Model 3 and S failed automatic braking system stress test

[Krazaak]

I’m super curious why people disliked this post.

Do you disagree about his description of what AEB is for? Because he was correct based on every definition I’ve found in web searches.

Are you disagreeing with the statement that only the Tesla’s failed in this test? Because that’s true.

Or are you disagreeing with the statement that the Tesla’s are having trouble detecting stationary objects? Because that’s true.

Did I miss something else in that post that was worthy of dislike?

I suspect it was disagreed with because of this, which came directly from the Model 3's owner manual.

Warning:
Automatic Emergency Braking
is not designed to prevent a collision. At
best, it can minimize the impact of a
frontal collision by attempting to reduce
your driving speed. Depending on
Automatic Emergency Braking to avoid a
collision can result in serious injury or
death.

If you want AEB to be better, fine. This is what AEB does now.

 

[chinnam3]

I’m super curious why people disliked this post.

Do you disagree about his description of what AEB is for? Because he was correct based on every definition I’ve found in web searches.

Are you disagreeing with the statement that only the Tesla’s failed in this test? Because that’s true.

Or are you disagreeing with the statement that the Tesla’s are having trouble detecting stationary objects? Because that’s true.

Did I miss something else in that post that was worthy of dislike?

I think too many blind fan boys that could not digest Tesla deficiencies. Every manufacturer has problems, and unless problem is identified and highlighted, it would not get prioritized or fixed. Looks like Fan boys can not even take that.

 

[clostridium]

I suspect it was disagreed with because of this, which came directly from the Model 3's owner manual.

Warning:
Automatic Emergency Braking
is not designed to prevent a collision. At
best, it can minimize the impact of a
frontal collision by attempting to reduce
your driving speed. Depending on
Automatic Emergency Braking to avoid a
collision can result in serious injury or
death.

If you want AEB to be better, fine. This is what AEB does now.

Good point.
The model s manual is even more clear on this and says it won’t slow more than 25 mph. I suppose some people think that because the system appears to work as Tesla designed it means that it should pass but the IIHS gets to run their tests however they want as long as they consistent in expectations it’s fair.

There have been more than a few examples of Tesla’s failing to stop for stationary objects. I understand the challenges in avoiding false positive braking events. I love my tesla but that doesn’t mean I cut them a break (ouch) when a safety feature falls short just because it’s hard to implement.

Was the BI headline trolly? Heck yes. Was it silly that IIHS didn’t update the model s in the testing? Yes. But let’s not let that cloud the underlying issues that came out. Tesla can and should fix this.

 

[chinnam3]

I suspect it was disagreed with because of this, which came directly from the Model 3's owner manual.

Warning:
Automatic Emergency Braking
is not designed to prevent a collision. At
best, it can minimize the impact of a
frontal collision by attempting to reduce
your driving speed. Depending on
Automatic Emergency Braking to avoid a
collision can result in serious injury or
death.

If you want AEB to be better, fine. This is what AEB does now.

Putting a disclaimer is not taking care of actual issue. Industry and user expectation in general for AEB is that it stop the car. Ofcourse there might be scenarios where car comes across at high speed and there is not enough distance to stop the car it might still cause collision.
It is the case with every manufacturer. But in this test scenario, all cars were given enough distance to stop the car and Tesla failed. That is bottom line.

 

[Krazaak]

I think too many blind fan boys that could not digest Tesla deficiencies. Every manufacturer has problems, and unless problem is identified and highlighted, it would not get prioritized or fixed. Looks like Fan boys can not even take that.

There's definitely a bit of fanboi-ism on any fan site, but I think there's a huge difference between something failing to work like it's supposed to and failing to work like you want it to.

The limitations of AEB are clearly documented. It didn't fail to perform as it is designed to perform.

I absolutely agree that it could and should be better in the future.

IIHS is the one that gave the Model 3 a superior front crash prevention score.

2018 Tesla Model 3

Their own test doesn't require that the vehicle stop before impact, the score system is based on how much it slows down.

 

[Lasairfion]

With the upcoming release of AutoPilot's magical new 10x faster computer chip perhaps the false positive issue will go away, and Tesla can implement a "comes to a full stop" autobraking option.

Also, I had to Google what FUD meant to Americans. Perhaps we should have mods add it to the auto-censor.

 

[StellarRat]

I can't figure out how a car with radar cannot tell there is an object in front of it and it needs to stop. That seems pretty elementary to me. If the car only has Doppler radar and can't detect non-moving objects than they need to add regular radar. Also, why does the car allow itself to hit objects at low speeds when the ultrasonic sensors have a contact? At a minimum it should stop and ask the driver if he/she wants to continue aka an override.

 

[Runt8]

Also, I had to Google what FUD meant to Americans. Perhaps we should have mods add it to the auto-censor.

FUD - Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt

 

[FourOhFour]

Automatic emergency braking that can't bring the car to a stop is a bit like an elevator that skips odd floors. Sure, you can do it. It's better than nothing. And most of the time, it's good enough... most of us can climb one flight of stairs, and most of the time the driver will take over for the AEB and bring the car to a stop if necessary.

