Nomadic Device Forum – Final Report

Transcription

Final Report, September 2009
-Short Form∗Editors:
Editing Team NDF
Special Contributions:
Members of the Working Group NDF
Peter Christ, ERTICO
Michael Fond, Orange
Peter Fröhlich, FTW
Rudolf Gerlach, TÜV Rheinland
Johann Grill, ADAC
Mark Jendzrok, MEDION
Michael Schürdt, MEDION
Tobias Axt, MEDION
Theo Kamalski, TomTom
Katia Pagle, ICCS
Wolfgang Reinhardt, ACEA
∗
The complete version of the final report can be received from Wolfgang Reinhardt (ACEA).
eSafety Forum
Working Group Nomadic Device Forum
Nomadic Device Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 1 of 56
List of Figures
3
1.
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
2.
3.
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
4.
5.
5.1
5.1.1
5.1.2
5.1.3
5.1.4
5.2
6.
6.1
6.2
6.3
6.4
6.5
6.5.1
6.5.2
6.5.2.1
6.5.2.2
6.5.2.3
7.
8.
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Background & History
Aim and Objectives
Scope
Work items
Organisation
Membership
Nomadic Device Forum 2008-2009 Activities
Memorandum of Understanding (MoU)
Executive Summary
Market Development (In-vehicle navigation, PND)
General Overview
OEM Navigation Systems
Portable Navigation Systems (PNDs)
Smartphones & Handhelds with Navigation Functionality
Road Safety & Nomadic Devices
HMI Achievements for Safe Integration
Key Research Results
User Experiences
PND Safety Advantages
Supportive Functionality and Precautions
Product Achievements
Fixing of Devices
Open Issues & Potential Improvements
Problems with Products in the Market
Missing Common Standard(s)
Field of View
Interpretation of the Law
Potential Solutions, their Barriers and Benefits
Technical Issues
Standardisation
Human Machine Interface
PND Connector
Database Access
Road Map
Recommendations
Annex I – Letter of Intent
eSafety Forum
3
Final Report
June 2009
Page 2 of 56
Table of Content
List of Figures
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 3 of 56
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Figure 1: Sales figures portable navigations systems for Western
Europe (15 countries) in 1.000 units for 2007-2008
Figure 2: Estimated Trends in road deaths in EU27, based on
developments 2001-2007 (ETSC 2008a)
Figure 3: Percentage change in road deaths between
Figure 4: Customer statements on Nomadic Device usage
Figure 5: Advanced PND features
Figure 6: View ahead (Art. 71 section 5 VTS)
Figure 7: Obstruction of view by navigation device
Figure 8: Recommended mounting place for passenger cars
Figure 9: Recommended mounting place for small vans and MPVs
Figure 10: Proposed Roadmap
The use of “Nomadic Devices” (or NDs) or portable and
aftermarket devices used in the vehicle by a driver for
support, assistance, communication or entertainment, is
increasingly common.
The Term Nomadic Device covers all types of portable
information,
communication
and
entertainment
equipment as well as accessories that can be brought
inside the vehicle by the customer to be used while
driving:
o Personal Navigation Assistants or devices (PNDs)
(110+ brands)
o Internet Appliances (iTouch, Nokia N, Sony Mylo,
etc.)
o Portable CD/DVD Players (Video)
o Music Players (Zune, iPod, Sony, Samsung, etc.)
o Mobile Computing (PDSs, UMPCs, Laptops)
o Mobile Phones/Smart Phones (iPhone, Nokia, HTC,
Samsung, Blackberry, LG, Sony-Ericsson, …)
o Gaming Devices (Nintendo, PlayStations Portable,
Sega, …)
o Portable TVs
As in-car use of such devices grows rapidly, there are
concerns that this should not lead to driver distraction
and increased safety risk. The lack of standards for
device “docking” in the vehicle, and for safe installation
and use, imply added costs, inconvenience and perhaps
risks for the user.
The need for a safe HMI goes back to 1995/96 as a
request of a high level expert group from Member
States, directly appointed by the Commission.
The recommendation of this group lead to the first
Commission recommendation on safe HMI issued on 21
December 1999 followed by a report on the needs for
updating & expanding the first principles in July 2001.
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 4 of 56
1. Background & History
With the start of the eSafety Program a new eSafety
Working Group on HMI was formed to revise the first
ESoP and to explicitly add nomadic device integration
issues and requirements to the work of the group.
The working group delivered a final report with updated
recommendations in 2005. Moreover, an expert group
was established to draft the 2006 update of the new
ESoP, which was supported by the European projects
AIDE and HUMANIST.
The Commission Recommendation of 22 December 2006
was published on 6th February 2007 (refer to: OJ L
32/2007). Comparing to the previous recommendation it
addresses both mobile and integrated in-vehicle
information and communication systems.
A revision of this new recommendation was performed
on 26 May 2008 and published on 12 August 2008 (refer
to: OJ L 216/2008). This revision was performed after a
request by ACEA and it includes a clarification of visual
display mounting installation principles
(Installation
Principle IV) excluding such type M1 vehicles from the
“30 degree rules”, which are derived from N1 vehicles).
To especially address the challenges for nomadic devices
a “Nomadic Device Forum” (NDF) was established on 20
January 2005 by the AIDE integrated project (6th FP,
eSafety Strategic Objective, co-funded by EC) to bring
together representatives of the key stakeholders
involved.
During the last four years the Forum has organized a
number of workshops and meetings to discuss important
issues around nomadic devices and their use within the
vehicle, addressing the most important use cases, the
potential requirements for and main characteristics of a
common “Nomadic Device Gateway”, related business
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 5 of 56
While ACEA supported the EC recommendation on
behalf of its members through a letter to the
Commission only a very few Member States took action
to implement the recommendations in their market.
On 24 October 2007 the attendees at the workshop of
the AIDE NDF in Brussels agreed on the need for the
Nomadic Device Forum to continue following the end of
the AIDE project, perhaps as a working group of the
eSafety Forum. This proposal was accepted by the
eSafety Forum Steering Group.
1.1 Aim and Objectives
The Nomadic Device Forum constituted a multi-sector
working group aiming at:
o Safe, effective and user-friendly nomadic device
integration and use in vehicles
o New business opportunities related to the in-vehicle
use of nomadic devices
To achieve these objectives, the Forum:
o Acted as a European consensus platform to reach
cross-sector agreement on issues relating to nomadic
device safety, technical harmonisation, in-vehicle
integration and their safe use
o Acted as a bridge between the research projects on
nomadic device issues and also between Europe and
the rest of the world
o Provided advice to the EC on nomadic device issues
o Identified requirements for new work items, handled
e.g. by sub-working groups of the Forum, research
initiatives, standardisation bodies etc.
1.2 Scope
Even though the Forum is open for all nomadic device
stakeholders, the OEMs and other interested parties the
work of the Forum focussed on Personal Navigation
Devices (PNDs) and their safe integration in vehicles due
to lack of participation and interest from the other
groups. The Forum is not dealing with general HMI
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 6 of 56
aspects and HMI issues including the awareness and
take-up of the European Statement of Principles on Invehicle HMI, the “ESoP”.
1.3 Work items
The main work items identified were:
Technical safe integration
o
o
o
o
o
o
Find ways to identify areas in the vehicle for safe
mounting of nomadic devices under consideration of
the Field of Vision Directive (77/649/EEC) of motor
vehicle drivers (M1 vehicles only) as well as airbag
deployment corridors and made those data
accessible
Development proposal on how to access the forum’s
information (public access, via OEM web page, via
NDM web page, with costs or free of charge? etc.)
NDMs to pre-specify a standard docking station (e.g.
NAVI-FIX) based on e.g. the FIAT 500 concept and
to discuss deployment with OEMs/CE4A1
Promoting the creation of commonly accepted and
standardized gateways or docking stations for invehicle integration of nomadic devices, in terms of
mechanical mounting, electrical connection and
device-vehicle information exchange.
For nomadic devices/applications in use, make
expert assessment of likely risks related to driver
use and device installation
Despite warnings and alerts expressed several times
by some stakeholders the use of nomadic devices
for the transmission of eCall message as
communication and positioning device was
investigated.
Business Opportunities
o
1
Identifying business opportunities specifically in the
areas of public-private services (e.g. eCall, speed
advice, traffic information, cooperative systems).
CE4A = Consumer Electronics for Automotive
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 7 of 56
issues, embedded systems or non-information and
communication systems such as Advanced Driver
Assistant Systems (ADAS).
o
Identify possibilities for OEMs to market a safe
standardized interface vs. windscreen fixing
Discuss and identify other business opportunities
where a co-operation between OEMs and ND
manufacturers is beneficial
Legal Issues
o
o
Identify legal and organisational issues and propose
solutions. Initiate a legal expertise on liability issues
(in case a customer does not follow the
recommendation?)
How to react to an increasing risk that national
legislators want to enforce safe integration of
Nomadic Devices?
Cooperation between stakeholders
o
o
o
o
o
Compile and agree on scenarios and use cases for
nomadic device-vehicle cooperation (installation,
interaction, integration)
Identify functional and system requirements
Define system architecture for a nomadic devicevehicle solution
Outline specifications for a “smart” vehicle-device
gateway (including intermediate gateway for
information management), including physical data,
functional and application interfaces
Support standardisation efforts, best practices, and
guidelines.
Awareness Building
o
o
o
Nomadic Device Manufacturers (NDM) to agree on
key messages to increase awareness for safe
integration on the user level and showing potential
consequences of poor fitment
Find ways to ban unsafe devices which do not meet
ESoP requirements
Provide self-certification for meeting ESoP rules and
to differentiate from non-compliant devices
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 8 of 56
o
o
Start parallel campaigns to inform customers on the
benefits of certified devices and the need for safe
installation
Initiate automobile clubs and car magazines to test
devices
also related to safe fitment and
communicate results
Originally it was intended to support the work of the
Nomadic Device Forum by sub-working groups but
finally the topics were handled in the general meetings.
1.4 Organisation
The Nomadic Device Forum was chaired by:
o Wolfgang Reinhardt, ACEA (Forum Chair, Vehicle
manufacturers’ association)
o Mark Jendrzok, Medion (Forum co-chair, ND
Manufacturer)
The chairmen were supported by an Organizing
Committee, which consisted of the following persons
and organizations:
o
o
o
o
Angelos Amditis, ICCS
Peter Christ, ERTICO
Wolfgang Hoefs, EC DG INFSO
Gustav Markkula, VTEC
The chairmen were also members of the Organizing
Committee.
The eSafety Support Office provided administrative and
organizational support.
The Organizing Committee was responsible for
organizing plenary meetings and working sessions of
sub-working groups of the Forum. In between meetings,
the Forum and its sub-working groups used web tools
and other means of collaboration. The Organizing
Committee was also responsible for continuous reporting
on activities and results to the eSafety Forum.
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 9 of 56
o
Membership in the eSafety Working Group: Nomadic
Device Forum was open to any interested organization
that wanted to actively support the Forum’s activities.
The Forum especially welcomed representatives of
stakeholders concerned with in-vehicle use of nomadic
devices, such as:
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Vehicle manufacturers
Portable navigation system manufacturers
Pocket PC/PDA manufacturers
Automotive suppliers
Navigation map suppliers
Mobile Telecom operators
Service providers
Public authorities
Research organisations & academic bodies
Associations related to the field
1.6 Nomadic Device Forum 2008-2009
Activities
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Promotion of the Forum to attract members from all
stakeholders.
Organization of a first plenary meeting on April 10
followed by meetings on 4 September and 25
November 2008.
2009 meetings on 26.2, 23.4, 17.6, 14.10 (Final
report)
Regular NDF meetings on 24.9 and 03.12.
Identify areas in the vehicle for safe mounting of
nomadic devices under consideration of the Field of
Vision Directive as well as airbag deployment
corridors and made those data accessible
Promote a study to transfer ESoP requirements into
measurable criteria and encourage compliance tests
according to comparable measurements
Creation and promoting commonly accepted and
standardized gateways or docking stations (e.g.
NAVI-FIX) for in-vehicle integration of nomadic
devices, in terms of mechanical mounting, electrical
connection and device-vehicle information exchange.
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 10 of 56
1.5 Membership
o
o
o
Investigate potential solutions for eCall using
nomadic devices as communication and positioning
devices
Discuss and identify business opportunities in the
areas of public-private services (e.g. eCall, speed
advice, traffic information).
Establishing contact with the CE4A working group to
get their input on nomadic gateway issues.
Liaison with current and new research projects
related to NDs (e.g. FESTA, TELEFOT, FOT-Net,
etc.), e.g. by organization of common workshops.
1.7 Memorandum of Understanding (MoU)
It is in the interests of both OEMs and NDM to avoid
legislation on technical matters with regard to HMI,
leaving room for differentiation.
In August 2008 the NDF formulated a MoU with the
purpose to promote the implementation of the
“European Statement of Principles (ESoP) on human
machine interface for safe and efficient in-vehicle
information
and
communication
systems”,
as
recommended
in
the
European
Commission
Recommendation 2007/78/EC. The principles should be
taken into account when designing new products to
enable a safer, more effective and more user friendly
integration of infotainment systems as well as
aftermarket and nomadic (mobile) devices in the
vehicles. This MoU also applied to personal navigation
devices.
It had to be seen as an expression of the individual and
collective commitment of the signatories to work in
partnership in order to realise a shared objective to the
benefit of society.
The MoU did not materialize due to different objectives
from Automobile Manufacturers, which wanted to
decouple the implementation of the EsoP from
discussions on potential co-operations between the
different stakeholders.
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 11 of 56
o
Consequently, the work of the NDF in its original form
has come to an end with this final report, but will
continue as a cooperation platform for the NDMs.
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 12 of 56
Even though this decoupling was agreed upon at the
NDF meeting on 4th September 2008 the Forum failed
to coordinate a common approach to a standardized
interface between the PND and the vehicle. Instead,
several discussions took place between individual OEMs
and NDMs resulting in bilateral agreements.
The growth of nomadic devices (PNDs, smartphones,
handhelds with navigation function) cannot be turned
back in time. It is expected that while OEM/dealer
installed systems will grow from 2.8 million to 4.5 million
devices (2008 vs. 2013= 60%), nomadic devices will
grow from 26.7 million to 66.8 million (150%) in the
same period.
Strong growth is expected in the field of smartphones
(+280%).
Strong in-vehicle use of nomadic devices requires
standardization and cooperation between the different
market players to avoid potential safety risks.
Mobile navigation is one major application and driver for
growth, but other applications should undergo similar
assessments.
The European Statement of Principles for safe
installation is valid and needs to be applied for all driver
and driving related applications. Awareness building at
customer level will be however essential to inform at
potential safety risks.
The usage of mobile navigation devices in vehicles has
no proven correlation with traffic accidents. On the
contrary, research shows positive impact on energy
efficiency, productivity and road safety.
In spite of significant progress in product technology and
design of nomadic devices there are still deficiencies
concerning HMI and safe installation, which have now
been taken up by leading suppliers to meet ESoP
requirements and future challenges.
Aging population, higher migration and mobility, strong
urbanization trends and environmental challenges as
well as sustainable transport needs and technological
progress in ITS applications have to be taken into
account in future product developments.
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 13 of 56
2. Executive Summary
Consumer tests, technical research and discussion in the
workgroup revealed a number of open issues with
nomadic devices, which are mainly in the area of
missing standards, product design, content presentation,
fixing and customer mounting, detracting the field of
view or interfering with airbag channels.
There are no EU regulations beside the Commission
recommendation on safe installation (ESoP) of 26 May
2008 yet on retrofitting vehicles with navigation devices
but national rules might exists in the different road
traffic licensing regulations.
The workgroup has looked at these issues and have
proposed a number of suggestions and potential
solutions.
While the majority of issues can be solved by the
nomadic device manufacturers the problem of safe fixing
requires cooperation between vehicle and nomadic
device manufacturers to identify the most uncritical area
at the windscreen or on the dashboard (e.g. access to
respective OEM information).The NDF favours a socalled NAVIfix solution with a standardized interface and
PND connector. The workgroup believes that this idea
should be pursued in international bodies.
As a short-term solution the NDF proposes to conduct a
