Slashdot Mirror


Researchers Test Drive Bus With Automated Steering

An anonymous reader tips us to news that researchers at University of California, Berkeley, have successfully test driven a 60-foot bus that controlled its own steering. Sensors on the bus detected magnets that had been embedded in a San Leandro road, and it was able to reach stops within one centimeter of its desired position. Acceleration and braking during the test were controlled by a human operator, but the system is capable of handling those as well, and has done so on test courses. "... sensors mounted under the bus measured the magnetic fields created from the roadway magnets, which were placed beneath the pavement surface 1 meter apart along the center of the lane. The information was translated into the bus's lateral and longitudinal position by an on-board computer, which then directed the vehicle to move accordingly. For a vehicle traveling 60 miles per hour, data from 27 meters (88 feet) of roadway can be read and processed in 1 second. Zhang added that the system is robust enough to withstand a wide range of operating conditions, including rain or snow, a significant improvement to other vehicle guidance systems based upon optics."

39 of 180 comments (clear)

  1. If "auto-steering" becomes popular... by nathan.fulton · · Score: 3, Insightful

    who gets sued in the event of a crash?

    1. Re:If "auto-steering" becomes popular... by CastrTroy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This is why self driven vehicles are a very very long way off. Even in the event that they bring collisions and other related problems down to 0.01% of their current rate, it still won't be good enough. When a crash happens now, it's almost always the fault of the person behind the wheel (except with mechanical failure, which is rare, and even more rare when you consider it's the fault of the driver for unmaintained vehicles). However, when cars start driving themselves, any crash will automatically be the fault of the company who designed the steering system. Any crash would probably cause a complete recall on the cars using the same system, and the company would probably go bankrupt instantly.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    2. Re:If "auto-steering" becomes popular... by Dan541 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But it will still be cheaper to kill people than to refit all affected cars.

      The only way to ensure safety is to hold the operator accountable with serious Jail time. It should always be up to the Driver/Operator to keep a check on the mechanical condition of the vehicle.

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
  2. trams! by stranger_to_himself · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The 19th century called....they want their trams back.

    1. Re:trams! by jonbryce · · Score: 4, Informative

      Try the Docklands Light Railway then.

      They don't have drivers. They have "train captains" who can hit the emergency stop button if necessary, close the doors when everyone is on/off, and the rest of the time walk up and down checking tickets.

      I think anything that drives where there is other traffic is going to have to have a driver, so like the grandparent poster, I don't see what the advantage of this is over a tramway.

    2. Re:trams! by NiceGeek · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Really? The streetcar is dead? I guess I rode a ghost train in downtown Portland, OR the other day.

    3. Re:trams! by ngg · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The cost of maintaining tracks, switches, overheads, etc., helped kill the streetcar. It's all over and above the expense of maintaining the road.

      That's because the cost of repairing damage caused to the road by heavy buses is largely invisible on municipal budgets. To wit: when streetcar tracks need repair, the cost appears on the streetcar budget; but when potholes (caused primarily by heavy vehicles like buses and trucks) need repair, the cost is absorbed by the "street maintenance" budget. Car-driving voters usually like politicians who spend money for pothole repairs. Streetcar operators, having been primarily private companies, also would not have had the same access to a municipality's General Fund as the DOT.

      There was no simple or economical way to re-route lines or add new ones.

      I hear this a lot in discussions of public transit, but I think it's a complete non-issue for two reasons.

      • First, ask yourself this: Would you prefer to use public transit with a route system that required you to find and learn a new route and schedule every few months or one that let you find a useful route once and rely on it for years? I recently had to ride the bus while my car was in the shop, and finding a time-effective route and schedule was a major PITA (even using the online route-planner).
      • Second: How often do you see bus routes change in actual practice? I don't ride the bus regularly in LA, but it seems like Metro hasn't changed the bus routes for decades.

      If changing the routes is inconvenient to the riders and the operating agency doesn't change them anyway, then why does it matter whether the routes can be changed?

