Posts
Industry Preps for Automated Vehicles Symposium 2015
Driverless Transportation
The Automated Vehicles Symposium 2015 is coming on fast, and will be held July 21-23 in Ann Arbor, Mich., sponsored by Automation for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI) and the Transportation Research Board (TRB), and held at the University of Michigan. There are also ancillary meetings scheduled for July 20, and July 24.
The AVS15 describes itself as “a multidisciplinary forum designed to advance the deployment of automated vehicles.” The keynote address on Wednesday, July 22 will be given by Chris Urmson, leader of Google’s self-driving cars efforts.
The AVS15 will also offer a number of break-out sessions that are closed to the media.
AVS15 benefactors are AutonomouStuff, Bosch, Continental, Denso, KVH, Magna, Munich Re, Realtime Technologies, Tass International, and Velodyne.
Learn more about the Symposium.
POSTER SESSIONS
AVS15 will offer two poster sessions, giving exhibitors the opportunity to showcase and discuss their work with colleagues. Abstracts for both sessions are due by June 7, and peer review decisions will be announced by June 21.
The first poster session will be held on Tuesday, July 21. It is designed for peer-reviewed research posters, with a presentation of a completed project that takes a similar approach to an academic journal or a Transportation Review Board poster session.
The second session will run on Wednesday, July 22, and cover a broader range of content, from introductions to research centers, to works in progress, to proposed studies.
The AVS15 website provides further guidelines and submission requirements for each poster session.
TRB Spotlights University Research on Connected and Automated Vehicles
The Transportation Research Board is sponsoring the 9th University Transportation Center (UTC) Spotlight Conference on Connected and Automated Vehicles November 4-5, 2015, in Washington, D.C. Abstracts are due by July 6. Sign in to learn more.
Send questions to Rich Cunard at RCunard@nas.edu.
The UTC focuses on connected and automated vehicle technology across all modes of transportation, and seeks to identify roles that university transportation research programs may play in the deployment of these advanced technologies.
In addition, the TRB standing committees have issued a call for papers for the 2016 Annual Meeting of the TRB and Research Record scheduled for January 10-14, 2016 in Washington, D.C. Papers are due August 1.
Driver Distraction an Epidemic: Va. Tech’s Fitch
Driverless Transportation
Greg Fitch is a research scientist who leads the User Experience Group at the Center for Automated Vehicle Systems at the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute in Blacksburg, Va. Fitch will be presenting a case study on automated vehicle interface and human interaction at the USI 2015 Conference in Las Vegas in September, with research from Virginia Tech and the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA).
This is an edited version of an interview conducted by USI. Visit here for the complete interview.
What are you working on?
I’m investigating the human factors pertaining to automated vehicles, the distraction potential of automotive head-up displays, the reliability of automatic emergency braking systems on commercial vehicles, and driver performance and crash risk when using portable aftermarket devices.
How will vehicle automation impact distracted driving?
Driver distraction is a growing epidemic, primarily because of the number of devices people bring into the vehicle and use while driving. We need to ensure drivers understand when they need to be monitoring the road, and when they are allowed to withdraw from the driving task (in the case of highly automated vehicles).
NHTSA has added automatic braking technology to its recommended safety features for new vehicles. What similar technologies will follow suit?
Automatic Emergency Braking (AEB) is a tremendously promising safety system. It stands to prevent or substantially reduce the severity of rear-end crashes by initiating a braking maneuver if the driver fails to do so. Drivers often fail to brake because they are visually distracted. Keeping the driver’s eyes on the road, particularly when operating partially automated vehicles, is imperative.
There are several technologies that will help accomplish this goal. First is advanced voice recognition systems. Voice interfaces have been developed to allow drivers to interact with technology while keeping their eyes on the road and their hands on the wheel. However, these systems can be unreliable and difficult to use for some drivers. This can lead to drivers performing visual and manual interactions instead, which are well-known to be riskier. Once voice interaction with technology resembles voice interaction with humans, I think we’ll see a widespread adoption.
