Rear ended another vehicle, not blaming Tesla but wondering why AEB did not activate?

[scottf200]

I think that the above statement can cause unsafe confusion as if AEB will still brake which is contrary to what the manual says:

"Automatic Emergency Braking does not apply the brakes, or stops applying the brakes, when:

.You turn the steering wheel sharply.
.You press and release the brake pedal while Automatic Emergency Braking is applying the brakes.
.You accelerate hard while Automatic Emergency Braking is applying the brakes.
.The vehicle, motorcycle, bicycle, or pedestrian is no longer detected ahead"

It would seem that other manufactures must have similar 'rules' they follow but may not be specifying them in the manuals. Surprised there are not regulations about the above responses (turn off when) happen.

Some cars only have low speed AEB. My Volt is only doing AEB at up to 37 MPH (not great when most of our roads around here are 40+ MPH).

Also apparently diff manufacturers give AEB unique names (see below).

AEB Auto Emergency Braking | How Safe Is Your Car | How Safe Is Your Car

 

[Tam]

...It would seem that other manufactures must have similar 'rules' they follow but may not be specifying them in the manuals...

Most manufacturers would honor the rule: Human overrides automation at all times at any time, no question asked.

That means if human wants to manually press on the accelerator and slam into the car in front, the automation system would yield and allow the human's wish of manual acceleration to happen.

It's very rare that a manufacturer would not honor that convention such as Boeing 737 Max.

It's a special but fatal automation that would nose dive and human pilot would fight back by nose up but the system again would not honor that human's wish to nose up and it would continue to force to nose down and that pattern was repeated over and over again until human pilots lost and the automation system won by successfully nosing down to kill everyone onboard (Lion Air pilots hopelessly and repeatedly overrode the system for 26 times and lost to the power of automation).

 

[ranova]

which ones did you purchase and is there a guide somewhere? thanks!

I bought the suma performance ones, you lose auto dimming but I think the auto dimming feature makes the mirrors TOO dark at night
Model 3

 

[scottf200]

Most manufacturers would honor the rule: Human overrides automation at all times at any time, no question asked.

Are any of them documented in other manufacturer manuals? I've never seen them. Diff manufacturers certainly give AEB unique names (see above).

 

[wrishel]

I may be wrong, but it's my understanding collision avoidance only works 100% in AP, FSD, and TACC. But In normal driving all I get is the car that's too close turns red and the warning goes off and EAB will slow you down but not necessarily stop you, at least that's been my understanding.

I remember reading this explicitly in the M3 manual, virtually the same as was in the manual for my 2017 Volt. The AEB system is NOT designed to prevent a collision; it is designed to reduce the damage. I have assumed this is because the system gets too many false positives if it were sensitive enough to prevent collisions.

 

[GlmnAlyAirCar]

Cause he said he had his head turned and did see the cars in front of him coming to a stop.

If we are looking at this for a possible solution to preventing the entire accident and not needing AEB, then by providing an ergonomic change to his side mirrors is a viable solution.

We have all these new technologies to help us when we are distracted or unable to fully be aware of every situation around us. Hence why accidents happen, because they are accidents. If he didn't have to keep his head turn to look over his shoulder, this accident may have been avoided. I linked the video because I had my mirrors set incorrectly during my 10 year driving career and only recently discover this method this year. So I thought I'd shared my newfound knowledge with the great people of this forum =]

But he didn’t ask how he could have avoided the accident, he had an AEB question.

 

[Tam]

Are any of them documented in other manufacturer manuals? I've never seen them. Diff manufacturers certainly give AEB unique names (see above).

Yes, there are.

As @wrishel mentioned, here's from GM Volt on how to override Forward Automatic Braking (FAB):

"To override FAB, firmly press the accelerator pedal."

Another from BMW on how to override or "interrupt" Tesla's AEB equivalent:

Interrupting automatic braking

It can be necessary to interrupt automatic braking in certain situations, for instance for an evasive maneuver.

Interrupt automatic braking:

By pressing the brake pedal.

By pressing the accelerator pedal.

 

[scottf200]

Yes, there are.
By pressing the brake pedal.
By pressing the accelerator pedal.