    4. Re:trams! by ProfessionalCookie · · Score: 2, Interesting

      ...not wanting to sit on a smelly bus with the types of people that usually are on public transportation (bums, street people, etc)

      Ouch.

    5. Re:trams! by Ragzouken · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Maybe if everyone wasn't so afraid to ride public transportation because of 'bums, street people, etc' then you might just reclaim it for normal people. Where I come from mostly old people and students ride buses. On a friday night you might get one drunken guy keeping to himself, but there aren't any bums or such.

  3. Sabotage? by maeka · · Score: 4, Interesting

    But can it survive intentional sabotage?
    Placing magnets on the surface of the pavement would not be hard to do.

    1. Re:Sabotage? by nathan.fulton · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes. 1. TFA: "In the system demonstrated today, sensors mounted under the bus measured the magnetic fields created from the roadway magnets, which were placed beneath the pavement surface 1 meter apart along the center of the lane." I'm assuming (but probably a safe one, UC Berkley is full of smart people) that the system has some pretty specific levels of acceptable differential in the magnetic field. Otherwise, any large magnet -- of which there are many in a large city -- would be able to modify its direction, intentional or not. And, seeing as it's a bus, the computer on-board probably has a course that it will accept, the magnets are just there to get it to exactly the right place so that loading/unloading time can be saved -- stops add up. 2. It doesn't replace a driver, it supplements one.

    2. Re:Sabotage? by Graff · · Score: 4, Insightful

      what about other sources of mangentic interference (say the motor of an electric vehicle, etc.)?

      This is no different than the head of a hard drive traveling over the disk surface. The magnets can be in a coded pattern that is encrypted a certain way that would be robust enough to overcome possible interference, whether accidental or intentional.

      Yes, there are always risks of sabotage or an accident but this is no different than the risks of our current roadways. What's to stop someone from spreading caltrops across the road and causing a massive accident? How about the accidental interference of an oil spill or a bridge support giving way?

      As with everything, you try to build redundancy and robustness into the system and limit the risks. Just because a system has the possibility of failing doesn't mean the idea is worthless.

    3. Re:Sabotage? by maeka · · Score: 4, Informative

      This is no different than the head of a hard drive traveling over the disk surface. The magnets can be in a coded pattern that is encrypted a certain way that would be robust enough to overcome possible interference, whether accidental or intentional.

      With a bit-per-meter you simply do not have enough data density to do any sort of robust encryption.

      Yes, there are always risks of sabotage or an accident but this is no different than the risks of our current roadways. What's to stop someone from spreading caltrops across the road and causing a massive accident? How about the accidental interference of an oil spill or a bridge support giving way?

      1 - caltrops in pavement should not cause a massive accident. For evidence see police use of spike-strips to stop fleeing vehicles. Rarely do vehicles lose control under even the more catastrophic tire failure these hollow spikes cause as opposed to caltrops.
      2 - Oil spills and bridge failures are not only more apparent than covert placement of magnets, they are also harder acts of sabotage to achieved w/o being caught.

      But enough of the pedantic replies to your specifics, on your general claim that "this is no different than the risks of our current roadways" I will argue this is completely different than the risks of our current roadways.
      Current roadway systems rely on human drivers. A human driver can react in a much more flexible manner than any automated drive system. Whereas it appears this system would be easy to fake with the high tech equivalent of false road signs, no (few?) human would drive into a lake because a fake road sign told them to. Again, this is not just about new technologies creating security risks which previously didn't exist, but more so the new assumptions which frequently come with the adoption of said technologies creating newly viable attack vectors.

    4. Re:Sabotage? by TheLink · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yeah it does sound unsafe to me.

      I've been thinking how about "just don't do that then"?

      After all, placing stuff on railway tracks can derail a train and kill people. Doesn't even have to be anything fancy.

      Someone could just as easily pour motor oil on a dangerous bend and get people killed.