According to NHTSA, half of all traffic fatalities result from roadway departures. Current Lane Keeping Assist (LKA) systems help keep vehicles in their lane on straight roads. However, extending LKA system operation to maintain a more central position in curved lanes will greatly reduce single vehicle roadway departures. Improved vehicle sensors and digital maps will bring great improvements in centering.
How will the timeline for truck-automation compare to car automation? Will certain features be more critical to one than the other?
Car automation will be driven by improved convenience and comfort, while truck automation will be driven by return-on-investment decisions. For cars, systems like traffic jam assist and self-parking cars will be in high demand and undergo rapid development. Given that truck fleets want leaner operations such as improved fuel efficiency and logistics, I think systems like platooning will be sought after.
Although safety is a fundamental reason automated vehicle technology should be developed, it will likely not be the primary reason people purchase the technology. Fortunately, safety improvements stand to be potential secondary benefits of the above technologies because of the automatic braking these systems provide.
What are the most critical obstacles to overcome to move from near-automation to fully- automated vehicles?
Surveys of subject matter experts indicate that regulation will be the greatest barrier to overcome for the deployment of highly automated vehicles. The main question is who will be at fault if a highly automated vehicle crashes. Another is what sensors are needed to yield reliable performance in inclement weather. This is of interest to me because we routinely perform controlled vehicle testing in artificially-created snow, rain, and fog on the Virginia Smart Road test track at the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute.
Photos from Va. Tech Transportation Institute.
Google vs OEMs: Millennials Decide
Steve Feyer
The Millennial generation is the future of business, science, politics and society. Driverless cars are the future of transportation – at least, they will be if Millennials use them.
In a previous article (“A Millennial’s Perspective on Driverless,” Driverless Transportation, 12/16/2014), we explored the opinions of Millennial “experts” in self-driving vehicles — 10 scientists, policy experts, and engineers who are already working in the autonomous vehicle field.
This article looks at the opinions of Americans under 35 who will buy the technology - a “consumer” panel of 10 well-informed Millennials not in the driverless field — graduate students, engineers, entrepreneurs, a doctor, and other professionals.
About half of the consumers polled thought driverless cars would be publicly available by 2020, while the rest thought it would be 2030 or beyond. Those who work on driverless cars were somewhat more pessimistic about how soon the technology would appear, averaging about five or more years in the future.
Most of the consumer panel thought Google would be the company to bring driverless cars to market, either independently or in joint ventures with automakers. “Google will lead in this new market, since they have a well-known name brand which is now becoming known in the area of household appliances and hardware,” said one 29-year-old scientist. “I don’t know of any companies in the space besides Google,” said another panelist, a software entrepreneur. (“Google’s Fully Functional Driverless Car is Adorable,” 12/22/2014).
In comparison, our panel of experts generally pointed to automakers, and not Google, as leaders in the field. But Google could have an advantage over the incumbent automakers that the experts do not see. “When cars become driverless, consumers are more likely to trust companies that they trust with computing,” theorized one young professional on the consumer panel.
A few respondents elaborated on which type of company would succeed.
“The established companies always have an image to maintain, so it may be newer companies or new names from older companies that will dominate,” observed one panelist, an engineer. No panelist thought that start-up companies would succeed in the market for self-driving vehicles, mostly because they thought consumers would only trust established businesses. (“GM Announces New Automated and Connected Vehicle Technologies for 2017 Cadillac Models,” 9/7/2014).
When asked about potential barriers to the deployment of driverless cars, consumers all pointed to legal and insurance issues. In contrast, the expert panel acknowledged these issues, but focused on concerns such as cyber security, technology development, industry standards and business models. For the most part, the experts believe that the necessary changes in law and insurance will be worked out without delaying adoption of the technology.
BUILDING CONSUMER TRUST
Members of both panels see another looming roadblock.
