Lessons learned “Safety validation and Road worthiness testing”
Lessons learned can significantly help future R&I initiatives by providing key information on the results achieved. The table below includes the lessons learned, collected so far, which are related to “Safety validation and Road worthiness testing”:
|Type of lesson learned||Topic||Project name||Source||Brief summary of Lesson learned|
|Technical||Test and validate in live traffic as much as possible||C-ITS Corridor||C-ITS Corridor Website||The learning curve is much steeper when testing developments in live traffic. You will find issues that will not show up in a lab or test circuit setting.|
|Technical||Extensive long term testing in live traffic||C-ITS Corridor||C-ITS Corridor Website||The gap between theory and the practical reality can only be narrowed by testing, testing and testing in live traffic between international partners. Intensive short term testing is great, extensive long term testing is indispensable in finding the real issues.|
|Technical||Differences in technology maturity||ADAS&ME||ADAS & ME Final Report||Issues became apparent with differences in maturity of technology available during the testing stage concerning the original plans. Due to this ad-hoc solutions often needed to be developed within a short timeframe before the start of the evaluations (with the use of valuable time and resources detracting from the effective implementation of the evaluations). Improvement in the flexibility of the evaluation framework could have provided some other options.|
|Technical||Key issues with failure of demonstrator vehicles and integrated technology||ADAS&ME||ADAS & ME Final Report||When a demonstrator representative was not present issues often became difficult and time-consuming to resolve, and for integrated technology, issues were difficult without input from relevant partners. This caused numerous instances of delays and/or missed data collection. In response to this, it should have been mandated that a demonstrator representative was available at the evaluation site for the duration of the testing. Also provision of user manuals.|
|Technical||System language issues||ADAS&ME||ADAS & ME Final Report||During the development of both the sensing technology and the vehicle demonstrators, systems were developed with the partner language. This led to issues with the need to recruit participants in the test location with a native level in a foreign language. This was a limitation for the number test participants and on other recruitment criteria (i.e. representative gender balance, driving experience). Consideration should be given to the specification of the testing environment before the development to ensure that content could be tested with an optimal test procedure.|
|Safety||Procurement and availability of automation-ready vehicle platforms||MuCCA||MuCCA Project Website||Timely access to a suitable automation-ready vehicle platform has been challenging in the project. Ready to buy solutions are expensive and developing customised solutions within the project requires a lot of resources. Early access to a physical platform during development has proven convenient although simulation has helped on this side to bench test algorithms and part of the hardware|
Summarising the table above, it is key to consider real-world testing in terms of safety validation and road worthiness testing. Moreover, it is important to plan a flexible approach while carrying out simulations. This is applicable to a variety of situations that range from language requirements to identifying a suitable testing environment to be evaluated.
Have feedback on this section? Let us know!
Please add your feedback in the field below.
Your feedback has been sent!
Thank you for your input.
An error occured...
Please try again later.