study to investigate if the fixing of the device in the
lower left corner (right corner for U.K) of the windshield
is the most suitable place with regard to field of view
and other requirements.
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 14 of 56
Most important factors for customers are reliable route
guidance, a competitive price, a good value for money,
and an easy to use and safe system. Additional services
and multi functionality are nice to have and can be a
sales pitch when buying a new device.
In chapter 8 the NDF suggest a road map for safer invehicle fixation that starts with today’s mounting
instructions in the user manual for PNDs and ends with a
standardized electro-mechanical interface (NAVIfix) by
2015 the latest.
One final key recommendation presented in chapter 9 is
that all nomadic device manufacturers should sign a
« letter of compliance » with ESoP requirements and
work together to address open issues.
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 15 of 56
While the ESoP leaves considerable room for innovation
and flexibility it does not foster standardized evaluation
and certification processes. Therefore, it would be
worthwhile to specify a concrete set of measures and
procedures for the evaluation and certification of HMIs
for nomadic devices.
3. Market Development (In-vehicle
navigation, PND)
During the mid nineties the first navigation products for
cars showed up in the market. Most of these products
found its way into the car during production of the car.
The retail market in those days was relatively small. High
product prices and build-in costs withhold navigation
becoming a mass-market retail product.
After the millennium change first Personal Navigation
Devices (PNDs) came to market. Attractive end-user
prices, the ‘out of the box use’ philosophy and fast
innovation cycles made PNDs successful in short time at
a larger audience. In half a decade PNDs became massmarket consumer electronic products.
The navigation sales in Europe showed a growth from
1.755 million sets in 2003 to 18.708 million sets in 2008.
This is an increase of 1,066%.
A spit per navigation product type is given in the table
below2.
Fixed systems
OEM sales
Aftermarket sales
Total Fixed system sales
Nomadic
Devices
OEM PND sales
Aftermarket PND Sales
Total PND sales
2003
1,175
395
1,570
185
185
2008
2,244
384
2,628
2013
3,968
356
4,324
592
1,003
15,488
16,080
11,107
12,110
(In thousand)
2
Source : iSupply Corporation. In the following other sources will also be quoted showing slightly different numbers.
Unfortunately some statistics refer to Europe 15, Europe 15 + EFTA, others to Western Europe, etc. without giving
the necessary details.
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 16 of 56
3.1 General Overview
Fixed and Nomadic Devices Systems Sales
16000
in Thousand Pieces
14000
12000
2003
10000
2008
8000
2013
6000
4000
2000
0
OEM sales Aftermarket Total Fixed
sales
system
sales
OEM PND
sales
Aftermarket
PND Sales
Total PND
sales
A very detailed study by TRG3 provides more
information (in-vehicle navigation systems include dealer
installed aftermarket device):
Total Navigation Systems Sales
80000
Year
70000
60000
In-Vehicle Navigation
Systems (in 000)
50000
Dedicated Navigation
Devices (in 000)
40000
Smartphones/PDAs
w/Navigation (in 000)
30000
Handsets w/Navigation (in
000)
20000
Total Navigation Systems
Sales:
10000
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
0
in thousa nd pie ce s
3
TRG Telematics Research Group: Worldwide Telematics Summary 2008, Period 2000 – 2013.
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 17 of 56
18000
… Aftermarket products are sold by electronic specialist
and/or car dealer and installed in the dashboard in the
service shop, basically independent from the new car
purchase.
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 18 of 56
While OEM products are bought together with the
vehicle either as a vehicle standard or as a factory
option and installed in the factory …
From 2005 onwards Personal Navigation Devices are
also entering the car as OEM products.
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 19 of 56
Personal Navigation Devices sold in the Aftermarket are
almost exclusively mounted by a windscreen dock on the
windscreen. Generic mounting instructions are given in
the user-manuals of the Personal Navigation Devices.
End-users following the instructions will minimize
negative effects on Field of View.
o Unmodified aftermarket PND docked in mounting
station of car maker
o Specific OEM PND docked in mounting station of car
maker with (wireless) connection to car infrastructure
o Specific OEM PND docked in head unit of car make
o Black box OEM PND connected to car infrastructure
(connected to Multimedia system of the car;
connected to car infrastructure; HMI of Multimedia
system)
o (Specific) PND fully integrated in the car
In the first two categories HMI structure between
Aftermarket and OEM remains the same in most cases.
In the last three categories the displayed information
remains the same in most cases and one or more
buttons of the head unit replaces the touch screen.
3.2 OEM Navigation Systems
The market for OEM navigation systems has grown from
1.175 million units in 2003 to 2.244 million units in 2008,
an annual growth rate of 14.3 % p.a.
Market prices for integrated navigation systems are very
difficult to compare as they are mostly offered as an
infotainment unit including stereo radio, several
loudspeakers, the choice between black/white or colour
display, and CD for one country or DVD for Europe
Prices are in the range of € 1,000 to € 1,700 for volume
producers and from € 2,000 to € 4,000 in the more
luxury segment.
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 20 of 56
In general, the following OEM PND integration
configurations can be found in 2009 on the European
market:
However, according to a recent market research study in
Germany, done by IfD Allensbach, only 10%4 of the
German households use a fix integrated navigation
system today.
4
Internet Statistics: Statista 2009, Source: IfD Allensbach.
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 21 of 56
Increasingly, cooperation between vehicle
manufacturers and nomadic device manufacturers leads
to a new category of integrated navigation system at
market prices starting from 500 €.
On the positive side integrated systems largely meet the
requirements of a safe HMI (European Statement of
Principles for safe integration of information and
communication devices), do not disturb the field of view,
do not interfere with any airbag deployment channels,
have in many cases larger screen, have excellent audio
capabilities, and longer navigation capabilities without
GPS reception (vehicle sensors). They also do not
depend on customer fixing. When switched on the actual
and correct GPS position is available without a delay so
that navigation services can be used immediately.
3.3 Portable Navigation Systems (PNDs)
For the European market the following chart shows die
geographical distribution in Western Europe for the
years 2007-2008.
While in 2007 14.5 million units of portable navigation
devices were sold in Western Europe this number
increased to 16.6 million units in 2008, an increase of
14.64%.
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 22 of 56
There are several issues that impact on the use of
integrated navigation systems. The system itself is
relatively expensive and systems based on CD require
the purchase of corresponding CDs when more-detailed
map material about the main European Countries is
needed. With 150 Euros and more these CDs are
relatively expensive as well. In addition integrated
systems do not include the latest developments (e.g.
touch screen, give slower mobile phone support update,
have older antenna technology) when they enter the
market due to industry lead times. Other important
safety features such as speed alert information are also
not covered by integrated solutions. Furthermore, travel
planning and programming have to be done in the car
and cannot be prepared in advance at home, which bear
the risk that this is done while driving. Additional
features such as Internet access and or TV could also
cause serious concerns.
Sales figures portable navigations systems for Western Europe
3600
Germany
Great Britain
2500
France
1700
Italy
4375
2997
2715
1950
1150
1199
Spain
775
Netherlands
927
507
535
Belgium
Sweden
360
351
2007
Denmark
259
383
2008
Swiss
220
275
Austria
214
277
Portugal
195
254
Finland
182
243
35
102
Ireland
23
29
Luxemburg
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
in thousand pieces
Figure 1: Sales figures portable navigations systems for
Western Europe (15 countries) in 1.000 units for 20072008
The drop in sales prices and the continuous strong
competition will cause - according to Canalys - a
sustainable consolidation of the PND sector.
Today, three providers, Garmin (35%), TomTom (29%)
and Mio Technology (9%) cover almost three quarter of
the global market.
In Europe GARMIN, TOMTOM, MIO, NAVMAN, MEDION,
NAVIGON, MAGELAN, HARMANBECKER basically share
the market (>80%) but have different positions in
different markets.5
The issues with PNDs are that they have to be fixed on
the front windscreen, that the fixing has to be left to the
customers with the problem that the customer ignores
the recommendations from the NDM for safer positions
