Autonomous cars? I think not

User avatar
Red Rider
Posts: 1021
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2011 5:44 pm
Location: Perth

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby Red Rider » Mon Mar 26, 2018 11:58 pm

Mububban wrote:
Alex Simmons/RST wrote:Having seen later video, there was something definitely wrong with that vehicle's technology. Ordinary driver assistance systems in many cars now days would have prevented that collision or at the very least reduced its severity.


I thought Autonomous Emergency Braking only works at fairly low speeds, not 60+?

So the car should plough into anything unforseen at 60+?? Somehow I think not. At higher speeds collision avoidance by steering is considered more effective.

User avatar
Mububban
Posts: 1528
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 12:19 pm

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby Mububban » Tue Mar 27, 2018 11:05 am

Red Rider wrote:So the car should plough into anything unforseen at 60+?? Somehow I think not. At higher speeds collision avoidance by steering is considered more effective.


Doing a quick bit of reading, it seems that AEB was only introduced on high end luxury models starting from 2009, becoming more popular around 2012-2014. High Speed AEB (>60kmh) has been around for only a few short years? So maybe 2015-16 model year cars? Whereas the <40kmh AEB has been around for longer, so there'll be more of those cars on the road.

Considering the number of older cars on Australian roads (mine included) I wouldn't say it's a really common safety feature on a lot of cars just yet. But should be standard on any car from now on (possibly with a $$$ "safety pack" option)
When you are driving your car, you are not stuck IN traffic - you ARE the traffic!!!

User avatar
Mububban
Posts: 1528
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 12:19 pm

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby Mububban » Tue Mar 27, 2018 11:15 am

2016 article:

Reckon autonomous emergency braking will make fender-benders a thing of the past? Think again: a US study has discovered not all AEB systems are created equal, and none will keep you away from harm a hundred percent of the time.

Conducted by the American Automobile Association, the study subjected five different AEB systems from unspecified manufacturers to more than 70 individual tests.

The results showed that systems designed to minimise the effects of a crash only reduced speeds by an average of 40 percent. During tests with a starting speed of 48km/h, these systems managed to avoid a collision a third of the time. At 72km/h, those systems were only able to successfully avoid an impact 9 percent of the time.

Meanwhile, AEB systems with a higher speed threshold clamped their brakes harder and achieved an average speed reduction of 79 percent during the AAA’s study. For those cars the 48km/h test resulted in a successful crash avoidance rate of 60 percent, though bumping the starting speed up to 72km/h saw that figure drop to just 40 percent.

If the AAA’s test is any indication, then even the most sophisticated and capable AEB systems still won’t yank you away from disaster without fail. Considering 68 percent of people polled by the AAA believe autonomous emergency braking systems are designed to avoid accidents altogether, the test results should be a wake-up call to a great many motorists.


Technology improves every year, and given crash statistics suggest nearly all accidents are caused by human error/inattention, I still think autonomous cars will reduce overall traffic accidents and especially fatalities by a large percentage.

The most thorough analysis of crash causation, the Tri-Level Study of the Causes of Traffic Accidents published in 1979, found that "human errors and deficiencies" were a definite or probable cause in 90-93% of the incidents examined.


http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2013/ ... le-crashes

60-70 percent of the patients trauma surgeons treat have been involved in road accidents. Road crashes cost Australia $27-30 billion per year – or $70 million per day, which is the same as the National Defence Budget,”


https://www.qbe.com.au/news/car/the-mos ... -australia
When you are driving your car, you are not stuck IN traffic - you ARE the traffic!!!

human909
Posts: 9038
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby human909 » Tue Mar 27, 2018 11:47 am

Red Rider wrote:So the car should plough into anything unforseen at 60+?? Somehow I think not. At higher speeds collision avoidance by steering is considered more effective.


I agree in many circumstances, but will qualify it but say it really depends on the circumstances.

There are plenty of rear end collisions on city freeways and major roads. Steering away could readily result in more and worse collisions with case in other lanes. Steering to avoid collisions requires skill to do so safely. There are plenty of deaths that have occurred do to cars steering to avoid minor collisions eg such as a kangaroo. Electronic stability control could help here, but if somebody decides to yank the steering wheel hard to avoid a roo there is only so much electronic magic can do.

User avatar
Thoglette
Posts: 4285
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 1:01 pm

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby Thoglette » Tue Mar 27, 2018 12:28 pm

Mububban wrote:Technology improves every year, and given crash statistics suggest nearly all accidents are caused by human error/inattention, I still think autonomous cars will reduce overall traffic accidents and especially fatalities by a large percentage.


That's called "wishful thinking", for reasons I've outlined earlier in this thread.

If you want to reduce fatalities by a large percentage, you need to reduce the miles driven by a large percentage.

Heavy freight and commuters can be (and traditionally were) serviced by rail, which is orders of magnitude safer.

In my lifetime, people used to shop within walking distance of their homes. Large items were delivered as often as not. Commuting over shortish distances involved busses and trams.

The problem is not the safety of cars but our over dependence on them, running hand in hand with our failure to plan our suburbs and cities (beyond providing good returns to shareholders of large companies).
Stop handing them the stick! - Dave Moulton
"People are worthy of respect, ideas are not." Peter Ellerton, UQ

AdelaidePeter
Posts: 461
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 11:13 am

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby AdelaidePeter » Tue Mar 27, 2018 12:41 pm

Thoglette wrote:
Mububban wrote:Technology improves every year, and given crash statistics suggest nearly all accidents are caused by human error/inattention, I still think autonomous cars will reduce overall traffic accidents and especially fatalities by a large percentage.


That's called "wishful thinking", for reasons I've outlined earlier in this thread.

If you want to reduce fatalities by a large percentage, you need to reduce the miles driven by a large percentage.


That's not true. The road toll is 1/3 of what was in 1970, and I suspect if anything the number of km driven has gone up. Seat belts, drink driving legislation and technology have all helped, and I don't see why technology can't help again.

User avatar
Mububban
Posts: 1528
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 12:19 pm

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby Mububban » Tue Mar 27, 2018 12:47 pm

Thoglette wrote:The problem is not the safety of cars but our over dependence on them, running hand in hand with our failure to plan our suburbs and cities (beyond providing good returns to shareholders of large companies).


I agree about the overdependence on cars. But do you realistically think Australian attitudes to cars will change in the next ~20 years? Sadly, I don't.
Autonomous technology will continue at an ever increasing rate within those same 20 years (along with electric or hydrogen vehicles). However I fear that road and infrastructure planning will not change significantly, due to those vested interests you mentioned.
When you are driving your car, you are not stuck IN traffic - you ARE the traffic!!!

User avatar
Thoglette
Posts: 4285
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 1:01 pm

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby Thoglette » Tue Mar 27, 2018 1:51 pm

AdelaidePeter wrote:That's not true. The road toll is 1/3 of what was in 1970, and I suspect if anything the number of km driven has gone up. Seat belts, drink driving legislation and technology have all helped, and I don't see why technology can't help again.


As you point out, the low hanging fruit has long since gone.

There's no reason technology can't help, however (as I outlined earlier) there are no political drivers to make that happen, rather it is likely that the status quo will be maintained.
Last edited by Thoglette on Thu Apr 05, 2018 2:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Stop handing them the stick! - Dave Moulton
"People are worthy of respect, ideas are not." Peter Ellerton, UQ

AdelaidePeter
Posts: 461
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 11:13 am

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby AdelaidePeter » Tue Mar 27, 2018 2:09 pm

Thoglette wrote:
AdelaidePeter wrote:That's not true. The road toll is 1/3 of what was in 1970, and I suspect if anything the number of km driven has gone up. Seat belts, drink driving legislation and technology have all helped, and I don't see why technology can't help again.


As you point out, the low hanging fruit has long since gone.


That is exactly the opposite of what I said. (You're welcome to disagree of course, but it's not what I said and certainly not what I think).

User avatar
Alex Simmons/RST
Expert
Posts: 4641
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 3:51 pm
Contact:

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby Alex Simmons/RST » Tue Mar 27, 2018 2:48 pm

Mububban wrote:
Alex Simmons/RST wrote:Having seen later video, there was something definitely wrong with that vehicle's technology. Ordinary driver assistance systems in many cars now days would have prevented that collision or at the very least reduced its severity.


I thought Autonomous Emergency Braking only works at fairly low speeds, not 60+?

While some earlier tech may have had speed limits, I can't see why such tech would/could not also work at speeds > 60km/h.
Indeed it does already in some vehicles. And braking is not the only option when it comes to avoiding something.

Vehicles with advanced driver assistance packages are able to automatically adjust vehicle's speed at highway speeds and some also auto steer to avoid collisions, indeed some manage all the passing manoeuvres for you. Some use sensors capable of detecting what's happening to the vehicle in front of the one in front of you.

Look at the braking tech that's been employed in European truck platooning:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcb4zSkE1G0

fat and old
Posts: 3678
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2014 12:06 pm
Location: Mill Park

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby fat and old » Tue Mar 27, 2018 2:50 pm

Mububban wrote:. But do you realistically think Australian attitudes to cars will change in the next ~20 years? Sadly, I don't.


Most large scale roads projects in Victoria that are "ready to go' will be completed in 10-15 years. There's the bulk of your 20 years. Add in the East-West link (which will happen one way or another) and the inevitable Eastlink and Pen Link upgrades and we'll be building freeways for 25-30 years without even looking at the outer east or south projects.

The inner/middle city I think is a different story in Melbourne. The god-cursed pre-occupation with high density housing has apartment blocks being built out as far as Doncaster and Box Hill in the East, Preston and Coburg in the North. These are usually on main roads, but there are countless re developments of suburban blocks being turned into mini hubs with 3, 4 or even 5 units. Put 2 or more cars and assorted trailer type things (boats, jet skis etc) into each and what we have now are streets absolutely clagged with vehicles. Some of these cannot be accessed by our trucks which many will say "so what?" to. Until they realise that I'm the water board, come to fix your water or sewer. NOW you care, aye? :lol: Or when your garbage can't be picked up? Or the Fire Truck can't get there? This is becoming a real issue, and I think that the tipping point is only 5-10 years away for a real reduction in personal cars. This of course will occur along socio-economic lines and create even more divides between the haves and have nots, at least until the rich start to live off world or high in the sky....

User avatar
Alex Simmons/RST
Expert
Posts: 4641
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 3:51 pm
Contact:

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby Alex Simmons/RST » Tue Mar 27, 2018 2:55 pm

Thoglette wrote:Why? There's no commercial or political driver to make it happen. Rather, the commercial driver is to a) sell more cars more often and b) keep the incumbents in control of the market (by continuing the current trend of making cars overly complicated through regulation).

I get what you're saying but I'm not sure I completely agree with you.

Perhaps that's the case for Australia and the USA but in reality many of the changes in tech are being driven by European companies in concert with their governments. They are showing far more political will for such change than we experience here.

Commercial and safety outcomes are not always mutually exclusive. Indeed it's often a strong selling point, eventually becoming legislation. The reason our cars are lower emitters of pollution now days isn't Australian standards but due to the changes brought about in Europe.

The cycling culture in the previously car mad Netherlands was brought about via political will.

eeksll
Posts: 2477
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 10:36 pm

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby eeksll » Tue Mar 27, 2018 5:48 pm

Thoglette wrote:
AdelaidePeter wrote:That's not true. The road toll is 1/3 of what was in 1970, and I suspect if anything the number of km driven has gone up. Seat belts, drink driving legislation and technology have all helped, and I don't see why technology can't help again.


As you point out, the low hanging fruit has long since gone.

There's no reason technology can't help, however (as I outlined earlier) there are no political drivers to make that happen, rather it is likely that the status quo will be maintained.


Well Uber are doing tests now, surely thats a commercial driver?

As the saftey features trickle down to cheaper cars (including autonomy), there certainly will be political will. From history seat belts and air bags ( air bags may not be mandatory in new cars, but I suspect in order to pass the tests its going to be next to impossible without airbags). It will be a very slow process, but if autonomous vehicles are shown to be clearly safer I do think it will happen. Maybe not in my lifetime though.

robbo mcs
Posts: 125
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2015 8:25 pm

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby robbo mcs » Tue Mar 27, 2018 8:19 pm

Mububban wrote:
Alex Simmons/RST wrote:Having seen later video, there was something definitely wrong with that vehicle's technology. Ordinary driver assistance systems in many cars now days would have prevented that collision or at the very least reduced its severity.


I thought Autonomous Emergency Braking only works at fairly low speeds, not 60+?