      As a species we really have to start growing up.

      If technology continues improving, the amount of power the average individual is able to wield is likely to increase dramatically.

      So the alternatives are grow up, or lose freedoms (not good), or experience "some random idiot thinks it's funny to kill everybody" (also not good).

      The odds are we're doomed, but who knows we might get lucky.

      --
    5. Re:Sabotage? by CastrTroy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why would it simply supplement a driver? If you still have to pay some guy $60,000 a year to sit in the bus, you might as well save the money on the magnetic navigation, and just have the guy drive the bus. Using a system like this only makes sense (and cents) if you can actually remove the driver from the bus. Since you'll always need somebody on the bus (for the foreseeable future), to ensure fares are paid, and to answer the questions of riders on which route to take, and about why the guy on the back of the bus has his pet pig on the bus, and to tell the able bodied people to get out of the priority seating on the bus so the guy with the wheelchair can get on the bus, you aren't going to get much advantage from a system like this.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    6. Re:Sabotage? by Carrot007 · · Score: 4, Informative

      >no (few?) human would drive into a lake because a fake road sign told them to.

      Cue links to stories detailing the idiocy of people using sat nav...

      --
      +----------------- | What is the question!
    7. Re:Sabotage? by SleepingWaterBear · · Score: 2, Insightful

      An automated system may in fact be more vulnerable to sabotage than what we have now, though I suspect you overestimate the difficulty in committing sabotage in the current system. But that isn't really the point.

      Right now cars are ridiculously dangerous, accounting for about 2 percent of deaths, and most of these accidents are due to human error. I suspect that the number of deaths due to sabotage are much, much lower than those due to human caused car accidents, and besides, a potential saboteur can always look elsewhere for targets if the road system is hard to attack.

      If automated systems can reduce the accident rate by any significant amount at all, the increased risk of sabotage is a pretty ridiculous thing to worry about.

    8. Re:Sabotage? by stoicfaux · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Use redundant sensor systems:
      * magnets in road
      * GPS
      * inertial guidance
      * collision detection sensors
      * inspection vehicles
      * encoded/encrypted magnets as per Graff's suggestion
      * combinations of the above: if magnet #1234 isn't at GPS coordinates X,Y,Z then shutdown. If the inertial guidance, GPS and magnets do not agree then shutdown.
      * tamper resistant magnets: every Nth magnet is too big to easily move
      * lots of magnets: there are too many small magnets to easily move or sabotage
      * video image analysis: if the road doesn't match the baseline video then stop. (Similar to the Tomahawk cruise missile's terrain contour matching guidance.)

      No one system is foolproof, so use layered redundant systems. Systems that human lives depend on already exist (nuclear reactors, 911 services, medical devices, airplanes, etc.) so strategies and processes for coping with sabotage, human interference, safety, reliability, and so on already exist.

      The real difficulties are how to make the system cost effective, and how to handle the PR when the first accident happens.

  4. Robobus vs. stupid drivers by rah1420 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I would've liked to have been on a Robobus back in July. An idiot driver in an SUV cut our bus off, and the driver firewalled the brake to avoid hitting him. My 3 year old daughter planted her face in the fiberglass seat ahead of us, I was in a side-facing seat and almost went through the windshield and my wife got thrown into a stairwell.

    My guess is that Robobus would've kept going right into the SUV. Would've served him right.

    (No, he didn't stop and we didn't get the plate number. He took off into the night.)

    Hey SUV driver; if you cut a bus off at 100th St. in Ocean City, MD on August 2nd, you're a bastard.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens.
    1. Re:Robobus vs. stupid drivers by TheLink · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Reminds me of this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDTLo-nDsUQ

      Crazy car driver.

      I think the bus driver in that accident should have just braked in a straight line and not swerved, even if he hits the car - if he slows down enough the people in the car should be ok.

      If not well too bad - esp if the driver had died I'd have called it suicide ;).

      It's also likely there are fewer people in the car than in the bus.

