Cash
Avoidance Technology (“CAT”) Musings
Crash
Avoidance Technology (CAT) is now becoming widely implemented in production
vehicles. Both IIHS and NHTSA are working CAT features into their testing and
evaluations. CAT is not just some idealized goal to be accomplished in the
future, but it is happening right now. Although we might best classify CAT as
within the first stage of implementation, automotive manufacturers and
suppliers are moving quickly to get this technology on the road. It is expected
there will be more that 100,000 autonomous cars on American highways by 2025.
We are already seeing these ads on TV, as there is a push to be first to market
or on the leading edge. Chevy put out new commercials about Forward Collision
Warning (“FCW”) being “available” on its new Chevy Equinox.[1] These
ads show focus groups being introduced to FCW on the Equinox. A focus
group member says “Maybe Ford should try to keep up” after the moderator tells
them that the Ford Edge does not have Forward Collision Warning. Think about
“failure to equip cases.” In addition, these advertisements and others like
them could turn out to be valuable evidence as this litigation emerges and AIEG
(and yes, you as our star paralegals) should be on the lookout for and
gathering these and similar ads for future use.[2]
A driving
force accelerating the trend will be new government mandates for
vehicle-to-vehicle communication technologies that are intended to improve
safety. But, as the automotive industry has shown, flaws and defects in
vehicles continue, although there may be slightly different types of defects as
compared to the structural type defects in years past. For example, in May,
Honda recalled some 2014-2015 Acura MDX 2WD and AWD, RLX and 2014 Acura RLX
Hybrid vehicles, because its Collision Mitigation Braking System could
incorrectly interpret certain roadside objects such as metal fences or metal
guardrails as obstacles and unexpectedly apply the brakes.
The litmus
test for looking for or screening these cases remains similar to our more
traditional cases, as one must always ask themselves the question, is this
something that just doesn’t seem right? Or something that shouldn’t have happened?
Or, how could this crash have been prevented? With the next steps being perhaps
good old fashion investigatory work in interviewing the drivers involved and
the witnesses to the crash, and documenting the physical evidence. A well
trained mechanic could also assist in obtaining a DRB (Diagnostic Readout Box)
scan of your vehicle’s electronic system. A DRB Scan Tool is a device that, in
conjunction with the electronics in automobiles, may be able to diagnose a
variety of problems that may be plaguing the vehicle. All cars produced after
Jan. 1, 1996, have been required to utilize OBD-II (On-board Diagnostics) to
electronically report vehicle problems upon being scanned. Different vehicle
manufacturers require unique tools to be able to scan and diagnose error codes.
Current CAT Technology
The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) has created
a program for evaluating the performance of front crash prevention systems to
raise consumer awareness of safety options and encourage auto manufacturers to
adopt and continue developing this technology. (see, http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/crash-avoidance-features) The program ranks
vehicles based on the availability and functionality of two crash avoidance
systems. A higher ranking is given to vehicle that utilize Forward Collision
Warning, (FCW) the most passive of the front crash avoidance technology, which uses
camera, radar, and/or laser equipment for object recognition and speed
detection, and alerts the driver via visual, audio, or haptic warning to apply
the brakes when the relative speed between a vehicle and object in the road
presents a risk of impending collision. Additionally, a higher ranking is given
to vehicle based on the functionality of Automatic Emergency Braking, (AEB) the
most active of the front crash avoidance technology, which automatically
engages the full braking potential of a vehicle to either completely prevent a
frontal collision or slow the vehicle down to mitigate severity when an imminent
collision is detected.
Other crash
avoidance technologies include Dynamic Brake Support, a hybrid of passive and
active front crash avoidance technology, which pre-conditions the brakes when a
collision is detected so that full braking power is applied with even slight
force to the brake pedal, to shorten the vehicle’s stopping distance. Some
vehicle also include Pedestrian Detection systems which warn the driver or
automatically engage emergency braking when pedestrians are detected either in
the same lane as the vehicle or to be moving dangerously into this direction.
Bosch is manufacturing Pedestrian Detection systems, while BMW and Toyota are
currently implementing this technology.
Apart from
crash avoidance technology, suppliers and manufacturers are working on adaptive
restraint systems and other pre-crash systems. TRW, for example, is producing
the Active Control Retractor, a system that provides full or limited reversible
belt retraction when dangerous situations are detected. Similarly, Mercedes has
implemented a system called Pre-Safe into their latest line of production, a
system which automatically engages when an imminent collision is detected and
prepares the vehicle’s occupants by tightening the front seat belts, adjusting
the front head restraints and passenger seats, and closing the windows and
sunroof.
Adaptive
Cruise Control (ACC) technology is another area that will continue to flourish.
These systems automatically engage the vehicle’s brakes and acceleration to
control the distance between the driver and other vehicles or objects on the
road. For example, when the cruise control is set on the highway and a slower
moving car merges ahead, a vehicle will automatically engage the brakes to
prevent or mitigate a collision. When that car merges back over, the ACC system
will bring the vehicle back up to speed. TRW’s system utilizes a 24 GHz ISM
frequency band radar sensor to detect relative speeds between a vehicle and
object in the road. Bosch is also producing ACC systems, and manufacturers such
as Infiniti, BMW, Opel, Cadillac, Jeep, Dodge, Ford, and Toyota have already
designed their newest models with this safety feature.
