Weekly Europe newsletter to get corner office insights on the biggest business stories in Europe. Sign up for free.

Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *