Developing an Operational Concept Framework to support government policy and regulation on Connected and Automated Vehicles | 1

Developing an Operational Concept Framework to support government policy and regulation on

Connected and Automated Vehicles

AMPEAK-2017 Brisbane / Richard Fullalove / 5 April 2017

April 2017

Developing an Operational Concept Framework to support government policy and regulation on Connected and Automated Vehicles | 2

Key Topics of the OpsCon Framework • Why, and relationship to Asset Management • Levels of automation • Operational context • Operational outcomes • Operational use cases • Operational migration timeline • Operational modes • Operational interfaces • Operational users/actors • Operational zoning • Operational scenarios • Operational risks

Developing an Operational Concept Framework to support government policy and regulation on Connected and Automated Vehicles | 3

Why, and relationship to Asset Management • The OCD tells the "day-in-the-life" story of how the system is expected

to operate in its environment • The OCD defines operations and support assets and resources • The OCD is a valid reference point throughout the system lifetime • The OCD is a living document - regularly reviewed and updated • Transport authority uses OCD to develop high-level policy / regulations

to facilitate controlled introduction of CAVs onto the road network • Road transport authority is not (generally) in the business of designing,

acquiring, operating or maintaining CAVs (private sector) • However, it may need to configure existing road network infrastructure to

facilitate safe introduction of CAVs, including changes to road markings, signs and intelligent transport systems (ITS)

• Thus, the OCD can directly drive the Demand/Need and Planning phases of the Asset lifecycle

Developing an Operational Concept Framework to support government policy and regulation on Connected and Automated Vehicles | 4

CAV Levels of Automation • L0 (No Automation): Automated system has no vehicle control, but may

issue warnings. • L1 (Driver Assistance): Driver must be ready to take control at any time. • L2 (Partial Automation): The driver is obliged to detect objects and

events and respond if the automated system fails to respond properly. • L3 (Conditional Automation): Within known, limited environments (such

as freeways), the driver can safely turn their attention away from driving tasks.

• L4 (High Automation): The automated system can control the vehicle in all but a few environments such as severe weather.

• L5 (Full Automation): Other than setting the destination and starting the system, no human intervention is required in all driving modes

SAE International brochure, "Automated driving - Levels of driving automation are defined in new SAE International Standard J3016"

Developing an Operational Concept Framework to support government policy and regulation on Connected and Automated Vehicles | 5

Operational Context Introduction of CAVs onto the road network needs to be considered within the context of other new or existing network-level systems and associated environment, e.g.: • Public mass transport system (intercity, metro, light rail, bus, ferry) • Smart City initiatives • The “Internet of Things” (IoT) • “Big Data” initiatives • Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS) • Governance & Regulatory Frameworks

• Risk/Safety Assurance Framework • Transport Regulatory Framework • Road Infrastructure Investment Framework

These are all asset groups (including information as an asset) that will be affected and needs to be managed

Developing an Operational Concept Framework to support government policy and regulation on Connected and Automated Vehicles | 6

Operational Outcomes High-level public/private road transport enterprise goals and operational capabilities, e.g.: • Reduced road congestion • Reduced road accidents • Reduced single-user vehicle traffic • Increased human productivity • Improved equitable mobility access

Note: an operational outcome may be a benefit, but also a “dis-benefit”: • Employment threats due to increasing automation replacing humans • Unexpected events that software (AI) cannot interpret

An operational outcome may (or may not) require asset investment

Developing an Operational Concept Framework to support government policy and regulation on Connected and Automated Vehicles | 7

Operational Use Cases Usage scenarios that may exist or be planned for future deployment of CAVs on the road network, e.g.: • Privately-owned • Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS) • Bus Mass Transit • Human Mobility-impaired • Commercial/Freight • Road Asset Management/Maintenance (inspection CAVs?) • …and others

From an asset managers perspective: • Fleet asset managers need to plan, acquire CAVs with right capability • Road asset managers need to plan infrastructure changes (if any)

Developing an Operational Concept Framework to support government policy and regulation on Connected and Automated Vehicles | 8

Operational Migration Timeline Sequence and timing of stages of authorisation and deployment of various levels of vehicle automation (L0 to 5) Across limited geographic locations in the beginning, eventually expanding capability and use of CAVs to the road network

A CAV migration timeline could be: • Current situation: Levels 0, 1, 2 automation prevalent (2017) • Interim future situation 1: Levels 1, 2, and 3 prevalent (say 2025) • Interim future situation 2: Levels 2, 3 and 4 prevalent (say 2035) • Final future situation (nirvana): Level 5 throughout (say beyond 2050)

Road infrastructure asset managers need to plan for road infrastructure changes (if any) to meet CAV capability levels on the migration timeline. CAV fleet owners/operators need to plan service capabilities and asset acquisition.