A
sub-system of the ACC technology, called the Stop-and-Go system by some
manufacturers, is designed for use in traffic jams, and will automatically
accelerate, steer within the same lane, and bring the vehicle to a stop. The
driver’s vehicle will basically follow the vehicle in front of it as long as it
is in the same lane. Accordingly, when the Stop & Go feature is engaged in
a traffic jam and a vehicle ahead merges into a separate lane, your vehicle
will begin to follow the next-in-line forward vehicle. The system developed by
Bosch will automatically activate, when the ACC function is being used, at speeds
below 20 mph. Bosch has stated that “[i]n the following years, the system will
be enhanced to cover ever-faster speeds and more complex driving situations,
including automatic lane change.” Manufacturers including BMW and Jeep are
currently utilizing this feature in their 2015 production line
Additionally,
Lane Assist systems, including such technology as Lane Departure Warning (LDW),
Lane Keeping Assist (LKA), and Lane Centering Assist (LCA), are all designed to
promote lateral safety. LDW is a camera-based system that provides a driver
with visual, audio, or haptic (involving a vibrating steering wheel or seat)
warning when the driver’s vehicle unintentionally crosses a road lane marking
or the edge of the road. LKA is also a camera-based system and is designed to
utilize electronically powered steering to provide counter-steering torque to
assist the driver in moving back into the center of the lane. LCA is
essentially an LKA system, except that its purpose is to continually assist the
driver in keeping the vehicle in the center of the lane. To prevent misuse of
the system for autonomous driving, both the LKA and LCA employ hands-off
detection systems. Furthermore, for safety reasons, both the LKA and LCA are
designed to be easily overruled by the driver. Automotive suppliers producing
this technology include TRW and HELLA. Manufacturers currently implementing
Lane Assist technology include Infiniti, BMW, Opel, Mercedes, Cadillac, Jeep,
Hyundai, Honda, Ford, and Toyota.
Similar to
the Lane Assist systems, Side View Assist (SVA) systems promote lateral safety
by continually monitoring a range of area alongside and diagonally to the rear
of the vehicle through an ultrasonic sensor. When another vehicle is situated
in the monitored area, a warning LED light may display in the driver’s side
mirror. If the driver uses a turn signal while a vehicle is in the monitored
area, an audible warning will activate. The SVA system is not activated by
stationary roadside objects, such as guardrails, poles, or parked vehicles.
Bosch is currently producing SVA systems, and manufacturers including Infiniti,
Opel, Mercedes, Cadillac, Jeep, Hyundai, Honda, and Ford, have implemented
similar technology into their current line of production.
We will
also be seeing a big jump in rearview safety, as NHTSA
has issued a rule under the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) that
will require all new vehicles weighing less than 10,000 pounds to have rearview
visibility systems giving the driver a 10-foot by 20-foot zone of vision
directly behind the vehicle while backing up.[3]
Although the rule does not explicitly mandate the use of cameras to achieve
this goal, the most practically available means of compliance would require
auto manufacturers to install rearview cameras. NHTSA has included a phase-in
period to ease the burden on manufacturers. For new vehicles manufactured after
May 1, 2016, but before May 1, 2017, 10% of all new vehicles must be in
compliance; 40% new vehicles manufactured after May 1, 2017, and before May 1, 2108,
must be in compliance; and, finally, for new vehicles manufactured after May 1,
2018, 100% of a manufacturer’s fleet must be in compliance with NHTSA’s
rearview visibility requirements.[4]
NHTSA estimates that 58 to 69 lives will be saved each year, not including
injuries prevented, once the entire on-the-road vehicle fleet is equipped with
rearview visibility systems that meet these requirements.[5]
Moving Forward
Despite
what the manufacturers have told us, CAT technology will fail and crashes will
be out there. While we hope the opposite is true, we must continue to be on the
lookout for cases involving defective CAT technology. And we must be just as
eagerly monitoring for the “failure to equip” cases, in other words not having
this technology as standard equipment on all vehicles, including commercial
vehicles. Other cases may involve the technology simply not performing as
intended or expected, such as the problems noted above with the Acura Collision
Mitigation Braking System incorrectly interpreting certain roadside objects like
metal fences or metal guardrails as obstacles and unexpectedly applying the
brakes.
The legal
profession as it has always done, will play a
critical role in protecting the American public, and holding the automotive
industry accountable when their vehicles fail and harm the public.
[2] See
Demolition Derby 2014 Mercedes Benz M
Class, https://youtu.be/xU8NuH9QDhQ (last visited Nov. 30, 2015). Such ads
may be useful to show drivers are entitled to rely on this technology.
[3] 49 C.F.R. §
571.111 (2014).
[4] 49 C.F.R. §
571.111 (2014).
[5] Rule
Document on Rear Visibility,
http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=NHTSA-2010-0162-0256 (last
visited Nov. 30, 2015).
No comments:
Post a Comment