Josef Nilsson

Design and Experimental Validation of a Cooperative Driving System in the Grand Cooperative Driving Challenge

In this paper, we present the Cooperative Adaptive Cruise Control (CACC) architecture, which was proposed and implemented by the team from Chalmers University of Technology, Göteborg, Sweden, that joined the Grand Cooperative Driving Challenge (GCDC) in 2011. The proposed CACC architecture consists of the following three main components, which are described in detail: 1) communication; 2) sensor fusion; and 3) control. Both simulation and experimental results are provided, demonstrating that the proposed CACC system can drive within a vehicle platoon while minimizing the inter-vehicle spacing within the allowed range of safety distances, tracking a desired speed profile, and attenuating acceleration shockwaves.

Driver performance in the presence of adaptive cruise control related failures: Implications for safety analysis and fault tolerance

This study explored how failures related to an adaptive cruise control (ACC) were handled by drivers and what the effects on safety can be. The experimental study included forty-eight subjects and was performed in a moving base driving simulator equipped with an ACC. Each subject experienced two different failures in separate scenarios. In total, the study included four different failures, i.e., Unwanted acceleration, Complete lack of deceleration, Partial lack of deceleration, and Speed limit violation. The outcome of each failure scenario has been categorized based on whether the driver managed to avoid a collision or not. For the outcomes where collisions were successfully avoided, the situations were analyzed in more detail and classified according to the strategy used by the driver. Besides showing that partial lack of deceleration caused more collisions than complete lack of deceleration (43% compared to 14% of the participants colliding), the results also indicate a preference among drivers to steer and change lane rather than to apply the brakes when faced with acceleration and deceleration failures. A trade off relationship was identified between allowing a failing ACC to stay operational and on the other hand disabling it when an error is detected. Keeping the system operational can cause confusion about the mode of the system but as the results of the study indicate it can also improve the situation by reducing impact speed.

Evaluating interactions with non-existing automated vehicles: three Wizard of Oz approaches

Highly automated test vehicles are rare today, and (independent) researchers have often limited access to them. Also, developing fully functioning system prototypes is time and effort consuming. In this paper, we present three adaptions of the Wizard of Oz technique as a means of gathering data about interactions with highly automated vehicles in early development phases. Two of them address interactions between drivers and highly automated vehicles, while the third one is adapted to address interactions between pedestrians and highly automated vehicles. The focus is on the experimental methodology adaptations and our lessons learned.