5
Statements made by NDF members.
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 23 of 56
2770
Many systems give the customer a wide range of
additional services (different voices, music, video
players, audio books, hands-free mobile phone
connection via Bluetooth) also causing distraction when
activated while driving. Hardware lifetime is principally
shorter than for integrated systems.
The advantage of these systems is their competitively
pricing - with prices ranging from below € 100 to € 500.
They are, from a technology point of view, state-of-the
art and feature latest developments within a period of
about 6 months. This includes touch screen technology,
speed information, speed limits and alert, environmental
routing, etc. It can also be expected that they will be
used to collect traffic information (e.g. floating device
data) and to offer e.g. eCall and tolling functionality.
6
New developments integrate TMC antenna in the foot of the docking station or in the
device itself. Charging remains an issue.
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 24 of 56
so that field of view is narrowed (conflict with Field o
View Directive) or customer fixing interferes with airbag
deployment channels. Another issue comes from the
loosely hanging cables for recharging and TMC6. Due to
its position on the windscreen sunlight reflection is a key
issue. As it is fixed at arm length it is more difficult to
operate and causes distraction. The screen is also small
in comparison to integrated systems resulting in smaller
figures and numbers. Low battery capacity restricts
usage outside the vehicle e.g. for sightseeing and
walking tours in cities. Several devices need a relatively
long time to establish a GPS connection, especially after
starting the system in narrow streets with high buildings
or dense forest areas. This constrains their use
especially in unknown areas. The same problem is
caused by heat reflecting coated front screens, which
could cause delays of up to 45 minutes with
permanently loosing the signal afterwards.
The growing number of mobile phones and smartphones
with integrated GPS and navigation functionality
represents a potential business threat for nomadic
device manufacturers, but also give new business
opportunities (sales of navigation software, etc.).
According to Canalys, in the third quarter of 2008 more
GPS smart phones were sold in Europe than PNDs. For
example, the mobile phone manufacturer Nokia is
already the third largest supplier of mobile navigation
solutions in Europe, all platforms combined, behind
TomTom and Garmin.
Mid-range mobile phones will be equipped with GPS
chipsets in late 2009.
Today, however, only 3% of all mobile phone customers
in Germany actively use GPS (location based services) in
their phones.
With regard to the European smart phone market with
navigation software the market research group Canalys
reported that the sales of such products already tripled
in the first half of 2006 in comparison to the same
period the year before from 166 to 465 thousand units
while the market for mobile navigation only doubled.
Mainly so-called "Off board- or Online-Navigation
Systems", which gained the majority in the second
quarter of 2006, become more and more relevant.
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 25 of 56
3.4 Smartphones & Handhelds with
Navigation Functionality
Three out of four of the strongest suppliers for
smartphones offer these solutions solely or partly
online.
The company Jentro with its online solution
"activepilot" lead the market in Europe in 2006 with
30.4 % market share (Germany: 60% share). Together
with Wayfinder (10.3%), Telmap (9.2%), and
Webraska (5.5%) they reach more than 55% of the
smart phone navigation market.
The negative side of most smartphones is that when
used in a vehicle they can seriously draw attention away
from the driving tasks. Too many services, still available
when driving, have nothing to do with the driving task
like Internet access, TV, downloading of information,
SMS, emails, music, etc. and could cause critical
distraction. Screens are normally very small, keyboards
are challenging and numbers and characters are tiny.
When used for in-vehicle navigation and placed in
dashboard holders they are far from meeting the
requirements of the ESoP. Furthermore, navigation
software is charged and any download of actual traffic
information or map updates cost extra money.
As smartphones are mobile phones their usage in a
vehicle is normally forbidden when used non-hands-free.
On the positive side, they are pretty efficient from the
technology point of view; they are all-rounder and have
special benefits when navigating outside the vehicle.
From price point of view hardware prices have come
down significantly and range from below € 100 to about
€ 450 without a mobile phone contract; otherwise e.g. in
Germany they cost zero together with (rather expensive)
contract.
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 26 of 56
These systems do not store the map data on the device
itself but download the routes via GPRS or UMTS
respectively from a central server instead.
About 43,000 people were killed in road traffic collisions
in the European Union in 2007. This is 11,000 fewer
than in 2001 but for the first time since the adoption of
the EU target, 2007 saw hardly any reduction compared
with the previous year. If recent trends continue, the
European Union will reach its target only in 2017. While
the former EU-15 taken together will reach the target in
2013 if it maintains progress so far, slowest progress
has been made in Central and Eastern European
countries.
Figure 2: Estimated Trends in road deaths in EU27, based on
developments 2001-2007 (ETSC 2008a)
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 27 of 56
4. Road Safety & Nomadic Devices
The experience of the best performing nations suggests
that the key to their success has been their unrelenting
struggle against major road offences such as:
o Drink driving,
o Speeding and
o Non-use of seat belts
and their investments in infrastructure improvements.
New vehicle safety technologies also made a major
positive contribution in general. As market penetration
rates, geographic fleet composition and car park age
structure, however, are different between the Member
States the impact of new safety technologies differs
considerably from market to market.
In no statistics, however, an indication could be found
that the increased use of nomadic navigation systems
leads to a safety hazard due to unsafe fixing or
distraction.
Taking a look at the PND share distribution among
major West European countries and by comparing it
with fatal accident reduction trends, it becomes clear
that there is no correlation between the two.
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 28 of 56
Figure 3: Percentage change in road deaths between
2001 and 2007 (ETSC, 2008a)
In February 2007 the Dutch independent research
institute TNO carried out a research on this topic. The
objective of this research was to find an answer to one
central question:
What effects does the use of navigation systems have
on traffic safety?
In order to find the right answer to this, the following
five research questions were formulated:
o Does a navigation system have an influence on the
number of accident claims and the claim costs?
o Does using a navigation system increase the driver’s
alertness and reduce stress?
o Does driving behavior change when a navigation
system is used?
o Is the workload on drivers reduced when they use a
navigation system while driving?
o Does using a navigation system reduce the number
of kilometers driven?
The respondents of the test indicated the brand of
navigation used. Minimum 64% of the navigation
products were of PND manufacturers only. The
remaining products were from manufacturers producing
OEM, Aftermarket and PND navigation units. The
estimated percentage of PNDs used in the test is
between 65-85% and this means that there was a
dominant presence of PNDs in the test.
The results are based on 106,799 car lease drivers and
128,555 records. Duration of the test was half a year.
The percentage of cars with navigation was 10.5%; not
necessarily always switched on while driving.
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 29 of 56
5. HMI Achievements for Safe Integration
Satellite navigation systems have a positive influence on
road safety. Drivers without navigation submit 12%
more claims and claim 5% more cost than drivers with
navigation. Navigation systems support the driver as:
o 65% of the users agreed that they are more in
control during their trip
o About 75% also feel less stressed and calmer
when driving
o The majority mentioned that workload is
reduced when driving in an unfamiliar area
and that the system makes it easier to keep
attention on the road.
Other important findings relate to mobility and showed
that the mean distance and time traveled to reach the
destination was shorter. The study also showed that the
halt time was shorter and that fewer stops were made
when driving with a navigation system.
An actual study (07/2009) carried out in Germany by
NAVTEQ, tracking 2,100 individual trips with over 20,000
km of driving and over 500 hours of driving time, using
three reference groups (w/o navigation, with navigation,
with navigation plus traffic information) showed that