      --
    2. Re:Robobus vs. stupid drivers by algerath · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I love that book. If I could only have one reference for working on old VWs that would be it. One of the best parts about that book is the illustrations, it was all illustrations instead of photos. I learned more about my car and engine in that book than all of the others combined.

      I know off topic, I just can't resist when someone brings up my favorite book about one of my oddball hobbies.

    3. Re:Robobus vs. stupid drivers by algerath · · Score: 2, Funny

      Powered by Vista. I just had an image of a bus stopping every 3 feet "the bus has encountered a magnet cancel or allow"chug chug chug "the bus has .........

  5. Robustness? by polymath69 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    robust enough to withstand a wide range of operating conditions, including rain or snow

    Nice, but does it drive in random directions if someone has set loose a bag of magnetic marbles on the road? I'd have a hard time trusting this.

    --

    --
    I don't want to rule the world... I just want to be in charge of mayonnaise.
    1. Re:Robustness? by JustinOpinion · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's interesting that new technology is always held to a higher standard than established technology.

      We trust trains even though someone could put some rubble on the tracks. We trust human drivers even though someone could shine a laser pointer into their eyes. We trust bikes even though someone could string up a tripwire. We trust buffet restaurants even though someone could put crushed glass into the food.

      Newsflash: if someone wants to sabotage a piece of infrastructure, they'll find a way! Obviously autonomous driving vehicles need to be able to continue functioning despite normal interference (weather, traffic accidents, etc.), and even some forms of sabotage. But ultimately it will be possible for someone to mess with the system. Just as it is with everything else.

      Tossing a bag of magnetic marbles in front of robo-busses is no different than dropping bricks on cars from an overpass: the main deterrent is that most people are not sadistic assholes trying to kill other people.

  6. Re:Whatever... by nathan.fulton · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You can now. It's called public transportation.

  7. Seen it, driven it, didnt bother with the t-shirt by TheLuggage · · Score: 5, Interesting

    wow, i'm almost impressed except we have those already for a while. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phileas_(public_transport) They were supposed to be driverless, but dutch laws reuires a driver to be behind the wheel of a vehicle... Don't know where they got that idea ;-)

  8. Empty vs. Full Roads by mdmkolbe · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Sure it can navigate an empty road, but what about once there are other cars on it or pot holes or what if the bus service needs a temporary detour?

    Cool from a technology perspective, but I doubt it will ever be applied to actual street driving. Most likely it will end up with some alternative use like controlling the office mail cart or something.

  9. 1995 Called... San Diego Anyone? by TheNetAvenger · · Score: 4, Insightful

    1995 Called... San Diego Anyone?

    The Carpool lanes in San Diego I15 had magnets put in them over 10 years ago and fully autonomous GM cars navigated the roads effortlessly.

    This was almost 15 freaking yeats ago...

    Anyone so NOT impressed by this?

    1. Re:1995 Called... San Diego Anyone? by pvera · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yup, and as early as 2002 Siemens was demonstrating a bus in Arlington, Virginia that uses the same principle. It was basically a track-less tram with a driver override. The vehicle (which btw, was amazing) drove by itself and auto-detected its stops, red lights, hazards, but it had a driver. If the driver touched the controls it would override the automatic operationg.

      --
      Pedro
      ----
      The Insomniac Coder
  10. Still no replacemet for Keanu by txoof · · Score: 2, Funny

    Yeah, but can its new-fangled computer brain defy the laws of physics and jump the bus over an incomplete highway overpass at 70 mph? I didn't think so. Until we can make an artificial replacement for Keanu Reeves, I won't trust it. It's gotta be able to say, "I know kung-fu" too.

    --
    This one's tricky. You have to use imaginary numbers, like eleventeen... --Hobbes
  11. Re:Whatever... by CastrTroy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Get a pair of Myvu glasses. That way, nobody can tell what you are watching.

