Adaptive headlights approved for the US!

V

-Virgil-

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Mar 26, 2004
Messages
7,750
Let's try to keep the discussion vaguely lighting-relevant.
 
KITROBASKIN

KITROBASKIN

Flashlight Enthusiast
CPF Supporter
Joined
Mar 28, 2013
Messages
3,890
Location
New Mexico, USA
I just hope it is effective. The high beam automation on our 2019 Tacoma is not a solution. Perhaps if I could adjust the sensitivity... Highway signs reflect so much light back to our truck, the high beams go off. The local terrain where we live is very hilly and that may be part of the reason oncoming cars get more of our high beam than I think is polite or safe.

If the adaptive headlight system is granular enough and the sensors are not blocked by ice or mud (my 1987 Dodge Raider had headlamp washers manually activated) and calibrated well, sounds great and worth it. Knowing how dangerous night time driving is, I have avoided it for years. The funny thing is when driving at night these days, it is amusing to see how car makers now are incorporating more style into their headlight/illumination design these days. Some cars look like they have determined, aggressive, shining 'eyebrows'.
 
John_Galt

John_Galt

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Feb 20, 2009
Messages
1,734
Location
SW, PA
Not even close. 35K annual deaths and several million injuries is in no way remotely acceptable. Imagine if air or train travel were this deadly. The NTSB would shut it down immediately until a way could be found to make it much safer.

Also keep in the mind the "monitoring" systems you decry have been incorporated into modern aircraft flown by highly trained pilots. Putting similar systems in automobiles makes them safer. All these systems do is reject nonsensical inputs which always have bad outcomes. For example, if you start drifting off the road the system won't let you leave the road and crash, or in city driving leave the road and hit people on the sidewalk. What's wrong with that? Or they won't let you follow at less than a safe distance. In urban areas they shouldn't allow you to exceed the posted speed limit or accelerate at more than gentle rates (i.e. no more "stop light grand prix"). Basically, they won't kick in if the vehicle is being operated safely and competently. They exist for those moments where you might have a lapse of attention, or just want to drive recklessly. The end result of this is saving lots of lives until fully automated driving is ready for prime time.
The rejection of "nonsensical inputs" makes significantly more sense when there are fewer options in general for maintaining a stable flight pattern. As to your example of bad input =100%= bad output, you are terribly incorrect. There are a vast number of reasons an attentive driver may purposefully swerve or edge out of their appropriate lane of traffic, even up onto a curb in urban environments. The roads are littered with debris, roadkill, people, animals, etc the list goes on. A safety system that actively prevents the driver from being able to respond appropriately to changing road conditions is no safety system at all. As is the complaint leveled towards the driver, "they work until they don't." As it stands now, the ultimate liability falls on the licensed person behind the wheel. Refer back to my apparently nonsensical claim that perhaps licensing standards should be raised significantly (as long as we're comparing to pilots this doesn't seem nonsensical).

As far as systems that restrict acceleration, while I can see the argument in an urban environment, I have very practical experience with governed vehicle speed/acceleration due to a previous employer. And there is nothing more unsettling than being fully aware, as you are "the guy" holding up significant volumes of tractor trailer traffic, and that your vehicle will not respond to your inputs if you need to move the hell out of your lane, or accelerate momentarily to avoid collision, and cut power to limit your speed when you're in the far-right lane with two lanes filled with tractors to your left, no shoulder to the right and a downhill stretch that every tractor behind you fully intends to take advantage of for building steam to make it up the next rise, whether you're in the lane or not.

I have stated it elsewhere, I'll repeat it here. Self driving cars are a pipedream, despite all the countless engineering working towards the goal. The first time a mercedes with an octagenarian at the wheel opts to take out a crowd of schoolchildren to save the driver, the first time people realize that their fancy new bathtub refuses to let them leave the driveway on an icey side street losing them their job, the factories will be burned down.

Back to the adaptive headlight issue, and in anticipation of yet more moderator redactions... The camera based system for the automatic high/low beam selection on my cx30 seems to have some strange issues with retroreflective signage at times, where it seems to want to give other drivers seizures. This same camera system controls the intermittent wipers, which keeps the camera lens fairly clear, but also causes some annoyances with very irregular wiper action. Quite distracting. I have not had sleet/snow to see how these systems respond, but my current assumption is "not well." If people pay a premium for these adb features, especially if it is on a rental basis which so many vehicle manufacturers seem to be heading towards, and they crap out in the first inclement weather the driver experiences, reverting back to the current "loose screw between the seat and wheel" control, people are also going to be irate. I can't imagine a solely camera based (*cough* tesla *cough*) approach being effective at modeling the changes needed in conditions of poor visibility. Perhaps it would be more effective to tell everyone to just forget their lowbeams exist at night, if the goal is to maximize the ability to see.
 
