RegVault

UN R13 Supplement 20 (11 series) · UNECE Regulation No. 13 (ECE R13) — Uniform provisions concerning the approval of vehicles of categories M, N and O with regard to braking.

UN R13 — Supplement 20 to the 11 series of amendments

Supplement 19 → 20

Adopted at the WP.29 188th sessionEntry into force 2023-06-05
What changed
  • Under new paragraph 5.2.1.26.5., the warning of Annex 8, paragraph 2.6., may be delayed until the parking brake system has detected correct clamping. This applies when the parking braking system detects a request to fully apply the parking brake or to gradually control its action.
  • If the stable state is not reached, the yellow warning signal must show at the latest 10 s after a full application request.
Why
  • With an electric control transmission, the parking brake warning may already be displayed before the new stable parked state is reached. The driver may then believe that the parking brake is fully applied, and the proposal aims to remove this risk.
  • Instead of limiting the delay in time, the revised industry proposal requires a failure warning after 10 seconds.

Q1What changed4 changes

Annex 8, para. 2.6. warning may be delayed until correct clamping (para. 5.2.1.26.5.)

New paragraph 5.2.1.26.5. applies when the parking braking system detects a request, generated automatically or by the driver. The request is to fully apply the parking brake (to reach its mechanically locked position) or to gradually control the parking brake action. The actuation of the Annex 8 warning (para. 2.6.) may then be delayed until the parking brake system has detected correct clamping. If the stable state is not reached, the yellow warning signal (para. 5.2.1.29.1.2.) must show at the latest 10 s after a full application request. Before, there was no paragraph 5.2.1.26.5.

If the parking braking system detects a request (generated automatically or by the driver):
To fully apply the parking brake (i.e. to reach the mechanically locked position of the parking brake), or
2 more changes in this group — open in Compare
See every change side by side in Compare

Q2Why it changed

Proposed by
Experts from the International Organization of Motor Vehicle Manufacturers and the European Association of Automotive Suppliers
Working party
GRVA, 13th session (May 2022)

Reasons

  • Paragraph 2.6. of Annex 8 requires the parking brake warning device to be actuated once the brake parts begin to move. With an electric control transmission, a specific issue exists during the transition between the parked (applied) and un-parked (released) states. The parking brake warning may already be displayed while the electric control transmission has not yet reached its new stable parked state. The driver may then believe that the parking brake is fully applied. The proposal aims to remove this risk by allowing the warning only once the electric transmission of the parking brake is in a stable state.

    Sources (5)
    “Current paragraph 2.6. of Annex 8 requires the park brake warning device to be actuated once the brake parts begin to move”
    “a specific issue exists in the case of an electric control transmission, specifically during the transition between parked (applied) and un-parked (released) states”
    “the parking brake warning may indeed be already displayed to the driver (while the electric control transmission has not yet reached its new stable -parked- state)”
    “The driver may then have a wrong interpretation of the situation (believing the park brake is fully applied)”
    “The aim of this proposal is to eradicate this risk of misinterpretation by the driver, by allowing the warning device to be actuated only once the electric transmission of the parking brake is in a stable state”
  • Proposer's reason (informal document GRVA-13-22-Rev.1)

    To improve clarity, the revised proposal makes explicit the two use cases that it targets. These are the driver’s request to fully apply the parking brake, and the use of the parking brake by the driver as a secondary brake.

    Submitted by the experts from CLEPA and OICA. Working party adoption: ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/13, para. 89.

    Sources (2)
    “To improve clarity, the amended proposal makes now explicit the two different use cases which are targeted by the proposal”
    “the driver’s request to fully apply the park brake on the one hand, the use by the driver of the park brake as a secondary brake on the other hand”
  • Proposer's reason (informal document GRVA-13-22-Rev.1)

    The proposed failure warning after 10 seconds addresses concerns received at GRVA-12 that the delay of the warning should be limited in time. According to the industry, a time limit on the delay would go against the aim of the proposal. That aim is to show the warning only once the parking brake has reached a stable state. The proposal keeps the possible delay unlimited until a stable state, but requires the system to provide a failure warning after 10 seconds. The driver would then be informed of a system failure without wrong information about the actual parking brake status.

    Submitted by the experts from CLEPA and OICA. Working party adoption: ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/13, para. 89.

    Sources (4)
    “The added text in square bracket is addressing the concerns received at GRVA-12 that the delay of the warning should be limited in time.”
    “the proposed way to address it would actually go against the initial aim of the proposal (which is to show the warning only once the parking brake has reached a stable state)”
    “The proposal here is to keep the possible delay of the park brake unlimited (until the parking brake is in a stable state), but instead to require the system to provide a failure warning after 10 seconds.”
    “The driver would then be informed of a system failure, while not receiving any wrong information about the park brake actual status.”
  • Proposer's reason (informal document GRVA-13-22-Rev.1)

    The new wording of the revised proposal builds on existing wording in paragraph 5.2.1.26.2.3., to avoid a new wording with the same meaning. According to the proposers, “stable state” means the same as “correct clamping” of the parking brake.

    Submitted by the experts from CLEPA and OICA. Working party adoption: ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/13, para. 89.

    Source
    “The new wording of revision 1 builds on existing wording in 5.2.1.26.2.3. of the regulation, which avoids creating a new wording with the same meaning (“stable state” indeed means the same as “correct clamping” of the parking brake).”

Document trail

  1. 2021-11ProposalECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/11Proposal by the experts from OICA and CLEPA
  2. —Amended in sessionGRVA-13-22-Rev.1Changes by the experts from CLEPA and OICA to the proposal
  3. —Working party adoptsECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/13GRVA session report, para. 89
  4. 2022-08Sent to WP.29ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2022/137Text that GRVA sent to WP.29 and AC.1
  5. 2022-11WP.29 adoptsECE/TRANS/WP.29/1168Adopted at the 188th session (session report, para. 138)
  6. 2023-06-05In forceC.N.149.2023.TREATIES-XI.B.16.13UN depositary notification

Q3Who is affected

Vehicle manufacturer

  • If you delay the Annex 8, paragraph 2.6. warning, end the delay once correct clamping is detected.
  • Show the yellow warning signal within 10 s of a full application request that does not reach the stable state.

Component supplier

  • Check your parking brake control and warning functions against new paragraph 5.2.1.26.5.

Technical service / Approval authority

  • Where the Annex 8, paragraph 2.6. warning is delayed, check the delay against paragraph 5.2.1.26.5.
  • Check the 10 s yellow warning signal after a full application request that does not reach the stable state.

See every change side by side

RegVault customers compare every version of UN regulations, read the consolidated text and download the PDF.

ⓘ This report gives advice only. It is not legal or type-approval advice.

More UN R13 change reports

All UN R13 change reports