Some cars have it where it works at all speeds. In my car if you are doing <40kmh it will bring you to a complete stop. If you are doing >40kmh it will slow you down to reduce the impact speed, but will not stop you completely. Different car companies are probably different

I understand the logic behind this is try and balance the safety of you hitting a car in front, versus the dangers of you getting rear ended at high speed. ie if you are in a chain of cars doing 100kmh and suddenly there is a stationary object in front, and your car emergency brakes to a stop, you are likely to get rear ended at 100kmh. However, if your car brakes to 40kmh you will potentially have a front end impact speed of 40kmh and rear end impact of 60kmh. Because kinetic energy is related to velocity squared, the total energy from 40 + 60km impacts is substantially less than a single impact of 100km. That is how the engineer working for the car company explained it to me :wink:

chriso_29er
Posts: 237
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2015 9:00 pm

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby chriso_29er » Tue Mar 27, 2018 8:20 pm

Alex Simmons/RST wrote:
While some earlier tech may have had speed limits, I can't see why such tech would/could not also work at speeds > 60km/h.
Indeed it does already in some vehicles. And braking is not the only option when it comes to avoiding something.

Vehicles with advanced driver assistance packages are able to automatically adjust vehicle's speed at highway speeds and some also auto steer to avoid collisions, indeed some manage all the passing manoeuvres for you. Some use sensors capable of detecting what's happening to the vehicle in front of the one in front of you.


Yeah, not all tech is created equal. Some are only camera based so cant see far enough in front for faster travel. Other current systems work very well.
As far as accuracy goes, this car must have done this test 30 times the day I was there. Didn't hit the prop at all. Speed was around 60 - 70km/hr
https://youtu.be/vu94jz4UP7Q
Image

User avatar
Alex Simmons/RST
Expert
Posts: 4641
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 3:51 pm
Contact:

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby Alex Simmons/RST » Tue Mar 27, 2018 8:51 pm

robbo mcs wrote:
Mububban wrote:
Alex Simmons/RST wrote:Having seen later video, there was something definitely wrong with that vehicle's technology. Ordinary driver assistance systems in many cars now days would have prevented that collision or at the very least reduced its severity.


I thought Autonomous Emergency Braking only works at fairly low speeds, not 60+?


Some cars have it where it works at all speeds. In my car if you are doing <40kmh it will bring you to a complete stop. If you are doing >40kmh it will slow you down to reduce the impact speed, but will not stop you completely. Different car companies are probably different

I understand the logic behind this is try and balance the safety of you hitting a car in front, versus the dangers of you getting rear ended at high speed. ie if you are in a chain of cars doing 100kmh and suddenly there is a stationary object in front, and your car emergency brakes to a stop, you are likely to get rear ended at 100kmh. However, if your car brakes to 40kmh you will potentially have a front end impact speed of 40kmh and rear end impact of 60kmh. Because kinetic energy is related to velocity squared, the total energy from 40 + 60km impacts is substantially less than a single impact of 100km. That is how the engineer working for the car company explained it to me :wink:

Nothing to stop a vehicle from sensing what's going on behind and to the side in the processing of best outcome.

As for your engineer friend, yes that's correct given kinetic energy is proportional to the square of velocity. 100^2 > 40^2 + 60^2. Indeed it's nearly double the kinetic energy.

User avatar
Thoglette
Posts: 4285
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 1:01 pm

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby Thoglette » Tue Mar 27, 2018 11:51 pm

eeksll wrote: there certainly will be political will.


For what? For mandating additional complications to increase the barriers to entry in the market? To sell more cars, more often? Certainly.

We hit "peak safety" three years ago at about 1/6th the 70's rate. Factoring "per miles" it's probably even higher. But "per person usefully transported" it's not.

The the injury/death rate per capita has increased since.
Stop handing them the stick! - Dave Moulton
"People are worthy of respect, ideas are not." Peter Ellerton, UQ

User avatar
P!N20
Posts: 927
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby P!N20 » Thu Apr 05, 2018 1:06 pm

Bike Snob's take on self-driving cars: https://www.outsideonline.com/2292906/s ... e-cyclists

User avatar
bychosis
Posts: 5702
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2012 1:10 pm
Location: Lake Macquarie

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby bychosis » Thu Apr 05, 2018 1:50 pm

"The real solution is to stop building our world to conform to the car—and to let it die out as nature intended."
The problem is the speed of the two tonnes of metal. Lowering the speed limits further and working out how to stop people rushing when they are cocooned in said two tonnes of metal would go a long way to preventing many of our issues. Autonomous cars will help, and I guess once you've handed over the driving duties to the robot you can't ask it to go faster, and will have more time to update your instagram account so you won't have to rush.
bychosis (bahy-koh-sis): A mental disorder of delusions indicating impaired contact with a reality of no bicycles.