Yes, I think everyone would understand that basic braking and accelerating would override.

I thought Tesla was unique in these two:

.You turn the steering wheel sharply.
.The vehicle, motorcycle, bicycle, or pedestrian is no longer detected ahead"

 

[Tam]

Yes, I think everyone would understand that basic braking and accelerating would override.

I thought Tesla was unique in these two:

Indeed.

The manual accelerator is a common overriding for Automatic Braking.

Tesla goes further and has extra criteria for override protocol as well.

 

[Skotty]

As someone who has spent a lot of time programming automated simulated robots to battle each other, I can contribute that a feature like EAB is a fuzzy logic kind of thing that has to be balanced as best as possible, but will probably never be perfect. No one wants false positives, and no one wants false negatives, and there won't be a perfect cut off between the two. Tesla has to balance the system as best they can to provide the best experience possible and then add CYA language to the legal docs because unlikely it will ever be perfect.

Does this explanation apply here? Maybe. Maybe not. But it's something to consider.

 

[scottf200]

As someone who has spent a lot of time programming automated simulated robots to battle each other, I can contribute that a feature like EAB is a fuzzy logic kind of thing that has to be balanced as best as possible, but will probably never be perfect. No one wants false positives, and no one wants false negatives, and there won't be a perfect cut off between the two. Tesla has to balance the system as best they can to provide the best experience possible and then add CYA language to the legal docs because unlikely it will ever be perfect.

Does this explanation apply here? Maybe. Maybe not. But it's something to consider.

The Dashboard for Tesla Android app has a feature that lets you finish charging by a certain time. Because of changes in volts, amps, and temp, it seems to walk up in 15 min increments to test the charge rate before it does a final one. They did quite a bit of testing on this. I would prefer an option just to be close tho (ie. within 1-3 % of SOC).

So perhaps Tesla is just doing a reasonable estimation of how long it will take based on the current volts (which vary +/- 5 by me at diff times of day) and other factors.

 

[daver3]

I may be wrong, but it's my understanding collision avoidance only works 100% in AP, FSD, and TACC. But In normal driving all I get is the car that's too close turns red and the warning goes off and EAB will slow you down but not necessarily stop you, at least that's been my understanding.

This is how it appears to me as well, but the question is why. The car clearly has the ability to see obstacles and stop you in AP so why not all the time. In what situation would you ever want to have a collision with an obstacle.

 

[wrishel]

The Dashboard for Tesla Android app has a feature that lets you finish charging by a certain time. Because of changes in volts, amps, and temp, it seems to walk up in 15 min increments to test the charge rate before it does a final one. They did quite a bit of testing on this. I would prefer an option just to be close tho (ie. within 1-3 % of SOC).

So perhaps Tesla is just doing a reasonable estimation of how long it will take based on the current volts (which vary +/- 5 by me at diff times of day) and other factors.

This seems unrelated to the thread. Did you mean to post it another thread?

 

[wrishel]

Hi all,
I recently rear ended someone and when it happened my EAB made no attempt at stopping the vehicle. Long story short- I was merging on the highway, I looked over my shoulder, and started to merge- traffic was moving fine but as I turned my head back around my lane came to a stop and I rear ended this woman.

... Video below.

2019-11-08_08-16-11-front.mp4

Looking at the video it appears that @kaelendavis1 had moved from the entrance ramp into the traffic lane, which was slow, was checking the mirrors for an opportunity to move a lane to the left. The cards in front slowed down more and KD's car hit the one in front.

The discussion of this in the M3 owner's manual starts on p102. A careful reading uncovers a somewhat disturbing possibility. Collision alerts and emergency braking are not triggered if the driver is already pressing the brake pedal.

Apparently, having one's foot lightly on the pedal will prevent an alert or the much more aggressive braking required to minimize damage.

Given the traffic situation that scenario seems quite possible.

I never realized this limitation on alerts and emergency braking.

As has been well discussed on this thread, these systems are not perfect and their design creates difficult trade-offs. That being said, it seems like Tesla should consider taking into account how heavily the driver's foot is on the brake before disabling alerts and EAB.