J

jtr1962

Flashaholic
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
6,499
Location
Flushing, NY
Refer back to my apparently nonsensical claim that perhaps licensing standards should be raised significantly (as long as we're comparing to pilots this doesn't seem nonsensical).
I agree on that. Licensing should be as difficult as getting a pilot's license. But it won't happen because there's no political will for it. Also, higher licensing standards would mean probably 90% of the population can never drive. While that would be a great thing for safety, we'll have to rapidly build out public transit so these people can still get around.
I have stated it elsewhere, I'll repeat it here. Self driving cars are a pipedream, despite all the countless engineering working towards the goal. The first time a mercedes with an octagenarian at the wheel opts to take out a crowd of schoolchildren to save the driver, the first time people realize that their fancy new bathtub refuses to let them leave the driveway on an icey side street losing them their job, the factories will be burned down.
I often hear the so-called trolley dilemma bought up with self-driving cars. The thing is only a human-driven car will get into that situation in the first place by going too fast in the face of normally expected obstacles in an urban environment. An AV would likely limit its speed to 20 or 25 mph so it has room to stop in any eventuality. But we don't even need AVs to get rid of the trolley dilemma. Just govern speeds on urban streets to the speed limit, even if the driver has full control otherwise. That alone will prevent most mishaps. The vast majority of incidents in cities are caused by speeding.
I can't imagine a solely camera based (*cough* tesla *cough*) approach being effective at modeling the changes needed in conditions of poor visibility.
And that's the problem in a nutshell with self-driving cars. The algorithms work well enough when they actually detect things. But you really need more sensors besides just cameras and image recognition software. We should use radar and/or lidar to detect things. We could use sound to detect heartbeats so you can distinguish animals or people from inanimate objects. Ultrasound might come in handy to determine if the object ahead is a paper bag you can safely run over, or a medium-sized rock you need to steer around. Microchanges in air density can further help to detect pedestrians, animals, or cyclists. Autonomous vehicles really have a lack of sensors problem more than anything else.
 
L

lumen aeternum

Enlightened
Joined
Sep 29, 2012
Messages
830
Waiting for a definition of the things...
"adaptive driving beam headlamps, which aren't the same as "adaptive headlights".
 
John_Galt

John_Galt

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Feb 20, 2009
Messages
1,734
Location
SW, PA
Virgil addressed the differences on the first page of discussion.
 
V

-Virgil-

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Mar 26, 2004
Messages
7,750
you really need more sensors besides just cameras and image recognition software. We should use radar and/or lidar to detect things.

The entire automotive industry agrees with this....except for Elon Musk, who thinks lidar is for pedophiles (or whatever the latest gradeschool poo-flinging is that he's done on twitter).
 
S

SubLGT

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Nov 18, 2013
Messages
1,183
Location
Idaho, USA

In the above thread, some F-150 owners in the USA claim they have been able to enable ADB via software (FORScan) changes.

Are some current F-150 USA production trucks actually being equipped with software disabled ADB headlights?
 
V

-Virgil-

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Mar 26, 2004
Messages
7,750
Well, it would make sense, because ADB (as per SAE J3069) is offered on the F150 in Canada, where it's been legal since 2019.
 
S

SubLGT

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Nov 18, 2013
Messages
1,183
Location
Idaho, USA
Can Ford legally sell an ADB equipped F-150 in the USA, if the ADB is software disabled?
 
Last edited:
Alaric Darconville

Alaric Darconville

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 2, 2001
Messages
5,346
Location
Stillwater, America
Can Ford legally sell an ADB equipped F-150 in the USA, if the ADB is software disabled?
If they certify that it is compliant with FMVSS 108, they can. We don't work on a type approval basis here.
 
V

-Virgil-

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Mar 26, 2004
Messages
7,750
Can Ford legally sell an ADB equipped F-150 in the USA, if the ADB is software disabled?

Certainly. So can (and do) Audi, Mercedes-Benz, BMW, and others.
 
S

SubLGT

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Nov 18, 2013
Messages
1,183
Location
Idaho, USA
....The infrastructure bill (now law) requires NHTSA to amend FMVSS 108 within two years to allow ADB as per SAE J3069. That's nice if it ever actually happens (let alone within the two years), but if you'll look at this and this and this, you'll see the odds and track-record are against it.
Does this document (Feb 1, 2022) constitute amending FMVSS108 ?

SUMMARY: This document amends NHTSA's lighting standard to permit the certification of adaptive driving beam (ADB) headlamps. ADB headlamps utilize technology that actively modifies a vehicle's headlamp beams to provide more illumination while not glaring other vehicles. The requirements adopted today are intended to amend the lighting standard to permit this technology and establish performance requirements for these systems to ensure that they operate safely. ADB has the potential to reduce the risk of crashes by increasing visibility without increasing glare. The agency initiated this rulemaking in response to a petition for rulemaking from Toyota Motor North America, Inc.
 
S

SubLGT

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Nov 18, 2013
Messages
1,183
Location
Idaho, USA
I found the answer to my question.

The U.S. Department of Transportation's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued a final rule today allowing automakers to install adaptive driving beam headlights on new vehicles. This satisfies a requirement in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law more than a year and a half ahead of schedule.....

....The final rule amends Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108, "Lamps, reflective devices, and associated equipment." The amendments adopted today are intended to allow manufacturers to offer this technology and establish performance requirements for these systems to ensure that they operate safely.
 
Mister Ed

Mister Ed

Administrator
Staff member
CPF Supporter
Joined
May 31, 2021
Messages
273
I'm excited, as I experienced just the basics of this with a toyota I rented with the car being able to control the high-beams turning them on/off automatically. I really think this will be a great safety feature coming.
 
V

-Virgil-

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Mar 26, 2004
Messages
7,750
I'm afraid it's still not time to break out the bubbly and start celebrating. I've read the final rule three times (and counting). It's a heaping helping of smug, deliberate scorn for well-proven international practice, with substitution instead of rules pretty much guaranteed to make US ADB systems inferior to those in the rest of the world. :-(
 
John_Galt

John_Galt

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Feb 20, 2009
Messages
1,734
Location
SW, PA
[Off-topic trolling/baiting removed by moderator]

Any particular examples, -Virgil-?
 

Similar threads

M
Replies
26
Views
46K
Hilldweller
Hilldweller
donmontalvo
Replies
7
Views
7K
Alaric Darconville
Alaric Darconville
AnAppleSnail
Replies
7
Views
2K
Hamilton Felix
H
nicho
Replies
6
Views
4K
Alaric Darconville
Alaric Darconville
rob3rto
Replies
4
Views
4K
127.0.0.1
1
Top