when using navigation the average driver could increase
fuel efficiency by 12%, drove nearly 2,500 km less each
year and saved fuel costs of € 416 per year.
5.1.1 User Experiences
A survey study in USA, DE, FR, UK, IT and ES shows
that approximately 60% of the navigation users
indicated to agree with the statement ‘you feel safer in
your car when driving with a navigation system’. The
score of non-navigation users was significantly lower. In
each country the score of non-navigation users was
significantly lower- 18% to 48% versus 54% and 70%
per individual country. Exact details are shown in Figure
4.
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 30 of 56
5.1 Key Research Results
The survey shows that in the mentioned countries:
•
•
•
•
62% - 85% feels
navigation
68% - 75% feels
with navigation
65% - 80% feels
navigation
48% - 75% feels
on the road
less stressed while driving with
calmer in the car while driving
more in control while driving with
it easier to keep her/his attention
5.1.2 PND Safety Advantages
Personal Navigation Devices have additional safety
advantages specific for the product type. Trip
destinations do not have to be entered in the car. Users
can take PNDs with them to enter the destinations at a
more convenient place at home or in the office. This will
have impact on entering complete addresses while
driving. If PNDs are mounted in accordance with the
instructions of the manufacturer there may be a positive
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 31 of 56
Figure 4: Customer statements on Nomadic Device
usage
5.1.3 Supportive Functionality and
Precautions
All new launched PNDs will be accomplished with
instructions for safe fixation of the device in the car.
PNDs offer the opportunity to disable functionality while
driving. Entering full addresses will be impossible and
menu structures of the HMI are restricted to driver’s
support.
State of the art PNDs will alert drivers when exceeding
the maximum speed or alert drivers in the proximity of
schools or children’s crossovers. Advanced lane guidance
support drivers change lane in time. Figure 5 shows an
example of lane keeping and speed warning.
Figure 5: Advanced PND features
On-line traffic and traveler information services are
primarily developed to support navigation and to inform
the driver reliably about the time arrival. The accuracy
and reliability of the traffic information of the secondeSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 32 of 56
impact on driver distraction as display and road can be
monitored simultaneously. The nomadic characteristic of
PNDs can positively impact on safety since users that are
frequently changing cars (e.g. persons who frequently
use rental cars for business or leisure) are able to use
their own PND, with which they are familiar, in different
cars.
5.1.4 Product Achievements
There are three categories of product safety:
1. The intrinsic impact of safety by Personal Navigation
Devices,
2. The impact achieved by the implementation of the
recommendations of the ESoP 2008/653/EC and
3. The impact of added eSafety functionality.
An evaluation showed that in the area of passive safety
most guidelines could be implemented by the PND
sector itself without any cooperation with other sectors.
In some cases it is difficult –if not impossible- for PND
sector to implement the solution with potentially the
highest traffic safety impact without the support of other
sectors. If such cooperation cannot be achieved the
intention should be to strive for the next best solution
and not to restrict the use of PNDs. Latter case would
destroy the intrinsic traffic safety impact of Navigation in
a mass market and this will have a significant negative
impact on traffic safety.
The NDM partners consulted in the past expert
organizations for advice. An example of such advice is
TNO memorandum TNO-DV3 2006 M048 dated 27 July
2006 of authors: M.H. Martens, A.J.K. Oudenhuizen,
W.H. Janssen, M. Hoedemaeker. TomTom used the
recommendations in the mounting solution, mounting
instructions and human machine interfaces.
5.2 Fixing of Devices
State of the art is that all PNDs of the NDM partners are
accomplished with mounting instructions for safe
positioning and mounting in the car. As long as these
instructions are followed the most optimal safety
situation is achieved for window mounted PNDs. In our
view only a standardized electro mechanical interface
would improve the current situation slightly as it
eliminates the influence of the users.
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 33 of 56
generation services is good enough to inform the driver
on hazardous situations as e.g. approaching the tale of
congestion at bad visibility (curve, hill, fog, etc.).
The NDM believe that a lot of mechanical passive safety
issues can be solved when the PND is fixed at the short
windscreen site (EU continent: Left Side, UK: Right Side)
especially related to Field of View (FoV) and potential
risk for the driver to be hit in case of an accident.
For practical reason it is recommended to use this
position for mounting from now onwards; campaigns to
create awareness should be considered.
As a second step it is recommended to study which
percentage of the large volume cars cause FoV
problems.
Based on the outcome there are two options:
o Percentage is acceptable -> no additional
requirements in ESoP
o Percentage is not acceptable -> develop and
standardize « NAVIFix »
The German Public Authorities (BMVBS/BASt) initiated
activities to support the implementation of the
ESoP/653/EC. The working group FKT-SA-PSS dealt with
passive safety and derived a list of requirements for
PNDs from the OEM requirements list. Tests were
executed on several products of the NDM partners
recently and only minor problems were found and
meanwhile solved.
References to international standards give for some of
the rules in ESoP 2008/653/EC limits to meet, but most
HMI rules indicate softer design principles. This is done
deliberately. It provides the necessary freedom to the
HMI designer to compromise differently between simple
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 34 of 56
As a result of REACH legislation and environmental
requirements new synthetic materials had to be used
with as consequence the window docking stations had to
be re-designed to meet the desired cohesion
requirements again. Meanwhile all launched new
products of the NDM partners fulfill this requirement.
6. Open Issues & Potential Improvements
6.1 Problems with Products in the Market
In addition to TMC navigation that obviates traffic jams,
mobile navigation device OEMs equip their products with
additional features such as MP3 players, picture viewers,
video players and DVB-T receivers. Also, the scope of
map coverage increases constantly. Even lane guidance,
speed limits and 3-D representation of buildings are now
possible.
However, the value of premium additional features is
questionable when the quality of the basic functions is
not good enough or on-screen representation is so small
as to be illegible.
Buyers are offered none but the most general
information on where to install the device without
cluttering their field of view or keep them far enough
away from the airbags to prevent them being projected
in the cabin when airbags are released in a crash.
ADAC testers found shaky mounts and devices, which
dropped from the windscreen altogether because the
suction cups were not strong enough to hold;
connection and antenna wires cluttering the dashboard
and steering wheel or being in the way.
Testing conducted by TÜV Rheinland has confirmed that
in many cases the mounts themselves, the connections
between the devices and the mounts or the suction cups
and the windscreens will not withstand the deceleration
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 35 of 56
and more complex HMI concepts. NDM stakeholders
have evaluated their HMI concepts and concluded that
most of the rules are fulfilled. There are difficulties to
meet the minimum character size requirements and the
contrast of the display. Differentiation is made between
primary and secondary information to be displayed. The
primary information fulfils the requirement in most
cases. Display contrast is a more problematic decision.
NDM is concerned that the extra costs will disturb
market position. The price gap between compliant and
non-compliant PNDs will increase; less safe products will
conquer the EU market.
Other issues of major interest include driver distraction
and the operability of the devices while driving. At
certain speeds, some devices on the market
automatically shift from the map display to arrow-only
display, thus minimizing the output of information.
Using the devices while driving represents a high safety
risk, since, depending on the devices’ position, the
drivers may have to avert their eyes completely from the
road ahead.
The range of devices tested by ADAC included one with
DVB-T functionality, which can receive up to 30 TV
programs, depending on the quality of the reception. For
safety reasons, the OEM specified the device to display
TV programs only when stationary. From a very low
speed the reception switches to audio only.
Some of the devices come without or with incomplete
user instructions. Often, this information is available only
on a CD-Rom or must be downloaded on the Internet.
