Standards Play a Vital Role

November 1, 2017

Jennifer Shuttleworth

As autonomous vehicle development expands throughout the mobility industry, the competitors are agreeing on one thing: there is a vital need for standards related to the new technologies.

SAE International’s Technical Committee members, along with its Ground Vehicle Standards (GVS) staff who support the committee effort, are busier than ever developing, updating and publishing standards related to automated driving systems, connectivity and vehicle electrification.

Current discussions include the U.S. DoT’s new voluntary-guidelines document for autonomous-vehicle development, the recently passed U.S. House bill (the SELF-DRIVE Act, with a Senate bill still in discussion) and the now famous SAE J3016, popularly known as the “SAE Levels 0 to 5” hierarchy but officially dubbed “Taxonomy and Definitions for Terms Related to On-Road Motor Vehicle Automated Driving Systems.”

J3016 is among some 49 core standards currently in the automated-and-connected transportation standards realm.

Autonomous Vehicle Engineering recently corralled the busy Jack Pokrzywa [poke shiva], SAE’s Director of Ground Vehicle Standards, regarding the hot issues facing his GVS team.

Testing and test-case scenarios

“In my view, the most important part right now is testing that is correlated with standards,” Pokrzywa noted. “If we have a portfolio of testing procedures, the deployment of autonomous vehicles is so much faster because there are certain levels of certification, compliance and adherence.”

He explained that companies currently conduct testing “in a competitive mode” where each organization uses a unique set of procedures.

“That’s what I think we should be looking at — how to bring them to SAE’s ‘universal table’ where they actually start sharing their findings and then transfer those lessons learned into standards so everybody can benefit,” he said. “Open a discussion about what is really going on in testing,” because now there is a level of compliance.

Ensuring that the autonomous vehicle performs reliably and safely at an intersection where there are pedestrians and cyclists is among the challenges related to testing the technology. But industry is looking for alternatives to testing in limited fashion on public roads, where accidents could occur. Pokrzywa maintains it needs to be conducted at a dedicated facility, such as the American Center for Mobility (ACM).

SAE took the approach of testing case scenarios in the electric vehicle area, and produced standards that defined the testing cases. That work “is not done yet — I mean it’s done only on the competitive basis,” he explained. “Google does not want to share; neither does Tesla or Audi or whomever else, because they feel that they have it all done by themselves,” he said.

Having standards for testing facilities like ACM where only a few OEMs, like Toyota or Ford, might have a set of test cases, is critical. Also important to consider is what happens when AVs start deploying into real traffic situations, where legacy vehicle fleets that are not necessarily automated, autonomous or connected, must share the road with the new AVs.

Standards are also needed on a component and systems level, so that the technology Tier 1s and their partners who supply ADAS suites, for example, can be properly tested and validated both discretely and when integrated into the vehicle.

Sensing capabilities are a related consideration. Pokrzywa outlines the significant challenges presented by inconsistent and often deteriorating roadway conditions as they relate to the sensor capabilities of autonomous vehicles.

He noted the development of special road-lining paint that can be recognized by cameras and other on-board sensor equipment that is “necessary to connect with whatever devices are in a vehicle and elsewhere.”

Keeping pace with innovation

The big question now is: With the vehicle automation developments accelerating quickly, how do global standards-development organizations (SDOs) deal with the speed of technology development?

“Generally speaking, it’s challenging because typically you have certain things in place when you start standardization,” Pokrzywa noted. “First of all, [typically] the innovation is not moving forward so rapidly so you have time to do that [develop standards].”

When the technology changes on a daily or weekly basis, it creates its own unique set of challenges for standards agencies. “I think in a lot of cases, SDOs are waiting and trying to figure out what the government is going to do,” he opined.

Government regulators are creating guidance documents and envelopes within which the mobility companies can operate.

“Is it enough for standardization? In some cases it is, if you lay out five [SAE] Levels of Automation perhaps,” he said. “But is it good enough — or enough— for developing any further standards? We’re struggling with that. It’s a competitive, innovation-driven industry where setting something in stone may not be the right thing to do.”

He cited the DSRC-versus-5G debate as an example. DSRC (dedicated short-range communications) technology has been approved for implementation across the U.S. Industry has to comply. But then along comes 5G. “So are we ready to set standards for 5G?” he asked. “And then, what is the relationship with that technology with whatever government rulemaking is?

“It’s a constant back and forth, trying to figure out what is going to win here,” he observed.

In this and other discussions about the tidal wave of self-driving tech that will soon enter global markets, Pokrzywa believes SAE standards can play an important role in consumer education.

“We have to translate it into messages that are well understood and simple enough for a common user and common buyer of that technology,” Pokrzywa said.

“I think that is part of our training, part of our conferences and part of our publications.”

---