“Building consumer trust is going to be the lynchpin for the driverless car,” said one consumer, a 29-year-old manager. “A computer can simply fail without warning, and what happens if it does so while going 65 miles per hour on a winding highway?”
The engineer on the consumer panel declared that “the vehicles will be prone to hacking and unwanted remote control, which takes away all the advantages of safety and stress reduction in less than a blink of an eye.”
Given the changes needed in law and consumer trust, several members of the consumer panel suggested that America would not be the first country to accept driverless cars. “Perhaps a smaller European or Asian country, or one in the Middle East which is heavily investing in infrastructure improvements, would be the first to prove that driverless cars can become the main form of transportation,” observed a scientist.
The expert panelists, in contrast, did not consider which markets might be early adopters.
It is not surprising that the experts are making big plans around driverless cars, since this technology is guiding their career choices. They see them as a beneficial change in society.
The consumers are more reserved, with most adopting a wait-and-see attitude. “We will see these technologies pervade into every aspect of our lives. Having said that, I’m not planning my life around anything that is not yet here,” said one business student.
Another graduate student added, “I can’t possibly be making any plans on the basis of this technology, especially since they’re not even allowed on roads where I live.”
Another added, “Some of the decisions you need to make on the road or when picking up people can’t just be programmed. I would still rather be in a human-operated vehicle.”
One panelist, although generally positive about driverless cars, said, “The whole industry is going to have to do a lot to overcome consumer skepticism and risk aversion.”
Ultimately, all the experts viewed driverless cars as transformative technology while the consumers saw it as something would cause an incremental change in their lifestyle. “They’re like battery-operated toothbrushes - an advancement in technology that reduces human effort, thereby increasing the quality of life and standard of comfort,” offered a 25-year-old musician. While electric toothbrushes may be nice, they are not revolutionary.
COMFORT & REVOLUTION
Our surveys of Millennial Americans have found several interesting differences between those working to create a driverless future and those who will choose whether to accept it. The potential consumers of autonomous vehicles think Google will bring these cars to market relatively soon, while the experts believe other companies will sell them more than 10 years from now.
Perhaps this difference can be explained by Google’s success in advertising its efforts in driverless cars. Our consumer panelists are convinced that Google is at the forefront of driverless car technology and is close to bringing it into the world. The experts are more skeptical of Google’s promises, knowing more about the efforts of other companies and seeing more barriers to commercial adoption.
In sum, the companies and individuals creating self-driving vehicles have much more work to do to convince consumers of the technology’s value. The consumer panelists have mixed opinions about the value and significance of self-driving cars, and that the technology will bring benefits to their lives.
Steve Feyer is a James R. Swartz Entrepreneurial Fellow and MBA at Carnegie Mellon University’s Tepper School of Business.
What this ‘Impact’ Specialist says about Autonomous Transportation
Darcy Conlin
Yeganeh Mashayekh Hayeri, Ph.D.
This featured article takes a look at some of the work going on in Pennsylvania in conjunction with University of Pennsylvania (UPenn) and the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT). Yeganeh Mashayekh Hayeri is a post-doctorate research fellow at UPenn who works with the GRASP lab (General Robotics, Automation, Sensing & Perception). She was a researcher at Carnegie Mellon University (CMU) with USDOT T-SET UTC (Technologies for Safe and Efficient Transportation). Hayeri’s projects are funded by UTC.
We frequently hear about what is happening within the driverless industry in states like California and Nevada. Hayeri has experience working in both of these states but now finds herself in Pennsylvania.
The juxtaposition between geography is just one of the challenges that needs to be sorted out within this industry. Hayeri is working to help educate people about the overall impact that the evolving autonomous industry will have on our transportation system. This emerging technology is creating a paradigm shift in the way we think about issues relating to transportation regardless of what coast you live on, or whether you are north or south of the Mason-Dixon line.
There is a lot going on in Pennsylvania. Let’s start by acknowledging that last November, CMU celebrated the 30th birthday of self-driving car technology and has touted itself as the birthplace of self-driving cars. That’s right – Pennsylvania, not Mountain View, Calif.