There are still motorists, who do not have access to the
Internet to print manuals. The complexity of some
manuals makes it also quite costly to print the entire
document. This aspect weighs even heavier when the
basic operation of the devices is not intuitive.
6.2 Missing Common Standard(s)
There are no EU regulations yet on retrofitting vehicles
with navigation devices. There is only the COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION of 26 May 2008 on Safe and
Efficient In-vehicle Information and Communication
Systems: Update of the European Statement of
Principles on Human-Machine Interface (2008/653/EC)
providing general recommendations.
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 36 of 56
loads impacting them in a crash. In such a case the
navigation devices can turn into projectiles that are a
serious threat for a car occupant.
In this case, the state of the art includes the standards
applicable to the factory equipment of vehicles
throughout the EU.
The requirements are:
o
o
o
Stability of the mount and the PDA, the laptop or
displays under deceleration forces in line with
Council Directive 74/408/EEC and/or ECER17;
testing of mounted device in a sled test at 20g over
30ms.
Positioning with paying attention to airbag
deployment: there must be no interaction between
airbags and navigation devices.
Positioning relative to the driver’s field of view in line
with 77/649/EEC and/or for German utility vehicles
§35b StVZO. Devices must not restrict the driver’s
direct field of vision.
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 37 of 56
In Germany, the Road Traffic Licensing Regulation
(StVZO) makes provisions for installing retrofit
equipment where this requires the use of tools.
Retrofitting vehicles is covered under §19 StVZO that
deals with the after-sale alteration of vehicles and
vehicle parts in general. §19 section 2 explicitly provides
that the authorisation to operate a vehicle expires if the
alteration is liable to cause a hazard and if no positive
expertise or permit is obtained.
While the owner of a vehicle is responsible to install only
tested parts, the manufacturer is responsible for the
safety of the parts in line with the state of the art.
o
o
o
Testing display, device functionality, and operation
in line with the update of the European Statement of
Principles
on
human-machine
interface
(2008/653/EC).
Requirements lay out in Council Directive
72/245/EEC on electromagnetic compatibility must
be met.
Energy dissipation and shatter-proofness in line with
ECE-R21 and/or 74/60/EEC and/or for German utility
vehicles §30 StVZO. There must be no shattering, no
sharp rupture edges in the impact area, no
acceleration in excess of 80g for longer than 3ms.
Radiuses in line with ECE-R21 and/or 74/60/EEC.
Any edges in the head impact area, which can be
reached by a ball with a diameter of 165mm, must
be rounded with radiuses of at least 2.5mm and
must be constructed to absorb energy (cf. above).
Materials with a hardness of less than 50 Shore A
are deemed absent. The structure below them must
be assessed. If installed on the dashboard outside
the head impact area, the reachable radius must not
be less than 3.2mm. For German utility vehicles §30
StVZO applies (no dangerous edges).
For suction cup mounts, the legal situation in Germany is
somewhat different. The same requirements apply to
the suction-cup installation of a navigation device, which
also apply to a roof rack or to securing the cargo.
Manufacturers are bound by the product safety act.
o
The component must be safe in line with the state of
the art.
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 38 of 56
o
6.3 Field of View7
When the media reported about motorists being indicted
for installing mobile navigation devices in a manner
obstructing their view, the Zurich municipal police
started receiving inquiries on how to install such devices
safely. A memorandum dated 24 October 2007 was
published to explain the legal requirements applicable in
Switzerland and to show where mobile navigation
devices can be installed without posing a threat to road
safety.
Applicable Legal Requirements
a.
Obstruction of the field of view
The drivers of motor vehicles must ensure that in their
vehicle the field of view is not obstructed. The regulation
on technical requirements for vehicles (VTS8) specifies
in Art. 71 section 5 (see Figure 6):
“Assuming the level of a driver’s eyes to be 0.75m above
the level of the seat, the driver must be able to freely
view the road ahead outside a 12.0m radius. [...]”
In addition to the provision above, Art. 71 section 4 VTS
also comes into play. It requires that windows ensuring
command of the road allow clear and undistorted view.
b. Driver distraction
The unobstructed view notwithstanding, the driver must
refrain from any activity, which might interfere with the
operation of the vehicle (Art. 31 section. 1 SVG9 and Art.
7
Zurich municipal police memorandum of 24 October 2007
VTS=Verordnung über die Technischen Anforderungen an Strassenfahrzeuge (Swiss
regulation on technical requirements for road vehicles).
9
SVG=Strassenverkehrsgesetz (Swiss RoadTraffic Act).
8
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 39 of 56
o
The state of the art includes the requirements listed
above.
The driver is responsible for positioning the device.
3 section 1 VRV10). Drivers must ensure that using the
navigation devices does not distract them from driving.
Confirming the position of the Zurich municipal police
and in line with the position of ASTRA (the Swiss Federal
Road Agency), the law may be interpreted as follows:
A good view of the road ahead is essential for road
safety. Windows ensuring command of the road include
the windscreen and the front side windows. No stickers
or sun shades may be attached to them, except for the
mandatory items or items expressly specified by law
(e.g. toll stickers, LSVA11 transponders, interior mirror
and sun visors).
Under certain circumstances, the installation of today’s
commercial navigation devices on or against the
windscreen may be tolerated, since the devices serve a
justified purpose; reducing search time. If used
correctly, navigation devices can increase road safety by
providing information about road signs or about the
course of the road.
Using a navigation device must not pose any risks for
other road users, e.g. because the driver’s view is
obstructed.
In accordance with “Art. 71 section 5 VTS” the
navigation device must not obstruct the field of view
specified therein. This means that the driver must be
able to see an object on the road 12m or more ahead.
Devices mounted to the centre of the windscreen do not
comply with this requirement: they create a dangerously
large blind spot (Figure 14).
Based on the above considerations, the Swiss authorities
deem installations at the upper or lower edges of the
windscreen acceptable. Notably, if installed in the angle
between the dashboard and the glass at the lower edge
of the windscreen, today’s commercial products do not
interfere much or at all with the mandatory field of
vision ahead of the vehicle (12m radius).
10
11
VRV=Verkehrsregelnverordnung (Swiss Traffic Regulations).
LSVA=Leistungsabhängige Schwerverkehrsabgabe (Swiss/Liechtenstein HGV toll).
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 40 of 56
6.4 Interpretation of the Law
When it comes to the ban against distraction, the
situation is similar to that of using mobile phones while
driving. For instance, it is not admissible to enter a new
destination into the navigation device while driving.
Field of view to keep clear
Figure 6: View ahead (Art. 71 section 5 VTS)
(Source: Merkblatt der Stadtpolizei vom 24. Oktober 2007)
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 41 of 56
Navigation device
12x18cm
approx. 60cm from
the driver’s head
Obstruction of view
Obstruction of view at 15m
•approx. 2m vertical section
•approx. 3m horizontal section
Ob
s tr
uc
ti
on
o
fv
iew
Navigation device
12x18cm
approx. 60cm from
the driver’s head
Figure 7: Obstruction of view by navigation device
(Source: Municipal police memorandum of 24 October 2007)
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 42 of 56
6.5 Potential Solutions, their Barriers and
Benefits
The ND Forum feels that a study should be conducted to
show the percentage of the existing fleet in which the
installation of navigation devices in the lower left area of
the windshield would interfere with the field of view.
Such a study could also determine the extent of the
blind spot in the mandatory field of view caused by the
currently available navigation devices.
Another possibility would be to mark the windscreen in
type approval (4° line below which obstructions of view
are tolerable).
In line with the requirements of the Recast Directive, the
vehicle manufacturers could specify positions for the ND
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 43 of 56
6.5.1 Technical Issues
o
o
o
o
Coated windscreen glass issues could be overcome
by connection to internal vehicle antenna.
As an option for future development, the work group
discussed the introduction of standardised “NAVIFix”
installation points (like those for ISOFIX child seat
attachment points). This would provide the
possibility of compliance with existing field of view
regulations, finding a safe spot relative to airbag
deployment and to ensure the crash-safe installation