Developing an Operational Concept Framework to support government policy and regulation on Connected and Automated Vehicles | 9

Operational Modes How CAVs will operate under normal, degraded and emergency modes, the initial conditions that trigger transitions to and from these modes, and how both human and software interact will need to act in a seamless way to ensure that no safety risk arises during these transitions.

Operational modes include: • Normal mode operation (all functions and capabilities available) • Degraded mode operation (degradation or loss of one function) • Emergency mode operation (loss of multiple functions and capability) • Maintenance mode operation

Developing an Operational Concept Framework to support government policy and regulation on Connected and Automated Vehicles | 10

Operational Interfaces

CAV

CAV Maintenance Facility

Vehicle LicensingAuthority

Vehicle Insurer

CAV Vehicle Supplier (software update)

Map Data Agency(Google, Nearmap)

MaaS P2P CAVService Provider

(Uber, Taxis)

Other CAVs

Electronic Road Sign

Intelligent Transport Systems

(SCATS, C-ITS)

CAV Owner/Operator (1st Party)

CAV Owner/Operator (1st Party) CAV

Passengers (2nd Party)

CAV Passengers (2nd Party) Vulnerable

Road Users (3nd Party)

VulnerableRoad Users (3nd Party)

Non-CAVs

EmergencyServices

(Police, Ambulance) Road Authority(Operator/Maintainer)

Mobile DataDevice

Mobile DataDevice

EmergencyServices

Staff

EmergencyServices

Staff

HumanDriversHumanDrivers

HumanUsers/

Operators

HumanUsers/

Operators

Developing an Operational Concept Framework to support government policy and regulation on Connected and Automated Vehicles | 11

Operational Users/Actors Entities (human or machine) that perform an action across an interface that interacts with the operation of the CAV More appropriate to use the term "Actor" than "User", as actors include the user as well as other parties that will need to interact with the CAV Potential actors may include, but are not limited to: • CAV owner/operator (the direct user) • Vulnerable road users (e.g. pedestrians, cyclists) • Emergency services (e.g. police, ambulance, vehicle recovery) • Road operator (public & private/toll) • Vehicle service centre (e.g. “over the air” diagnostic data download) • Vehicle supplier (e.g. “over the air” software updates)

Developing an Operational Concept Framework to support government policy and regulation on Connected and Automated Vehicles | 12

Operational Zoning Designation of physical zones or lanes where a CAV may be permitted to operate at a certain level of automation

Until CAVs are ubiquitous on all road types, zoning may be based on: • Segregated geographic areas (e.g. Level 4/5 on campus areas only) • Separate lanes (e.g. CAV use of existing bus/taxi lanes) • Road types (e.g. >= Level 2 automation only permitted on motorways)

Road asset managers may need to plan for new or altered zones to accommodate CAVs at specific levels of automation, e.g.: • Physical barriers • Lane markings (e.g. “CAV only” or “Level 2 only”) • Signage (e.g. “Select Level 3”) • Virtual (electronic) barriers

Developing an Operational Concept Framework to support government policy and regulation on Connected and Automated Vehicles | 13

Operational Scenarios (1) Describe conceptually how the CAV will behave, operate and interact with its environment, as a "day-in-the-life" story Each scenario is described in a narrative that tells the story about that scenario, how the CAV is expected to behave and respond, and possible variations of that central theme Some examples of how CAVs may be expected to “behave” include: • “Platooning” of CAVs • Traffic Light Intersection scenario • CAV/non-CAV overtaking scenario • Pedestrian encounter • Police encounter • Roadworks encounter • …and many more!

Some scenarios may drive the need for new/altered road infrastructure

Developing an Operational Concept Framework to support government policy and regulation on Connected and Automated Vehicles | 14

Operational Scenarios (2) Some illustrative examples of operational scenarios:

CAV/CAV PlatooningCAV

CAV

CAV

CAVUser

CAVUser

CAVUser

CAV-Electronic Road Signs (/ITS)

CAVUser

CAV

Electronic Road Sign

CAV-Roadworks

TrafficControl

RoadworksTeam

CAVUser

CAV

Response: Stop/Avoid

Caution, road works ahead!

Traffic Light Intersection

NonCAV

CAV

CAV

CAV-Pedestrian

Pedstrian(Obstacle)

CAVUser

CAV

Response: Stop/Avoid

Playing Pokemon GoLalalalalala

Developing an Operational Concept Framework to support government policy and regulation on Connected and Automated Vehicles | 15

Operational Scenarios (3)

Home

CAVOwner

CAV

Home

MaaS P2P Customer

MaaSCAV

CAV

CAV

CAV

CAV(auto fail)???