Also, the GRASP lab where Hayeri finds herself these days is a vital and cooperative environment fostering interaction between students, research staff and faculty. GRASP is a $10-million research center founded in 1979 and, according to Hayeri, is exactly what you would think from the acronym. There are all kinds of things happening in robotics, automation and perception — all necessary concepts for research related to automated transportation systems.
One of the recent projects Hayeri worked on was the “Connected and Autonomous Vehicles - 2040 Vision” project with PennDOT. This one-year visionary project examined the impact that these new technologies would have on the state’s investment decisions, infrastructure, workforce training, driver licensing, and communications systems. Concluding this past July, the project took a high-level qualitative analysis of various impacts from these technologies.
With the focus on Pittsburgh, one of the short-term action items was to allocate funding for and identify key locations for dedicated short-range communication (DSRC) and roadside equipment deployment. Between 2016 and 2020 the project proposes early, small-scale deployment of vehicle to infrastructure (V2I) applications at these key locations. The longer-term plans include working with local and state educational institutions to enhance workforce training, along with tailoring certain features to the trucking industry. This gra
phic spells out the proposed actions arising from the project.
Fundamentally, all DOTs want to create a sustainable transportation system that will prepare them for the future. By working with PennDOT, Hayeri hopes to bridge the gap between collaborating with local communities and educating both state planners and locals on individual needs and concerns.
Her latest project, while still within the automated transportation world, has a bit of a twist to it.
With the help of UPenn’s Department of Electrical and Systems Engineering, Hayeri and her colleagues are modeling human behavior while driving using inverse reinforcement learning techniques. In simple terms, reinforcement learning looks at the behavior of an agent (the driver), his utility and reward functions, and his actions in an environment.
Hayeri chose traffic engineering as a career because she is fascinated by human psychology and its impact on traffic operations and planning, something she believes has been missing from much of the previous models and theories. While staying present behind the wheel has always been crucial, driver distraction today has reached saturation.
With inverse reinforcement learning techniques the hope is to evaluate enforced policies, like speed limit rules, and their effectiveness. What type of a reward function drivers use to make driving decisions is the key element to Hayeri’s current research. Her goal is to understand how people set up these reward functions internally and how they react.
According to Hayeri, “The goal is to gauge the effectiveness of a policy or a combination of policies by modeling humans’ behavior and examining the patterns. This research should assist decision and policy makers to set informed and effective policies as we enter the automated transportation era.”
There are many challenges ahead. One is the legislative policy toward autonomous transportation and driving that each state DOT, along with the US DOT, will need to work out. The new regulations and their enforcement, and the interaction between the states and the federal government in policing this technology, will all have to be determined. Then there is the challenge of states in different regions and how they will address difficult weather such as snow and fog.
Behaviorally there are questions about how drivers of automated vehicles will interact with automated features, and how drivers of conventional vehicles will interact with driverless vehicles.
Hayeri is passionate about contemplating ways to bridge the gap between our traditional way of thinking about transportation, and transitioning to the future with connected and autonomous vehicles. Looking at current human behavior and what people’s perceptions of autonomous vehicles are is a necessary task. The differences in individuals, what they are willing to accept and how quickly they can change their current patterns of behavior will all have an impact on how this will evolve.
In her own words, Hayeri thinks of herself as an “impact specialist,” and is wondering if, as a culture, we are ready to let go of our cars – a question she is not alone in contemplating. We look forward to seeing what else comes down the Pennsylvania Turnpike.
DHL Report on Self-Driving Vehicles
Last week, international logistics company DHL released a report entitled “Self-Driving Vehicles in Logistics.” The report provides a comprehensive overview of the current state of the driverless transportation industry. It gives a good, high-level overview of the current state of the technology and its legal issues, as well as perceived consumer acceptance. (We here at Driverless Transportation aren’t sure there is much value in consumer surveys at this point.) It then gives a good rundown, by manufacturer, on the current state of the art in autonomous capabilities.