of the device and connection with the on-board
circuits without lose wiring and aerials. Various
categories of installation points (on top of or at the
front of the dashboard, large/small vehicle) would
also allow the adaptation of the scale of the onscreen display. This idea presents a certain potential
and could be a solution for the future development
of vehicles and navigation devices.
The work group would also like to point to the CE4A
(Consumer Electronics for Automotive) integration
work group, with which the ND Forum has
established contacts in view of developing a
standard electrical/electronic interface.
This work group believes that the above idea and its
potential for the development of vehicle and
navigation devices should be pursued in
international bodies.
One possible step in this direction would be
amendments to the Council Directive 74/60/EC and ECER21.
The German work group listed the following in-car
installation requirements for ND:
a. Compliance with the ≥3.2mm radius, energy
absorption of 80g/3ms, and shatter-proofness in line
with 74/60/EEC / ECE-R21
b. Compliance with 77/649/EEC and/or §35b StVZO
(field of view)
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 44 of 56
manufacturers in which nomadic devices can be installed
ensuring that there is no interference with the field of
view or with airbag deployment.
Items b) and c) stand out as potentially problematic and
costly. In this respect, only vehicle-specific agreements
are likely to be achieved.
The results of this work group were presented to,
discussed and basically endorsed in the ND Forum. The
ND manufacturers need closer cooperation with the
vehicle manufacturers, notably with a view to items b)
and c).
6.5.2 Standardisation
6.5.2.1
Human Machine Interface
The HMI of an in-car information system has a
significant effect on driving safety. In order to minimize
distraction from the primary driving task, HMI design
and evaluation should be built on a consistent and
internationally agreed set of principles and criteria. The
ESoP has been prepared to meet this need. While the
high-level principles within the ESoP leave considerable
room for innovation and flexibility, they do not foster
standardized evaluation and certification processes.
It would thus be worthwhile to specify a concrete set of
measures and procedures for the evaluation and
certification of HMIs.
Benefits:
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 45 of 56
c. Safe positioning relative to airbags
d. Sled test 20g/30ms conducted according to ECE-R17,
Appendix 7
e. Compliance with 72/245/EEC (electro-magnetic
compatibility)
f. Review of display, functionality and operability in line
with the update of the European Statement of
Principles
on
human-machine
interface
(2008/653/EC)
g. Compliance with the Council Resolution of 17
December 1998 on operating instructions for
technical consumer goods
h. Compliance with the Council Directive 2001/95/EC of
3 December 2001 on general product safety.
Results of various product tests relying on such a test
procedure would be better comparable and thus provide
more transparent guidance for consumers.
Barriers:
•
Automobile manufacturers are currently reluctant to
promote standardized measurement procedures
with unique target figures to compare individual
products against or to have products certified.
•
Building such a certification procedure requires
high efforts of all parties involved. Although much
relevant material is available that can be taken as a
reference, some further empirical research would
be needed to validate a sound test methodology
and to establish documentation and awareness. For
such activities, public funding on the European
level would be necessary. 6.5.2.2
PND Connector
As a common connection interface, a PND connector
should be integrated in the centre console. A technical
sample of this solution is already on the market (Fiat
500). The nomadic device manufacturer could provide a
brand-specific connector to connect the brand-specific
PND to the car interface.
As a minimum requirement, the interface should provide
switched power. Optionally, FM aerial access for TMC,
access to the CAN bus and to the sound system might
complete the interface.
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 46 of 56
Nomadic device manufacturers could be supported in
self-certification for meeting ESoP rules and to
differentiate from non-compliant devices.
When travelling with company cars or rental cars,
destinations can be entered prior to the trip, which is
safer than entering them while driving and more
comfortable than entering the destination just before
starting.
Barriers:
Currently the automotive industry is not willing to
provide a standardised connector. From their point of
view, designated bilateral business relations are
preferable.
6.5.2.3
Database Access
Information for installation with windscreen mount or
aftermarket centre console mount systems.
Installation of nomadic devices can cause safety-relevant
problems, which cannot be managed by the nomadic
device manufacturers without support from the
automobile industry. One aspect is the field of view,
which might be affected if the nomadic device is
installed in the wrong place. Another issue is the airbag
deployment area as airbags might interact with installed
nomadic devices in case of an accident.
For new cars, it would be preferable if a safe installation
area would be specified in the car user manual as long
as no standardised area is available for nomadic devices.
Benefits:
Safe installation of nomadic devices.
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 47 of 56
Benefits:
Personal navigation systems can be used in different
cars (company car, second family car or rental car).
When a familiar system is used, driver distraction is
decreased compared to an unknown system such as an
OEM system or a nomadic device from a rental car
company.
For cars already on the market, a database provided by
the car manufacturers might be helpful.
Alternatively, third parties such as technical service
providers could provide such data to the ND
manufacturer. The technical service provider could
perform practical tests to check where it is possible to
install nomadic devices in a way that they do not
interfere with the airbag systems and do not cause blind
spots in the mandatory field of view. Such tests could be
funded by a consortium of ND manufacturers.
7. Road Map
Most passive safety requirements can be solved by the
PND manufacturer, but for safer in-vehicle fixation the
support of the car makers is needed. Therefore safe
fixation is part of the road map.
Prior to the roadmap definition discussion took place on
potential safe mounting solutions. Following potential
safe fixation solutions were discussed:
1. Mounting instructions in the user manual of the
PND
2. Mounting instructions in the user manual of the
car
3. Look-up datebase with car model specific
mounting instructions for the users
4. Proprietary in-vehicle PND mounting facilities of
the car makers
5. Standardized electro-mechanical interface NaviFix
All these potential solutions were cross-examined on
following criteria:
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 48 of 56
Barriers:
Currently, the automotive industry is reluctant to provide
information for a safe installation area for nomadic
devices. Possibly an EU Directive would be an option.
Field of View
Airbag areas
Specific versus generic solutions
User influence
Additional effects
This resulted in the following conclusions:
Mounting instructions in the user manual of PNDs is
state of the art. Most PND manufacturer consulted an
expert organization to guide them. TomTom followed
the advice of TNO made in report TNO – DV3 2006
M048 dated June 27, 2006. The recommendation is to
mount the PND as low as possible on the windscreen at
the left side of the steering wheel (in UK the right side).
For MPVs the small side window is recommended. See
both pictures below. All members of the NDM have
similar instructions in the user manual of their products.
Figure 8: Recommended mounting place for passenger cars
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 49 of 56
•
•
•
•
•
This is the best possible car model generic mounting
instruction to give. There are still two safety relevant
uncertainties namely the positions of the airbags and the
influence of the user. It is the expectation that only in a
small number of car models “Field of View” requirements
will not met for a few centimeter maximum.
Mounting instructions in the user manual of the car do
solve the airbag issue, but the user influence can not be
minimized.
The look-up database is comparable with the previous
option. There are higher costs involved to create and
maintain the database but the influence of end-users
cannot be minimized. Customers can still ignore
mounting instructions.
A standardized electro-mechanical interface (NaviFix) is
the best possible solution for safe fixation of PNDs. Car
makers decide on the mounting position and this will per
definition result in the best option for “Field of View” and
avoid contact with airbags. The influence of the user is
minimized as the position of the PND is predefined by
the car maker. Furthermore, NaviFix has two additional
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 50 of 56
Figure 9: Recommended mounting place for small vans and
MPVs
