Automated Driving: The Technology and Implications for Insurance Brake Webinar 6 th December 2016 Andrew Miller Chief Technical Officer Chairman of the Board and President
The Story So Far: Advanced Driver Assistance Systems ESC is an established life saver ESC equipped vehicles are 25% less likely to be involved in a serious or fatal crash in the UK Other ADAS systems show potential
AEB: Should It Be Mandatory? Euro NCAP see a 38% overall reduction in realworld, rear-end crashes for vehicles fitted with low speed AEB compared to a sample of equivalent vehicles with no AEB Thatcham Research now a world leading reference in AEB and ADAS system functionality and effectiveness
AEB Fitment Today All new cars on sale in Forecast: New cars launched in 2015 2015 21% 2016 Not Available Optional 49% 2016 41% Not Available Optional 52% Standard Standard 27% 10% Last updated: May 2016
AEB Testing & Insurer Effect Low Speed Testing Claims Data * XC60 Golf High Speed * XC60 Golf *All Crashes
Frontal Impacts With Pedestrians UK DfT reports 398 pedestrian fatalities in 2013 13% of all road casualties Test scenarios based on top 3 UK pedestrian collisions CP1 Unobscured nearside walking adult CP2 Obscured running nearside child CP3 Unobscured farside adult Testing introduced into Euro NCAP 2016
Frontal Impacts With Cyclists UK DfT reports long term fall in cyclist deaths, fluctuating 100-120 in last 6 years 109 cyclist deaths in 2013; 11% of all road casualties Pedal cycle traffic increasing: 13% higher than 2005-9 average crashes 9% 29% 22% deaths 45% 22% 2% Thatcham developing testing for Euro NCAP; to be introduced into Euro NCAP 2018
Vehicle Evolution Parking Collisions In the UK, 23% (725 out of 3,107 cases) of claims related to parking collisions 71% of parking collisions (516 out of 725 cases) occurred during reversing Reversing & Parking Car to car rear 4% 3%2% 18% Single vehicle 12% Junction 23% Head on 17% Lane change 9% 16% 75% Reversing Moving forward Not clear VRU 22% Other
Vehicle Evolution Automated Steering LDW/LKA systems widespread in the market 20% of KSI relate to single vehicle crashes Sophisticated Lane Guidance Systems now available Run off road and across lane capabilities Reversing & Parking Car to car rear Single vehicle Junction Head on Lane change 12% 17% 4% 3% 2% 18% 23% VRU 22% Other Insurance claims
Evolution of Automated Systems Active safety Passive safety Mixed materials Powertrain complexity Car of the Future Frequency Personal injury cost Accident damage/cost Product liability Crash of the Future Repair of the Future Driver of the Future Severity Cost ADAS repair EV & hybrid repair New & mixed materials Driver out of loop Skill level under manual driving Interaction with ADAS Liability
Ten Year Prediction of Crash Severity - AEB Speed Reduction in Rear-End Crashes Cosmetic Cosmetic Moderate Moderate Severe Severe Accident Damage Distribution Cosmetic Moderate Severe Severe = Severe 540m = 140m Source: Kullgren A, Dose-response models and EDR data for assessment of injury risk and effectiveness studies, Proceedings of IRCOBI conference, Bern, Switzerland, 2008. Strandroth J, et al. Head-on collisions between passenger cars and heavy goods vehicles: Injury risk functions and benefits of Autonomous Emergency Braking, Proceedings of IRCOBI conference, 2012. Delta V = change of energy in a crash (not approach speed). Simple e.g. car travelling at 30km/h hits a stationary car; delta V is approx. 15km/h; complex calculation allows for many factors including vehicle stiffness, rebound etc.
