RegVault
Free trial

UN R131 Supplement 1 (02 series) · UNECE Regulation No. 131 (ECE R131) — Uniform provisions concerning the approval of motor vehicles with regard to the Advanced Emergency Braking System (AEBS) for M2, M3, N2 and N3 vehicles.

UN R131 — Supplement 1 to the 02 series of amendments

Base text → Supplement 1

Adopted at the WP.29 189th sessionEntry into force 2023-09-24
CompareRead full text
What changed
  • The AEBS function must now be automatically reinstated at each new engine start (or run cycle, as relevant), not each new ignition cycle (para. 5.4.1.1.).
  • This requirement does not apply when a new engine start (or run cycle, as relevant) is performed automatically, for example by a stop/start system.
  • A new footnote is added to paragraph 6.9.1.(b) on additional test runs. If a category would still have fewer than 10 test runs, the footnote allows additional test runs of that category to reach at least 10.
Why
  • The proposers describe the text proposed for paragraph 5.4.1.1. as an alignment on the wording adopted for UN Regulation No. 152 (AEBS for light vehicles).
  • The proposal says that, if the text remains unchanged, one failed test run will immediately fail the criterion of only 10 per cent failed tests.

Q1What changed4 changes

Reinstatement of the AEBS function at each new engine start or run cycle (para. 5.4.1.1.)

Paragraph 5.4.1.1. now requires the AEBS function to be automatically reinstated “at the initiation of each new engine start (or run cycle, as relevant)”. Before, it said “at the initiation of each new ignition cycle”. A new second sentence says that this requirement does not apply when a new engine start (or run cycle, as relevant) is performed automatically. The paragraph gives the operation of a stop/start system as an example.

The AEBS function shall be automatically reinstated at the initiation of each new ignition engine start (or run cycle, as relevant). This requirement does not apply when a new engine start (or run cycle, as relevant) is performed automatically, e.g. the operation of a stop/start system.

Robustness of the system: footnote on additional test runs (para. 6.9.1.(b)) and wording of para. 6.9.2.

A new footnote is added to item (b) of paragraph 6.9.1. Item (b) limits failed test runs within one category to 10.0 per cent of the performed test runs for the Vehicle to Pedestrian tests. If a category would still have fewer than 10 test runs, the footnote allows additional test runs of that category to reach at least 10. The footnote says these may include, but are not limited to, the failed test scenario. Paragraph 6.9.2. now says “may test at any other speed” instead of “may test any other speeds”. Paragraph 6.9.2. also changes “analysed” to “analyzed” and “technical service” to “Technical Service”.

In case the total number of test runs within a category would still be less than 10, additional test runs of that category may be performed, including but not limited to the failed test scenario, to reach a total number of test runs at least equal to 10.
1 more change in this group — open in Compare
See every change side by side in Compare

Q2Why it changed

Proposed by
Experts from the Informal Working Group on Advanced Emergency Braking Systems of Heavy Duty Vehicles (AEBS-HDV)
Working party
GRVA, 14th session (September 2022)

Reasons

  • The proposers describe the text proposed for paragraph 5.4.1.1. as an alignment on the wording adopted for UN Regulation No. 152 (AEBS for light vehicles). They state that there is no difference of AEBS deactivation technology between the light and the heavy vehicles, so full alignment is reasonable. The AEBS-HDV informal working group is of the opinion that alignment on a text that reached consensus in GRVA in May 2021 promotes harmonization.

    Sources (3)
    “The text proposed for amendments to paragraph 5.4.1.1. (AEBS reactivation) is an alignment on the wording adopted for UN Regulation No. 152 (AEBS for light vehicles)”
    “There is no difference of AEBS deactivation technology between the light and the heavy vehicles; full alignment is then reasonable.”
    “The AEBS-HDV informal working group in addition is of the opinion that alignment on a text that reached consensus within GRVA at its tenth session in May 2021 promotes harmonization”

  • The proposal says the explanatory footnote widens the possibility of performing additional test runs when one test failed. Full alignment with the wording of UN Regulation No. 152 would not be appropriate, as the revised UN Regulation No. 131 has fewer test runs. If the text remains unchanged, one failed run will immediately fail the criterion of only 10 per cent failed tests, due to the low number. The footnote permits more test runs, which decreases the “weight” of a unique failed test run and makes the requirements more reasonable.

    Sources (4)
    “The addition of an explanatory footnote in para 6.9.1.(b) (Robustness of the system) permits to widen the possibility of performing additional test runs when one test failed.”
    “A total alignment on the wording of UN Regulation No. 152 would not be appropriate in this case since the number of test runs in the revised UN Regulation No. 131 is lower than in UN Regulation No. 152.”
    “If the text remains unchanged failing one test run will immediately fail the criterion of only 10 per cent failed tests due to the low number.”
    “The footnote permits to increase the number of test runs, thereby decreases the “weight” of a unique failed test run and makes the requirements more reasonable.”

  • The proposers note that the footnote is a clarification. The technical service can already perform as many additional test runs as it believes are needed to assess the quality and robustness of the system.

    Source
    “Note that this is a clarification; the technical service already is given the opportunity to perform as much additional test runs as they believe is needed to assess the quality and robustness of the system.”

  • At the GRVA session, the expert from OICA presented GRVA-14-26, proposing clarifications to the provisions regarding reinstating AEBS, for example for a new engine start.

    Source
    “The expert from OICA presented GRVA-14-26, proposing clarifications to the provisions in the two official documents above regarding reinstating AEBS e.g. for new engine start.”

Document trail

  1. 2022-07ProposalECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/2022/22Proposal from the AEBS-HDV informal working group
  2. —Amended in sessionGRVA-14-26Amendments to the proposal from OICA and CLEPA
  3. —Amended in sessionGRVA-14-47Proposal text with the amendments of GRVA-14-26, prepared by the secretariat
  4. —Working party adoptsECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRVA/14Session report, para. 84
  5. 2022-12Sent to WP.29ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2023/12Text that GRVA sent to WP.29 and AC.1
  6. 2023-03WP.29 adoptsECE/TRANS/WP.29/1171Adopted at the 189th session (session report, para. 127)
  7. 2023-09-24In forceC.N.427.2023.TREATIES-XI.B.16.131UN depositary notification

Q3Who is affected

Vehicle manufacturer

  • Make sure AEBS reinstates automatically at each new engine start (or run cycle, as relevant), except those performed automatically.

Component supplier

  • No direct action for this role.

Technical service / Approval authority

  • No direct action for this role.

See every change side by side

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

Start free trialSign in

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

More UN R131 change reports

All UN R131 change reports