But try telling people in wheelchairs that can't climb stairs or who suffer an unexpected seizure and can't apply the brakes that it's good enough.

Is the Business Insider headline clickbait? Of course. Hard to find one that isn't. Was IIHS testing the Tesla beyond its stated capabilities? Apparently so. But... other car makers did it. We should be pushing Tesla to improve rather than making excuses and accusations.

 

[Runt8]

I can't figure out how a car with radar cannot tell there is an object in front of it and it needs to stop. That seems pretty elementary to me. If the car only has Doppler radar and can't detect non-moving objects than they need to add regular radar. Also, why does the car allow itself to hit objects at low speeds when the ultrasonic sensors have a contact? At a minimum it should stop and ask the driver if he/she wants to continue aka an override.

Seeing a stationary object is easy. Knowing what objects to stop for is the hard part. I’m guessing you don’t want your car slamming on the brakes for a soda can in the road.

 

[Glamisduner]

I am seeing many Fan boys getting heartache for criticizing Tesla even for right reasons. I hope Fan boys get out of their shell and be reasonable/rationale.

I myself owner and fan of Tesla, but that does not mean I would be blind to the Tesla Faults.

In this specific case, I really like that Tesla, esp my model 3 maintained the steering to keep within the lines, and that mirrors my experience where lines are clearly laid out (without merges).

Also, at the same time, I have first hand experience of Phantom braking several times. I can consistently reproduce this issue. First time it happen on highway at 80MPH because of overpass and that was scary and jarring. Now when it starts braking I press throttle to counter that.

Another issue is AEB. As we have seen enough instances where Tesla did not apply brakes/ or did not apply fully causing accidents. So this is one of those important features I hope AEB is improved soon and take care of the issue. I did not want to test this, and fortunately I have not ran into situation like this. IMHO, it is as critical as Belts, airbags, ABS etc to reliably work.

Hope, Tesla takes care of both of those issues soon and also gets the promised EAP features like switching highways on EAP and taking right exit sooner.

Tesla says AEB will slow the car down 25mph before a collision. If it does this but still crashes AEB has worked as intended. Phantom braking, that should certainly be fixed.

 

[SupersonicP3D]

Putting a disclaimer is not taking care of actual issue. Industry and user expectation in general for AEB is that it stop the car. Ofcourse there might be scenarios where car comes across at high speed and there is not enough distance to stop the car it might still cause collision.
It is the case with every manufacturer. But in this test scenario, all cars were given enough distance to stop the car and Tesla failed. That is bottom line.

Exactly. "AEB" as defined by the industry and by apparently almost every other manufacturer that implements it means the car comes to a complete stop, whether or not you're in autopilot mode. That's what I'd expect as a user when I hear "automatic emergency braking." So does IIHS, and they are neither a bunch of morons nor have some hidden agenda.

What it comes down to is that Teslas don't have AEB as traditionally defined, they have some sort of AEB[asterisk]. And that matters! IIHS didn't conduct some esoteric gotcha test - they drove the cars into objects. Other cars stopped, Teslas didn't. Whether you rate that a fail, an N/A*, "not tested," or whatever, the point is that Teslas do not react consistent with how an industry standard ADAS feature is expected to work by a whole lot of people. That it's noted in the manual is great, for the 5 people who read car manuals (yes I'm sure you read it, but think of the people who aren't on Tesla message boards). It's still a gap in Tesla's feature-set and IIHS is right to point it out.

The Model 3 is the best car I've ever driven and I for one am really excited to see it get even better.

 

[Glamisduner]

Exactly. "AEB" as defined by the industry and by apparently almost every other manufacturer that implements it means the car comes to a complete stop, whether or not you're in autopilot mode. That's what I'd expect as a user when I hear "automatic emergency braking." So does IIHS, and they are neither a bunch of morons nor have some hidden agenda.

What it comes down to is that Teslas don't have AEB as traditionally defined, they have some sort of AEB[asterisk]. And that matters! IIHS didn't conduct some esoteric gotcha test - they drove the cars into objects. Other cars stopped, Teslas didn't. Whether you rate that a fail, an N/A*, "not tested," or whatever, the point is that Teslas do not react consistent with how an industry standard ADAS feature is expected to work by a whole lot of people. That it's noted in the manual is great, for the 5 people who read car manuals (yes I'm sure you read it, but think of the people who aren't on Tesla message boards). It's still a gap in Tesla's feature-set and IIHS is right to point it out.

The Model 3 is the best car I've ever driven and I for one am really excited to see it get even better.

Actually, straight from the source...