RecoveryVehicle

CAV(total fail)

NonCAV

CAV

CAV

Non-CAV

CAV

CAV

CAV

CAV

Electronic Road Sign

Pedstrian(Obstacle)

CAV

Playing Pokemon GoLalalalalala

Carjacker(Obstacle)

CAVUser

CAV

Gimme your car and your

money!

Police Officer(Obstacle)

CAVUser

CAV

Stop for a breath test!

CAVUser

CAV

Police Vehicle(Obstacle)

PoliceOfficer

Stop, you nearly collided

with me! TrafficControl

RoadworksTeam

CAV

Caution, road works ahead!

CAV

CAV???

CAV???

CAVUser

Non-CAVDriver

Police

VehicleRecovery Police

Vehicle

CAV

RecoveryVehicle

NonCAV

Police

VehicleRecovery Police

Vehicle

CAV

RecoveryVehicle

CAV

CAV Refuel/RechargeFacility CAV

CAV MaintenanceFacility CAV

CAV RepairFacility CAV

Vehicle LicensingAuthority (RMS) CAV

Vehicle InsurerCAV

MaaS CAVService Provider CAV

CAV SupplierCAV

Road Map Data Supplier

CAV

CAV

Non-CAV CAV

Light RailVehicle

Non-CAV

Train

CAV

X

CAV

Hacker

???

victims

CAVVBIED

Terrorist

SecurityServices

CAV

Toll Gate & Cameras

CAV

RecoveryVehicle

Non-CAV

CAV

CAV???

CAV

Transport Interchange

??????

CAV

CAV Kiss & Ride operations at multi-modal transport interchange node

Cyber-attack on CAVs by hackers

CAV parking operations in at-grade or multi-story car-park.

No need for car-parks?

Aggressive driving behaviour toward

CAV by non-CAV

Safe recovery of broken-down CAV

by recovery vehicle

Personal P2P CAV owner/operator

MaaS P2P CAV Service customer

CAV Platooning scenario

CAV partial auto functional failure

Broken-down CAV interaction with recovery vehicle

CAV Toll Road Systems encounter

CAV terrorist VBIED encounter

CAV encounter with roadworks

CAV encounter with moving

police vehicle

CAV encounter with static police

RBT/Speeding

CAV encounter with carjacker or roadside robber

CAV encounter with pedestrian/jaywalker

CAV encounter with Digital Vehicle

Electronic Info Signs

CAV to non-CAV dangerous overtaking encounter

CAV to traffic light intersection encounter

(CAVs and non-CAVs)

CAV???

CAV to railway level crossing encounter

CAV to Light Rail mixed alignment encounter

CAV encounter with bad weather, low visibility

CAV transition from surfaced to non-

surfaced road/track

CAV interaction with CAV repair facility (unplanned repair)

CAV interaction with CAV maintenance facility (planned service)

CAV interaction with refuel/recharge facility

CAV-CAV collision scenario and interaction with police

& vehicle recovery

CAV-non CAV collision scenario and interaction with

police & vehicle recovery

CAV encounter with low visibility driving conditions

CAV encounter with unexpected

road diversion

CAV encounter with unexpected road hazard (any)

CAV interaction with vehicle licensing authority

to validate license

CAV interaction with vehicle insurer to validate

insurance claims

CAV interaction with MaaS P2P CAV

service providerCAV interaction with CAV supplier (e.g. S/W update)

CAV interaction with road map data agency

Developing an Operational Concept Framework to support government policy and regulation on Connected and Automated Vehicles | 16

Operational Risks Operational risks relate to operational context, interfaces, scenarios and modes Example: "loss of lane-keeping function leading to undesired and uncontrolled change of lane by the CAV“ Outcomes (consequences) for this risk could be: • CAV crosses into, and remains in, adjacent same-direction lane with no

collision (no loss) • CAV crosses multiple lanes and runs off the road (V2I collision) • CAV crosses one or more lanes and collides with one or more other

vehicles (V2V collision) Operational risks (both safety and non-safety related) should be identified, assessed and controlled Some risk controls may require investment in new or altered infrastructure assets

Developing an Operational Concept Framework to support government policy and regulation on Connected and Automated Vehicles | 17

Conclusion The operational concept framework can be used by transport agencies to: • identify scenarios that require new or updated policy and regulations,

as well as to plan road infrastructure upgrades • systematically analyse the rapid rate of CAV-related innovations to

assist transport policy-makers to respond • Have a platform that can be expanded and adapted to accommodate

future new CAV innovations as they are delivered from the industry