User avatar
Thoglette
Posts: 4285
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 1:01 pm

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby Thoglette » Thu Apr 05, 2018 1:55 pm

Stop handing them the stick! - Dave Moulton
"People are worthy of respect, ideas are not." Peter Ellerton, UQ

User avatar
Thoglette
Posts: 4285
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 1:01 pm

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby Thoglette » Thu Apr 05, 2018 2:04 pm

bychosis wrote:The problem is the speed of the two tonnes of metal.

That's half a dozen problems
1. that the car now weighs two tons, rather than 3/4 ton a few decades ago. It also can be crashed "safely". Well, for the occupants. Bugger everyone elses
2. that the car gets up to speed without any sensation of speed.
3. that the speed limits are too high for drivers to maintain situational awareness ("he came from nowhere" SMIDSY etc) in today's traffic
4. that road design is focused on maximising vehicle speed rather than safe use of the roadway
5. that we're expecting cars to solve a city planning problem. See the following photo.

Note that if you put the bus on rails it can average 200kph over multistop 1000km+ trips (that's Norseman to Ceduna) with safety rates orders of magnitude better than the private motor car (and no, Virginia, autonomous cars won't be any better)
Image
Image: Press-Office City of Müenster, Germany, via treehugger
Last edited by Thoglette on Thu Apr 05, 2018 2:23 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Stop handing them the stick! - Dave Moulton
"People are worthy of respect, ideas are not." Peter Ellerton, UQ

User avatar
P!N20
Posts: 927
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby P!N20 » Thu Apr 05, 2018 2:13 pm

bychosis wrote:The problem is the speed of the two tonnes of metal. Lowering the speed limits further and working out how to stop people rushing when they are cocooned in said two tonnes of metal would go a long way to preventing many of our issues.


OK, so here's an idea; why can't cars/trucks/buses, etc be speed limited to suit the conditions? Surely the technology exists that a vehicle's computer can pick up a signal that will limit the speed to 60 or 100 or whatever the case may be. Yes, I'm aware there may be instances where you need to exceed the speed limit to avoid a collision, but surely that can be designed in. (Or maybe I just thought about this too much during my lunch break...)

User avatar
Thoglette
Posts: 4285
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 1:01 pm

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby Thoglette » Thu Apr 05, 2018 2:35 pm

P!N20 wrote:OK, so here's an idea; why can't cars/trucks/buses, etc be speed limited to suit the conditions? Surely the technology exists that a vehicle's computer can pick up a signal that will limit the speed to 60 or 100 or whatever the case may be. Yes, I'm aware there may be instances where you need to exceed the speed limit to avoid a collision, but surely that can be designed in. (Or maybe I just thought about this too much during my lunch break...)


Ah, simples!

Because there is no political will.

Particularly when the "base" (as you call it) needs to be below 40km for MV drivers to maintain situational awareness. Which is still a whole 10kph to 15kph higher than the average effective speed within 10km of a CBD.

IVMS has been cost effective (and effective) for a decade. Video analytics and numberplate recognition has made leaps and bounds in the same time.
Meanwhile, rather than embracing technology, state governments are removing the speed cameras they have.
Stop handing them the stick! - Dave Moulton
"People are worthy of respect, ideas are not." Peter Ellerton, UQ

User avatar
find_bruce
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 7951
Joined: Mon May 09, 2011 8:42 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby find_bruce » Fri May 25, 2018 11:47 am

Slowly the truth comes out & it is not good news for Uber - the system detected the pedestrian 6 seconds before impact & concluded a collission would occur 1.3 seconds before impact, yet took no evasive maneuvers because it couldn't - the emergency braking system was disabled & instead Uber relied upon the "vehicle operator", however the system did not alert the passenger behind the wheel who was looking away from the road at the time & began braking less than a second AFTER impact.

The preliminary report is available via the National Transportation Safety Board

Headline in Canberra times says it all Uber self-driving car that fatally struck pedestrian was not programmed to brake

User avatar
MichaelB
Posts: 9237
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 9:29 am
Location: Adelaide, South Australia

Re: Autonomous cars? I think not

Postby MichaelB » Fri May 25, 2018 1:49 pm

Oh dear. Think Uber may be in a bit of poo.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Calvin27, CycloVelo, madmacca, opik_bidin, RetroPilot, StevOz, uart