Driver Assistance Technologies

"Automatic emergency braking (AEB) systems detect an impending forward crash with another vehicle in time to avoid or mitigate the crash. These systems first alert the driver to take corrective action and supplements the driver’s braking to avoid the crash. If the driver does not respond, the AEB system may automatically apply the brakes to assist in preventing or reducing the severity of a crash. "

 

[Az_Rael]

Exactly. "AEB" as defined by the industry and by apparently almost every other manufacturer that implements it means the car comes to a complete stop, whether or not you're in autopilot mode. That's what I'd expect as a user when I hear "automatic emergency braking." So does IIHS, and they are neither a bunch of morons nor have some hidden agenda

Totally agree. The biggest problem with AEB is there are many different implementations of it, and a consumer looking to buy a car would have to dig deep into user manuals to figure out which ones are different. Some systems amplify your braking force even when you are pressing the pedal, some like Tesla's do not. Some work at low speeds, where Tesla's doesn't work below 7mph. Some don't work above certain highway speeds, where Tesla's system does.

It is a hot mess for the average consumer, so I am glad the IIHS is developing some standard tests. That will drive the industry to want to pass the tests, and therefore provide some standard capability across the market. And hopefully drive Tesla to improve their system as well. They do like to market themselves as the "safest car" after all.

 

[diamond.g]

At what speed should the Tesla come to a complete stop? Should they code for the test, or should it come to a complete stop at any speed?

If they used to TACC logic to stop the car I wonder how dangerous the full power phantom braking incidents would become. Clearly TACC is able to stop the car and it is able to do it gracefully. If AEB is using the same functionality then why doesn't it too stop?

 

[Krazaak]

Automatic emergency braking that can't bring the car to a stop is a bit like an elevator that skips odd floors. Sure, you can do it. It's better than nothing. And most of the time, it's good enough... most of us can climb one flight of stairs, and most of the time the driver will take over for the AEB and bring the car to a stop if necessary.

But try telling people in wheelchairs that can't climb stairs or who suffer an unexpected seizure and can't apply the brakes that it's good enough.

Is the Business Insider headline clickbait? Of course. Hard to find one that isn't. Was IIHS testing the Tesla beyond its stated capabilities? Apparently so. But... other car makers did it. We should be pushing Tesla to improve rather than making excuses and accusations.

Except, from the actual report....

Out on the road, engineers noted instances in which each vehicle except the Model 3 failed to respond to stopped vehicles ahead.

So in their mock testing, the other cars stopped for the dummy target, but on the actual road the Model 3 was the only one that performed properly in all situations under ACC/TACC.

I don't know why Tesla has chosen to implement AEB they way they have, but the NHTSA and IIHS guidelines discuss warning and crash mitigation, not just avoidance.

I don't see anything wrong with people calling for Tesla to change AEB so it reacts early enough to avoid a collision, I just disagree with saying the AEB system failed during the IIHS tests. It didn't fail, it operated as designed.

I usually run with FCW set to normal and I definitely wouldn't want AEB to intervene at the point that normal reacts with an FCW warning. Early alerts way too often and I haven't tried late FCW warnings. AEB is an aggressive braking maneuver, too early and it's going to be responsible for a lot of Tesla's being rear-ended.

 

[Krazaak]

Exactly. "AEB" as defined by the industry and by apparently almost every other manufacturer that implements it means the car comes to a complete stop, whether or not you're in autopilot mode. That's what I'd expect as a user when I hear "automatic emergency braking." So does IIHS, and they are neither a bunch of morons nor have some hidden agenda.

What it comes down to is that Teslas don't have AEB as traditionally defined, they have some sort of AEB[asterisk]. And that matters! IIHS didn't conduct some esoteric gotcha test - they drove the cars into objects. Other cars stopped, Teslas didn't. Whether you rate that a fail, an N/A*, "not tested," or whatever, the point is that Teslas do not react consistent with how an industry standard ADAS feature is expected to work by a whole lot of people. That it's noted in the manual is great, for the 5 people who read car manuals (yes I'm sure you read it, but think of the people who aren't on Tesla message boards). It's still a gap in Tesla's feature-set and IIHS is right to point it out.

The Model 3 is the best car I've ever driven and I for one am really excited to see it get even better.

That's what is bizarre about that report. IIHS has rated the Model 3s front crash avoidance and they gave it the highest score possible, 6.

 

[StellarRat]

Seeing a stationary object is easy. Knowing what objects to stop for is the hard part. I’m guessing you don’t want your car slamming on the brakes for a soda can in the road.

No I don't, but that shouldn't be that hard. Big blip, little blip, we're talking 40's technology here from what I can tell. I'll be the first to admit I'm not a radar expert, but this seems solvable to me.

 

[ℬête Noire]

No I don't, but that shouldn't be that hard. Big blip, little blip, we're talking 40's technology here from what I can tell. I'll be the first to admit I'm not a radar expert, but this seems solvable to me.

The solution required different tech, current tech just has too much noise in the signal to differentiate a true signal of an Item That Matters from the noise. That's why nobody has solved it yet.

They weren't solving this in the 40's, either. They were operating at MUCH longer distances, so had a lot more time (and weren't particularly accurate in some ways, then, either, certainly not soda can precise ).

 

[mongo]

It's Automatic emergency braking
Not automatic emergency stopping...
No one should be relying on this to prevent a crash, it's there for when the driver screws up.

TACC on the other hand is there to adjust speed and steering and stay clear of other cars, and it does ,with Model 3 doing the best of all the cars.