The core of the report, of course, was the implications of driverless technology on logistics. Here it goes through the logistics process from the initial warehouse through delivery to the end customer. They do make a compelling case about how driverless technology is more likely to impact logistics than passenger vehicles in the short term.
Click here for the full report. It is worth checking out.
DHL: Self-Driving Vehicles in Logistics
DHL
This trend report examines the distance that needs to be covered before self-driving technology reaches full maturity, and addresses the challenges of regulations, public acceptance, and issues of liability. It also shines the headlights on various best-practice applications across several industries today, and takes a detailed look into the existing technology that’s successfully used today as well as some future applications for self-driving vehicles in the logistics industry.
Platooning Takes to the Road
Darcy Conlin
This featured article looks at Peloton Technology Inc., a Menlo Park, California-based automated vehicle technology company focused on developing a system to reduce fuel consumption and improve the safety of trucks by using advanced sensing and communications. The word “pelotón” is Spanish for platoon — and platooning of trucks is precisely what Peloton Technology intends to foster. Dr. Josh Switkes is the CEO of Peloton and holds a PhD from Stanford University in Mechanical Engineering. After hearing Switkes speak at ITS CA in October, Driverless Transportation wanted to learn more about the company and what Peloton is doing within the industry.
Peloton has a team of 11 employees poised to rapidly growing as they work to develop their technology and deploy production systems in 2015. The company was formed in 2011 with the goal of creating a system that would allow pairs of trucks to share information on their braking and engine systems to help them travel more safely and save fuel. The team began conducting market research in 2011, building on many years of experience across the founding team. The four members of the founding team come from backgrounds in the automotive and truck industry, vehicle safety and dynamics, business development, public affairs and government. Switkes has been working on systems to make driving safer and more efficient for the last 12 years. After his PhD work at Stanford University on a vehicle control systems, including guaranteeing safety for lanekeeping assistance and steering wheel haptic feedback, Switkes developed production control systems for Volkswagen, Audi, and Tula Technology. Peloton’s Principal Scientist Chris Gerdes is also a Professor at Stanford and the Director of the Center for Automotive Research at Stanford (CARS). Prior to joining Stanford, Gerdes was the project leader for vehicle dynamics at the Vehicle Systems Technology Center of Daimler-Benz Research and Technology North America. In this role, he worked closely with Freightliner / Daimler Trucks North America. Peloton’s VP Product, Dave Lyons has decades of experience with Silicon Valley technology startups and worked for many years as a leader at IDEO. Among other work in the automotive space, Lyons was employee #12 at Tesla where he led the development of the Tesla Roadster. Steve Boyd, Peloton’s VP External Affairs, has over 20 years of experience in government, public affairs and business development, including serving as a White House assistant press secretary, a PBS Newshour reporter/producer and in business development for a range of technology companies. Peloton is funded by a mixture of angel investors and venture capital investors including Castrol innoVentures which is part of British Petroleum.
The trucking industry handles about 70% of the freight in the US. This makes trucking a vital part of the US economy. Dr. Switkes noted there is a saying in the trucking industry that “If you bought it, a truck brought it.” To be clear, Peloton is not about either driverless or autonomous trucks. Drivers are an integral part of the Peloton System. The system simply augments driver performance and safety and leverages the cooperative potential between pairs of trucks.
How does the system work? It is geared for tractor-trailers operating on multi-lane divided highways and it’s important to note that even when the trucks are safely linked, both drivers continue to steer and the role of first driver isn’t much different from today. The system adds forward collision mitigation radar to each truck making individual trucks safer while on their own. Using vehicle to vehicle (V2V) communications, these active safety systems are linked between pairs of trucks when they form up into a platoon. While out on the road, trucks that utilize the Peloton System will be notified by the Network Operation Center (NOC)[1] that they are coming into range of each other and can link up. The NOC helps trucks find each other on the road by identifying platooning opportunities so if Peloton equipped trucks are within V2V range, one truck can slow down and one can speed up in order to rendezvous.
