Tesla: Development and Technology News
#361
Sanest Florida Man
The following users liked this post:
Comfy (05-28-2021)
#362
Sanest Florida Man
Granted it's still speculation on a lot of sites, but it's not hard to put two and two together considering the rush to get this semi-completed Full Vision update out, and shipping out NA Model 3/Ys without the radar module. Why else would they release an update missing some features that were supposed to be there?
As for the 5 facing forward cameras looking around the vehicle in front you? These are the same cameras that still cannot safely make unprotected left turns in FSD when there's another car on the opposite turn bay. Unless there's an undocumented X-ray feature, they will get blocked due to their FoV and angles.
They might be mitigating it somewhat by forcing Autopilot to pull back on their following distance in this update, but what happens when you have Autopilot off? Is pre-collision only enabled on Teslas with Autopilot? Most, if not all other cars have the PCS system separate from cruise etc.
As for the 5 facing forward cameras looking around the vehicle in front you? These are the same cameras that still cannot safely make unprotected left turns in FSD when there's another car on the opposite turn bay. Unless there's an undocumented X-ray feature, they will get blocked due to their FoV and angles.
They might be mitigating it somewhat by forcing Autopilot to pull back on their following distance in this update, but what happens when you have Autopilot off? Is pre-collision only enabled on Teslas with Autopilot? Most, if not all other cars have the PCS system separate from cruise etc.
#363
Sanest Florida Man
^Supposedly that's actually from Austin not Berlin
Improved autowipers should be coming soon. Looks good for beta testers
https://twitter.com/tesla_adri/statu...98368713793543
https://twitter.com/greentheonly/sta...97173542678533
DMS = Driver Monitoring System
They're developing a more robust monitoring system using the internal camera, steering wheel input, seatbelt, seat weight sensor, etc.
Eventually it should integrate with AutoPilot & FSD.
Video showing the beta DMS, pretty cool
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vTCbBsMJ3ts
Improved autowipers should be coming soon. Looks good for beta testers
https://twitter.com/tesla_adri/statu...98368713793543
https://twitter.com/greentheonly/sta...97173542678533
DMS = Driver Monitoring System
They're developing a more robust monitoring system using the internal camera, steering wheel input, seatbelt, seat weight sensor, etc.
Eventually it should integrate with AutoPilot & FSD.
Video showing the beta DMS, pretty cool
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vTCbBsMJ3ts
#364
Safety Car
He asked if I wanted to drive it and I reluctantly agreed. The doors on it have an auto-close feature, which would have smashed my hand if I didnt quickly retract it away from the door jam. The front windshield has a sort of upwards panoramic effect. Which would be cool if the car had self driving. When trying to self drive it would frequently kick out of self drive. The Model X would also sway around on the road auto-correcting its self. On a turn the car jerked at the steering wheel trying to stay in the lane. During braking it often braked late and you would go forward in your seat.
I asked my neighbor, "whats the point of self driving or this pano windshield if you have to always keep your hands on the wheel and your eyes on the road"? Seems real gimmicky.
A human can drive and make decisions So much better than a Tesla. You fans are cheering on a transport technology that will enslave us. Take away our freedon of self-logistication.
The interior is very minimalistic and cheap feeling. Nothing seemed refined like my 3G TL.
There is no sound when driving. No shifting at just the right moment when your at the apex of that turn. Just a stale, silent, emotionless roll down the road.
This transitional technology is like an iphone.
Enjoy fellas.
Last edited by Acura TL Builder; 05-27-2021 at 09:01 PM.
#365
You fans are cheering on a transport technology that will enslave us. Take away our freedon of self-logistication.
There is no sound when driving. No shifting at just the right moment when your at the apex of that turn. Just a stale, silent, emotionless roll down the road.
This transitional technology is like an iphone.
Enjoy fellas.
There is no sound when driving. No shifting at just the right moment when your at the apex of that turn. Just a stale, silent, emotionless roll down the road.
This transitional technology is like an iphone.
Enjoy fellas.