Usage of the proprietary mounting precautions of the
car makers is a solution for a small fraction of personal
cars. Only the cars equipped with such a propietary
solution will benefit and this is below 10%.
Sa
fe
Ra ty Im
nk p
in act
g
en
ce
Ad
di
t
i
be on
ne al
fit
s
nf
lu
rI
ci f
ic
Sp
e
>85%
>85%
no
large
1
4
User Manual Car
100%
100%
yes
large
2
2
Look-up table
95%
100%
yes
large
4
3
Proprietary car solution
100%
100%
yes
small*1
Cables ?
3
5
Navifix
100%
100%
yes
small*1
No cables
Veh.cat.
5
1
*1 Remaining
Us
e
Ca
r
gs
Ai
rb
a
User Manual PND
d
Fi
el
of
Vi
ew
This argumentation is summarized in the table below:
Short
term
Long
term
user influence is size of device.
In addition to passive safety also HMI aspects were
considered basically in the NDF. Some HMI requirements
are hard or not measurable. Other requirements may
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 51 of 56
safety benefits. There are no cables hanging around in
the car and it offers the option to distinguish between
the type of vehicles in which a PND is used. This can be
done mechanically or electrically. This categorization
enables PND manufacturers to enable and disable
software per vehicle type. E.g. disable small urban
streets for lorries. Point of discussion is the “Field of
View” for different sizes of PNDs and other Nomadic
Devices. Or with other words, how to prevent customers
worsening “Field of View” with too large Nomadic Device
sizes for the choosen NaviFix position?
All described elements are part of the proposed road
map of the NDF, which is shown below. The reader
should realize that this is a best case road map. Delays
in the eSafety HMI WG, the establishment of a
certification process and verification criteria as well as
the development of NaviFix may delay milestones in the
road map.
HMI certification
HMI certification
Verification methods
Criteria for hard requirements and
Guidelines for soft requirements
ESoP update
HMI WG
ESoP
draft
ESoP
launch
18 months period
Status Report
Input for HMI WG
08
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Safe mounting instructions in user manual of PND & transition adaptation
Safe mounting instructions in user manual of car
Nomadic Device
Forum
Standardization
NaviFIX
NaviFix
Figure 10: Proposed Roadmap
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 52 of 56
change depending on compromises to be made if the
number of applications running on the same HMI
increase. For the part that is measurable certification is
possible and recommended. For the more flexible part
implementation guidelines are needed to instruct HMI
designers. This part may also be subject of a more
flexible way of certification. The HMI subject is the core
activity of the eSafety HMI WG and will be addressed in
this group.
•
Implement the four passive safety related
recommendations of chapter 4 in the ESoP update.
•
Until more sophisticated future fixation solutions are
available nomadic device manufacturers should
recommend to their customers to fix a nomadic
device on the left lower corner of the windscreen or
for cars with fixed side windows (MPV, etc.) on this
side windscreen.
•
Start campaigns to create customer awareness on
safe mounting of Nomadic Devices. This is a joint
effort of NDMs, user organizations, insurances and
public authorities.
•
There is only representation of the PND industry in
the ESoP discusssion. Get other Nomadic Device
manufacturers involved.
•
The EC needs to approach the market leaders and/or
associations of the other ND sectors.
•
Start standardization for safe fixing (NaviFix)
•
Start developing a Certification Process for the hard
and measureable ESoP requirements and guidelines
for the softer requirements which are subject to
change with the integration degree of functionality in
the same device.
•
Certification of HMI to be based on minimum ‘state
of the art’ limits in a yes/no procedure.
•
While safe fixing and integration of nomadic devices
for future vehicles will probably be solved by closer
cooperation, safe fixing of such devices for the
existing vehicles park requires an exchange of
information with regard to less critical positions
(field of view, airbag deployment channels).
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 53 of 56
8. Recommendations
Provide full support for Field Operational tests
•
Last but not least all nomadic device manufacturers
should sign the “Letter of Compliances” with ESoP
requirements as already by some12
This report can provide the basis for strategic decisions
by nomadic device manufacturers and other
stakeholders but cannot replace company specific
strategic decisions.
12
For Letter of Compliance see Annex I
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 54 of 56
•
Letter of Intent
Nomadic Device Manufacturers
The main objective of the Nomadic Device Forum for 2008 was getting a
Memorandum of Understanding signed by the main stakeholders. Signing would
indicate the intention of the stakeholder to implement under voluntary conditions
the European Statement of Principle (ESoP) ref. 2007/78/EC.
Close to signing date one industry sector concluded that there was no need for it
to sign this Memorandum of Understanding. Instead a Letter of Intent was
proposed and agreed. The EC would appreciate to receive a Letter of Intent from
car industry and the nomadic device manufacturers.
This Letter of Intent contains the intentions of the PND sector cooperating under
Nomadic Device Manufacturers (NDM). The current members of the NDM are:
Garmin, Harman/Becker, Medion, Navigon, and TomTom. Other PND
manufacturers are welcome to join.
It is the intention of the NDM to implement the ESoP on a voluntary basis as far
as the described rules of the ESoP can be implemented without support of others.
This is applicable for most of the ESoP rules. Approximately 80% of the requirements
are fulfilled already in current products. A better estimate is not possible at this stage
as some rules are vague, subjective, and not measurable.
Despite some negative publicity around Nomadic Devices it can be stated that
navigation devices contributes to traffic safety with 12% less accidents and 5% less
insurance claims13.
Suggestions were made in the past to forbid PND use in cars. The consequence of such
decision would be that all traffic safety achievements would be destroyed and
navigation would be unavailable for the mass of vehicle users. Therefore the NDM
strongly recommends improving products to better comply with ESoP.
It is the intention of the NDM to work jointly with the car industry to develop
safer PND in-vehicle installation solutions reflecting business models viable for
both sectors.
A safe mounting place has to safeguard a collision free area for activated airbags with
minimum loss in Field of View. Support from the car industry and/or certified type
approval organizations will assist in finding the most suitable mounting place per car
brand, model and type.
13
TNO report 2007-D-R0048; Title: Do navigation systems improve traffic safety?
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 55 of 56
Annex I – Letter of Intent
Exceptions for Field of View may need to be allowed to bridge the gap with the long
term final solutions and allow existing PND products to be used.
For example, eCall would e.g. require the airbag activation signal from the car. The
alternative would be an After Market crash sensor.
It is the intention of the NDM to support those Nomadic Device Forum activities
that have the support of the car industry and the European Commission.
It is the intention of the NDM to support actively the update of the existing ESoP
in the eSafety Forum HMI Working Group.
The NDM expects the European Commission -the initiator of this safety initiativeto adopt a neutral attitude to in built, after market and PND devices. The NDM
notes that negative statements and/or campaigns about Personal Navigation
Devices may jeopardize the safety initiative and a fruitful implementation.
The NDM appreciates an open and timely discussion with the car industry on
technical and business critical criteria.
Viable business concepts are a prerequisite of efficient and successful implementation.
The NDM would welcome a clarification of the European eCall Implementation
Platform about eCall implementation in PNDs.
This clarification is necessary after negative publicity about PNDs from a European
Commission spokesman leading to a perception in the NDM that eCall will not be
allowed in PND. The clarification will justify opening discussions and negotiations with
the car industry in the Nomadic Device Forum on airbag activation signal accessibility.
Company:
…………………………………………………………
Name:
…………………………………………………………
Date:
………………………………………………………..
Signature:
………………………………………………………….
eSafety Forum
Final Report
June 2009
Page 56 of 56
It is the intention of the NDM to support eSafety functionality if business
models allow and required connectivity to car can be guaranteed.

Nomadic Device Forum – Final Report

Transcription

Similar documents

MFHutton

TruPay HR Forum.cdr

McGuffey`s 3rd Reader - Eclectic Education Series

NCHN Discussion Forum [SETUP INSTRUCTIONS] The NCHN

ILA Conference Center, GOLF Thursday, 2 June 2016

Creating in Moodle “Assignments”

Creating a Forum

Network Annual Report 2014 - Forest Youth Workers Network

San Marcos CISD

We encourage you to register early to enjoy the new year special