    --

    Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
  12. Re:Real questions defeat stupid ideas .... sometim by ductonius · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Why would we automate the driving of vehicles when there is a serious unemployment problem?

    The economy will see no lost jobs. Saving the cost of "busdriver" jobs will allow for the creation of other jobs elsewhere. The money normally spent on drivers will go toward increasing demand for other goods or services. That increased demand will create more jobs, and because inefficiency was removed the jobs that replace "busdriver" jobs will be more numerous and better paying. So, if unemployment is a problem, making bus drivers obsolete is a good choice.

    What does putting hundreds of thousands of expensive magnets in the road systems do to solve the problem of oil depletion?

    For one, making buses cheaper (no driver) will allow more public transport, and by that, less people will have to rely on public vehicles. If normal suburban roads can double as LRT 'tracks' suburbs just became screamingly efficient.

    What we need is a system of advanced high speed railways

    Well, this system will allow normal roads to double as light rail, which is not quite 'crisscrossing North America', but making city transportation more efficient is a good first step.

  13. Re:traffic by SEWilco · · Score: 4, Funny

    Ahem... any bus without any driver, and only the intelligence of a brick on the accelerator, is able to travel through traffic. It's generally better if it goes around the traffic.

  14. Dunno. Who gets sued today when... by jeffb+(2.718) · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...a car with anti-lock brakes still rear-ends someone?

    "Cars that drive themselves" won't arrive as a new option in model year 20XX. They'll encroach bit by bit, following in the footsteps of automatic spark advance, electric starters, power steering, power brakes, automatic transmission, cruise control, electronic fuel injection, anti-lock brakes, traction control, collision avoidance, self-parking...

    When you finally do get a car that can "drive itself", you'll probably be too busy talking on your cell phone and using your extended navigation/information center to notice.

  15. Re:Dunno. Who gets sued today when... by wronskyMan · · Score: 2, Interesting

    +1

    In aviation, planes have had autopilots for years (and recently, autoland systems), yet there is no giant puzzle as to who is responsible if the AP-equipped plane crashes: from the US aviation regulations, "The pilot in command is responsible at all times for the safe operation of the aircraft". Maybe a similar principle for cars is needed.

    --
    --- You shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you mad- Neal (not Cowboy) Boortz
  16. Re:Dunno. Who gets sued today when... by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 2, Interesting

    An aircraft autopilot is also ready to be disengaged at any moment by the pilot if he thinks he needs to. Indeed, there has been at least one serious airliner accident caused by the pilot inadvertently disengaging the autopilot but not realizing it until it was too late.

    An automated car which can drive fully independently will be a total game-changer. An automated car which requires the driver to still pay attention and be ready to take over control at all times is much less interesting.

    --
    If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
  17. Why? by PPH · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The human driver performs many critical tasks other than steering. Braking for vehicles or pedestrians moving into its path, making judgments about pulling over to the curb among illegally parked vehicles, arguing with fare cheats, crackheads and the homeless, etc.

    Its not likely that these other requirements for a driver's presence will be eliminated any time soon. Meanwhile, keeping the driver in charge of steering keeps him paying attention to road conditions. Note how many pilots take naps while on autopilot (both at the same time, sadly).

    The systems in which an automated steering system could work safely are essentially identical to elevated railways, monorails, or subways. In other words, grade separated transit systems.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  18. Magnets? Why not paint? by Akir · · Score: 2, Informative

    Las Vegas has had an automated bus line for a few years now. It's called the MAX and it's actually on the way of becoming obsolete, being replaced with the ACE line, which is supposed to connect all the cities in Greater Las Vegas. (The RTC has removed their page on MAX already)
    However, the MAX and ACE lines use optical technology, meaning they only need a painted line to operate. It's kinda cool, riding in a bus that follows a line just like those robot kits you give to kids.
    (Here's to hoping we've PWNed Berkley!)

  19. Re:did they say *meter* - as in metric system? by Ragzouken · · Score: 2, Informative

    The International System of Units is a metric system.