The following users liked this post:
Acura TL Builder (05-27-2021)
#366
Safety Car
I wonder if when EV will reach a certian saturation in the market, we will have a "Cash for Clunkers" style carocide for ICE vehicles to make more EVs.
Thats when the 3G will become more rare. *rubs hands together*
Thats when the 3G will become more rare. *rubs hands together*
Last edited by Acura TL Builder; 05-27-2021 at 11:15 PM.
#367
Race Director
Thread Starter
The new EV incentive program that just passed the Senate Finance committee, has the tax credit phase out when EVs get to 50% of passenger car sales.
The following users liked this post:
Comfy (05-28-2021)
#368
Moderator
I was working for a Chevrolet dealer when the first CFC came through. We only did 4 or 5, but it did get a lot of people in the door. Our dealership had a body shop off-site & was the location of the old dealership. Their lot was used as a CFC holding area & the lot was packed.
That said, CFC took a lot of good used cars off the road. IIRC, the poured molten glass in the engine & ran it til it seized, then crushed the cars.
CFC v2: EV Edition will take a lot more good used cars off the market.
The following 2 users liked this post by 00TL-P3.2:
Acura TL Builder (05-31-2021),
Comfy (05-28-2021)
#369
Azine Jabroni
#370
Sanest Florida Man
Tesla can’t win, you can always spin everything they do in a negative way
consumer reports complains that Teslas driver monitoring system isn’t strong enough and that they should enable camera based monitoring like GM and Ford have Tesla does that and then the media complains a Tesla is going to spy on you so they don’t have any more bad PR
consumer reports complains that Teslas driver monitoring system isn’t strong enough and that they should enable camera based monitoring like GM and Ford have Tesla does that and then the media complains a Tesla is going to spy on you so they don’t have any more bad PR
Last edited by #1 STUNNA; 05-28-2021 at 07:29 PM.
The following users liked this post:
Comfy (05-29-2021)
#371
Sanest Florida Man
Whaaaat no waaaayy the media totally fucked up a Tesla autopilot story again!? Which led to consumer reports and IIHS removing the Model 3 as a top pick based off bad media reporting
is anyone else noticing a trend where the media will immediately spread any negative Tesla autopilot rumor as fact?
Tesla’s new Model 3 and Model Y vehicles with Tesla Vision and no radar are still equipped with Autopilot’s active safety features despite what the media are saying and some organizations dropping their Tesla safety ratings.
Here’s what happened.
Earlier this week, Tesla announced the transition to its “Tesla Vision” Autopilot without radar, and it warned that it would result in limitations of some Autopilot features at first.
Tesla only mentioned limitations for Autosteer and Smart Summon and not any of the important active safety features that are powered by Tesla’s Autopilot, like forward collision warning and automatic emergency braking.
Yet, a questionable report led people to believe that Tesla’s new vehicles without radar don’t have the features, and it even led to some organizations dropping safety ratings on Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
As we reported yesterday, it originated from Reuters reporting that NHTSA was briefed by Tesla about the change and then updated its website to remove active safety features as standard on Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The report alluded that those vehicles were not being equipped with those features anymore despite also stating that the agency said it “only includes check marks for the model production range for the vehicles tested.”
It led us to believe that the safety features might still be there, and NHTSA simply hasn’t tested them yet on the new version of those vehicles, but the damage was already done.
Following the report, Consumer Reports and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) both pulled their top safety rating picks for Tesla’s Model 3 as they believed the active satey features to be gone.
Jake Fisher, director of auto testing at Consumer Reports, said:
It is extremely rare for an automaker to remove safety features from a vehicle during a production run, even temporarily, but this isn’t the first time that Tesla has done this.
Reuters was quick to share Consumer Reports and IIHS’s reactions to their own report about NHTSA’s update, but the problem is that the active safety features are still in Tesla’s new vehicles without radar.
After our suspicions that this whole thing might be a misunderstanding, we contacted Tesla CEO Elon Musk who confirmed that the active safety features are in new cars rolling off the line and NHTSA are going to test them next week.