Future Claims - AEB Effect in Front to Rear Claims Prediction of Effect on Claims Frequency and Cost in 2025 Frequency Cost Cosmetic 57% 140m Moderate 33% 340m Severe 10% 250m BAU With AEB Most frequent ΔV 9 km/h 1 km/h Front Engaged Rear Engaged BAU With AEB Most frequent ΔV 9 km/h 1 km/h Total Claims 495,000 407,000 Claims difference - -18% 1 km/h Total Costs 1,6bn 0.7bn Cost difference -56%
Addressing Crash Types: What Next? Reversing & Parking Car to car rear Single vehicle Junction Head on Lane change 4% 3%2% 18% 12% 17% 23% But what about other crash types? ADAS systems will address other crashes too What about Automated Driving here by 2020? VRU Other 22% AEB effect on Car-to-Car Rear Damage claim distribution from Insurer member data
ADAS Building Blocks Thatcham Influence on Testing Procedures towards Automated Driving Autonomous Driving Automated Driving (Trained) Automated Driving (Destination) Automated Highway Driving Automated City Driving Automated Valet Parking Autonomous Emergency Steering (AES) V2X Overtaking AEB AEB - City AEB - Urban Assist Pedestrian/Cyclist Intersection Assist ACC / Queue Assist Lane Keeping Lane Centering Auto Parallel Parking Navigation Rear-Collision Mitigation Anti-Lock Brakes Stability Control Electric Power Steering Blind Spot Monitoring Pedestrian Detection Parking Aid Traffic Sign Recognition Lane Departure Warning Forward Collision Warning GPS
The Autonomous Car Timeline International Categorisation of Autonomy open to interpretation 0 No Automation 1 Assisted 2 2016 Partial Automation Driver attention 3 Conditional Automation 4 High Automation 5 Full Automation 0: LDW, ESC (System functionality improvements) 1:ACC, LKA, BLIS, AEB 2: Queue Assist, Parking Assistance 3: (2018 on) Highway Pilot? 4: (2021 on) Automated Driving 5: (2025) Robot Taxi Feet Off Hands Off Eyes Off Brain Off? Driver monitors driving environment Driver monitored System monitors driving environment
Defining the Technological Route to Automated Driving Sensor Development Current: Low & High Speed (City & Inter-Urban) AEB 2018 Sensor Capabilities (Assisted Driving) Not to scale Not to scale 10m Current: Low Speed (City) AEB Current: Low & High Speed (City & Inter-Urban) AEB 2018 Sensor Capabilities (Assisted Driving) 150m To scale 250m
Automation nearly with us Tesla s latest autopilot software 18 th November 2016
Automated Driving Good for Insurers? How will drivers understand and use these systems? Level 2, Level 3 or Level 4? Hands off may mean eyes off! What will regulations allow ECE R79 ACSF? ADIG (Automated Driving Insurance Group) Thatcham/ABI and Members Interface with Gov and C-CAV CoF Modelling the future risks Explain and inform around Regulations Lobby to ensure that Driver Assistance Systems limit hands-off time (30 secs?) Future proofing Group Rating to accommodate AD functionality
Claim of the Future From Assistance to Auto Drive
Benefits of Automated Driving Technological developments will reduce casualties and fatalities 2021 Automation only applicable to Motorways Source: Stats19, UK DfT
Automated Collision Avoidance Technologies: Examples & Timeline All Roads, manual mode; maximum relevant collisions Low Speed Manoeuvring Front to Rear Single Vehicle Junction Ins = 20.6% Example Scenario: Ins = 27.0% Example Scenario: Ins = 13.8% Example Scenario: Ins = 16.7% Example Scenario: ~2019 Example Tech: Reversing AEB Example Tech: Automated Emergency Braking (AEB) Example Tech: Lane Departure Warning (LDW) Example Tech: Junction Assist Lane Change Head On Vulnerable Road User Other Ins = 3.9% Example Scenario: ~2018 Ins = 3.8% Example Scenario: ~2018 Ins = 2.4% Example Scenario: ~2022 Ins = 11.7% Example Tech: Emergency Lane Keeping (ELK) Example Tech: Emergency Lane Keeping (ELK) Example Tech: Automated Emergency Steering (AES) Ins = motor claims proportion of aggregated cost
The Autonomous Car Levels of Autonomy When will it happen? 0 1 2 3 No Assisted Partial Conditional Automation Automation Automation 4 High Automation 5 Full Automation New Car Sales %: Assisted Driving New Car Sales %: Partial Autonomy Fleet %: Assisted Driving New Car Sales %: High Autonomy Fleet %: Partial Autonomy New Car Sales %: Full Autonomy Fleet %: High Autonomy Fleet %: Full Autonomy 2018
Premium Distribution Premium Value The Autonomous Car 0 1 2 3 No Assisted Partial Conditional Automation Automation Automation Insurance Model Risks for the Autonomous Car: Premium Value & Personal to Product Liability 4 High Automation 5 Full Automation Premium breakdown: Person: 70%, Car: 30% Premium breakdown: Person: 50%, Car: 50% Halving of insurance claims Swiss Re, The autonomous car seminar, September 2014 Premium breakdown: Person: 30%, Car: 70% 80% reduction in claims reflecting benefits of autonomous vehicles NHTSA, Autonomous Vehicle Seminar, Washington DC, October 2012 Personal Insurance Product Insurance through Bundled insurance
Automated Driving: The Technology and Implications for Insurance Brake Webinar 6 th December 2016 Andrew Miller Chief Technical Officer Chairman of the Board and President