The NOC is an Internet based cloud service that each truck connects to via either a cellular or Wi-Fi link. The NOC is separate from the V2V communication and is used to make sure the trucks are platooning only when it is safe to do so. These trucks are connecting on interstates and major highways, not residential areas. The NOC can also remotely adjust the following distance of the platoon for weather, traffic or other road conditions. The Peloton System shares much more than just the braking information between the trucks. Additionally, engine torque, acceleration and speed data is shared. Most importantly, forward collision mitigation radar and other active safety system data is shared between each pair of trucks increasing safety when they are in platoon. So whether the front truck is slowing down due to braking, a hill, a tire blow-out, or upcoming slower traffic, the information is instantaneously shared allowing the rear truck to react smoothly and immediately.
The key safety benefit comes from this assurance that the rear truck will react through V2V communication at the same time as the front truck. This essentially guarantees simultaneous braking between the two trucks. In a best-case scenario where a driver is operating manually, human reaction time ranges from 1-2 seconds even for a good driver. Peloton guarantees that every single time, even if the driver is distracted or has trouble seeing (for example the sun is in their eyes or it’s foggy) the system will react dramatically faster than an attentive human driver would under normal conditions. While a 1-2 second reaction time may not seem like much, at high speeds it definitely can be the difference between having an accident or not.
The biggest and most frequent accidents within the trucking industry are caused by frontal collisions. The brakes on most heavy trucks don’t react quickly because they use air brakes. With air brakes, there’s what is called a “brake lag” from the time the brakes are applied to when the truck actually begins to slow down. The Peloton System virtually eliminates that lag in paired trucks by using the V2V communication to apply the brakes in the rear truck at virtually the same time they are applied in the front truck. Switkes said, “We are not reacting to the front truck slowing down, we are reacting to the front truck applying its brakes. That can be the difference between safely braking and having an accident. In many cases we are actually applying the brakes in the rear truck before the front truck has started to slow down, because we are reacting to the application of brakes, as opposed to the actual slowing down.”
Peloton also increases safety by enhancing drivers’ awareness of what’s going on around each of the connected vehicles. Video is sent between the two trucks. There is a forward facing camera on each truck and video is sent so the driver of the rear truck gets the view from the perspective of the front truck. Therefore the rear truck can see what’s ahead on the road such as cars coming in on the shoulder from an on ramp. There are screens within the trucks cab that show the driver these views, mounted similarly to a rear-view mirror. Additionally, the video feed that comes from a rear truck allows the front driver to get a view of his/her own truck from behind. This is extremely effective in showing blind spots. Blind spot accidents are another major type of accident for heavy trucks. Driving a 72-foot tractor-trailer makes it difficult to know if another vehicle is next to you. According to Switkes, the Peloton System will help prevent accidents caused by blind spots.
We mentioned the driver is still steering but what else do they need to know in order to operate their vehicle? Switkes underscores that driver training is a key part of the system. The first time the system is turned on it will show the driver what it feels like to be platooning at a far distance. Then it will demonstrate what it feels like to be closer and experience an automatic braking event, not a hard braking event. The goal is to make sure that the first time the brakes are applied automatically is not a safety critical situation. Peloton does not want any surprises for the driver. The training includes driving with the system so drivers get a strong understanding and feel for the system.
Besides the safety benefits that Peloton offers, dramatic fuel efficiency comes from the aerodynamics of bringing the trucks closer together. Within a typical trucking fleet, fuel is about 40% of the operating cost so when talk of saving fuel comes up, trucking companies do take note. Peloton worked with the North American Council for Freight Efficiency and the major trucking fleet CR England to test their system and measure fuel economy in November 2013. This independently validated study followed the industry standard SAE Type II testing procedures and showed 10% fuel savings on the rear truck and 4.5% on the front truck. The results of additional comprehensive track testing performed by the U.S. Department of Energy will be issued in the next few months. These levels of fuel savings are enormous given that a typical trucking company spends $80-$100 thousand a year on diesel fuel for each long-haul truck. It’s estimated that the average savings from platooning with the Peloton system will amount to approximately $6,500 per year for each typical long-haul truck.