Musk told Electrek:
Just confirmed with the Autopilot team that these features are active in all cars now, including vision-only. NHTSA automatically removes the check mark for any cars with new hardware until they retest, which is happening next week, but the functionality is actually there.
Some new Tesla owners who have taken deliveries of new Model 3 and Model Y cars without radar yesterday are also confirming that the safety features are active.
Musk added that he believes the safety features will improve with Tesla’s new pure vision solution:
It will have all the safety features of prior vision+radar and then some. The software should be fully rolled out to all new vehicles within two weeks. The probability of safety will be higher with pure vision than vision+radar, not lower. Vision has become so good that radar actually reduces signal/noise.
Tesla is expected to start rolling out its new version of its Tesla Vision software to the fleet in two weeks – leading to the release of its Full Self-Driving v9 beta software.
Electrek’s Take
It looks like this was just a bad game of telephone that resulted in both Consumer Reports and IIHS dropping their safety ratings on Model 3.
Since they did that without testing whether the new version had the safety features, let’s see if they reinstate it without testing either.
It goes to show that you need to be careful how to interpret media reports.
NHTSA never actually said that the new vehicles weren’t equipped with those features, and I wouldn’t be surprised if they explicitly said that to Reuters since they did note that they remove the checkmarks when they haven’t been able to test it.
Yet the publication still made it vague in their original report, and then they were quick to report on Consumer Reports and IIHS pulling their safety ratings based on the assumption that the safety features were gone, which was in turn based on their own reporting.
Let’s all try to do better.
Here’s what happened.
Earlier this week, Tesla announced the transition to its “Tesla Vision” Autopilot without radar, and it warned that it would result in limitations of some Autopilot features at first.
Tesla only mentioned limitations for Autosteer and Smart Summon and not any of the important active safety features that are powered by Tesla’s Autopilot, like forward collision warning and automatic emergency braking.
Yet, a questionable report led people to believe that Tesla’s new vehicles without radar don’t have the features, and it even led to some organizations dropping safety ratings on Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
As we reported yesterday, it originated from Reuters reporting that NHTSA was briefed by Tesla about the change and then updated its website to remove active safety features as standard on Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The report alluded that those vehicles were not being equipped with those features anymore despite also stating that the agency said it “only includes check marks for the model production range for the vehicles tested.”
It led us to believe that the safety features might still be there, and NHTSA simply hasn’t tested them yet on the new version of those vehicles, but the damage was already done.
Following the report, Consumer Reports and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) both pulled their top safety rating picks for Tesla’s Model 3 as they believed the active satey features to be gone.
Jake Fisher, director of auto testing at Consumer Reports, said:
It is extremely rare for an automaker to remove safety features from a vehicle during a production run, even temporarily, but this isn’t the first time that Tesla has done this.
Reuters was quick to share Consumer Reports and IIHS’s reactions to their own report about NHTSA’s update, but the problem is that the active safety features are still in Tesla’s new vehicles without radar.
After our suspicions that this whole thing might be a misunderstanding, we contacted Tesla CEO Elon Musk who confirmed that the active safety features are in new cars rolling off the line and NHTSA are going to test them next week.
Musk told Electrek:
Just confirmed with the Autopilot team that these features are active in all cars now, including vision-only. NHTSA automatically removes the check mark for any cars with new hardware until they retest, which is happening next week, but the functionality is actually there.
Some new Tesla owners who have taken deliveries of new Model 3 and Model Y cars without radar yesterday are also confirming that the safety features are active.
Musk added that he believes the safety features will improve with Tesla’s new pure vision solution:
It will have all the safety features of prior vision+radar and then some. The software should be fully rolled out to all new vehicles within two weeks. The probability of safety will be higher with pure vision than vision+radar, not lower. Vision has become so good that radar actually reduces signal/noise.
Tesla is expected to start rolling out its new version of its Tesla Vision software to the fleet in two weeks – leading to the release of its Full Self-Driving v9 beta software.
Electrek’s Take
It looks like this was just a bad game of telephone that resulted in both Consumer Reports and IIHS dropping their safety ratings on Model 3.