The fact that the rear truck saves more on fuel would likely make every fleet want their trucks to always be in the rear position, unless the two trucks are owned by the same company. However, a key part of the Peloton System is that trucks are ordered based on weight and braking ability. If there is an emergency stop, Peloton wants to be assured that the truck with the longest stopping distance is in the front of the platoon. For a given pair of trucks, the truck with the best braking ability and shorter stopping distance will be in the rear — and will get the better aerodynamic fuel savings. So trucks with the best combination of relative weight and good brakes will get the rear following position — and better fuel savings. In the rare instance that the braking ability is identical, Peloton may allow switching order, but Switkes says that will be unusual. In most cases there will be some difference in braking ability and the trucks will be ordered appropriately. If two trucks within the same company are traveling together, the order obviously won’t matter since the savings is across the same company.
Peloton Technology plans to have initial deployment with fleets that can easily adjust to have multiple trucks together on the road. The general public may not notice that many corporate fleets already travel in groups on our highways. Fleets like UPS and FedEx roll out trucks from their hubs based on the timing of when they finish sorting packages. According to Switkes, “Some fleets are sending out multiple trucks every day and they have to tell the drivers to leave a couple of minutes apart so that they don’t get backed up together at a stop light before getting on the interstate. So fleets like this only need to change their operation by telling two trucks, instead of one, to leave every few minutes.” For those owner operators with just one truck, there is the incentive to buy trucks with better brakes to better ensure being in the preferred rear platooning position. Switkes told us that some of the OEMs are already talking about having special platooning equipped trucks with better brakes.
When will we see this in action? Peloton has already driven the system over 12,000 test miles across the west and southwest. Currently they are collecting and analyzing data in a ‘data pilot’ with the Tennessee-based fleet TCW. This pilot has sensors and cloud-based monitoring operating on two trucks that run close together, though not yet platooning, as they carry freight between Nashville and Memphis. This data pilot and others to follow soon will help inform fleets about the benefits of implementing platooning on major freight corridors and to demonstrate the system’s evolving telematics features. In Q1&2 2015, a series of major fleet pilots will get underway. The aim is to have full production systems ready for deployment by late 2015.
There are no obstacles at the federal level to inhibit Peloton from moving forward. NHTSA has no regulations that get in the way of platooning. However, at the state level, states have their own following distance (tailgating) laws and Switkes said there are some states where that law or related laws would seem to place limits on platooning. However, just as driving laws were not made with driverless operation in mind, following distance laws – some of which apply specifically for trucks – were not written when wirelessly-connected active safety systems were available. What Peloton has found is that states in the US understand the importance of trucking to their economy and are open to innovative ways to make their freight corridors safer and more efficient. Switkes says that they are working with the states that have limitations in their following distance laws to explain the issues at play and find solutions. The most important thing Switkes says on this is that “When we roll out our system on customer trucks, we will be absolutely sure that those trucks will NOT get pulled over for tailgating.”
The Peloton System will be offered as a usage-based managed service. Fleets will pay a one-time fee for System hardware and installation to equip trucks and then they will pay a per-mile fee when trucks are in platoon. A rapid payback period as quick as a few months is anticipated for typical long-haul trucks. Switkes has his Commercial Driver Learners permit and is on his way to getting his full license — so he won’t be on the road driving a Peloton-equipped truck just yet. However, he and his company are driving towards deploying V2V technology and truck platooning in a more concrete way than others in the industry. Things look positive for 2015.
[1] Peloton’s Network Operations Center (NOC) coordinates trucks to find linking partners on the road and enables cross-fleet platooning. Geo-fencing enables trucks to platoon only on appropriate roads (accounting for passing lanes, topography and other factors), in safe conditions, with safe drivers. (http://www.peloton-tech.com/about/)