Since they did that without testing whether the new version had the safety features, let’s see if they reinstate it without testing either.
It goes to show that you need to be careful how to interpret media reports.
NHTSA never actually said that the new vehicles weren’t equipped with those features, and I wouldn’t be surprised if they explicitly said that to Reuters since they did note that they remove the checkmarks when they haven’t been able to test it.
Yet the publication still made it vague in their original report, and then they were quick to report on Consumer Reports and IIHS pulling their safety ratings based on the assumption that the safety features were gone, which was in turn based on their own reporting.
Let’s all try to do better.
The following users liked this post:
Comfy (05-29-2021)
#372
Sanest Florida Man
Hey @anoop just wanted you to know that that article you read is full of misinformation, the media repeatedly shows that they don’t know how autopilot works and they have no desire to learn. There have been no safety features removed from any Tesla. I explain it all in the post above
As of this morning, I take that back.
"Because of the change, Consumer Reports no longer lists the Model 3 as a Top Pick, and IIHS plans to remove the Model 3’s Top Safety Pick+ designation," CR wrote.
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/te...ditching-radar
"Because of the change, Consumer Reports no longer lists the Model 3 as a Top Pick, and IIHS plans to remove the Model 3’s Top Safety Pick+ designation," CR wrote.
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/te...ditching-radar
The following users liked this post:
anoop (05-29-2021)
#373
Sanest Florida Man
The following users liked this post:
Comfy (05-29-2021)
#374
The media like the stupid and clueless teenage girl who will gladly ask for directions even through they are holding a map in one hand a smartphone in the other, stating they don’t know how to read either, and then blame that you misdirected her. .
oops, sorry... that was sexist..... .
oops, sorry... that was sexist..... .
#375
Three Wheelin'
Hey @anoop just wanted you to know that that article you read is full of misinformation, the media repeatedly shows that they don’t know how autopilot works and they have no desire to learn. There have been no safety features removed from any Tesla. I explain it all in the post above
The following users liked this post:
Comfy (05-29-2021)
#376
Whats up with RDX owners?
iTrader: (9)
Well when you shitcan an entire PR department and rely on your CEOs Twitter feed to direct the narrative, this is bound to happen.
#377
Sanest Florida Man
I bet you could get a job for Gizmodo with the way you spin every story in a negative way against Tesla
#378
Ex-OEM King
The difference is radar and LIDAR can see in instances when you cannot. A vision system can only see what you can see. Our Subaru has a 100% vision driven system and there are plenty of instances when it doesn't work. Radar is not dead, thinking it is would be flawed.
#379
Whats up with RDX owners?
iTrader: (9)
The following users liked this post:
#1 STUNNA (05-30-2021)
#380
There’s absolutely no comparison between the software of Tesla vs that of Subaru.
#381
Safety Car
Interesting. I raced a model 3 with Dual motor 60-100 and won by a good margin. He then rolled down his window and thumbed up while taking video of the sweet engine and supercharger sound. Looking forward to the banks heavier SUV beating it.
#382
Sanest Florida Man
#383
Ex-OEM King
Software does not fix the inherent limitations of a technology. Vision is still vision no matter what software is behind it. If it can't see something, it can't see something. Subaru's system isn't as good as the radar based version in my VW. The new 2021 Subie is way better than our 2019 one was but it's still not as good as my 2018 VW.
#384
Three Wheelin'
I wonder what would happen if the cameras encountered something like this.
https://www.insider.com/optical-illu...driving-2019-5
https://www.insider.com/optical-illu...driving-2019-5
#385
Ex-OEM King
^ it would be fine. Cameras are trained to recognize shapes and such so this falls into that camp. My issue is if it's foggy/rainy and the cameras can't see.
#386
Team Owner
can they just use both camera and radar? or Elon should just use some military grade shit...
#387
Sanest Florida Man
^which one do you believe when they give you different results? One says the object is 30m away the other says 15m. Radar isn't infallible, it isn't perfect
#388
Sanest Florida Man
Tesla likely has AI that can see through fog better than you think using multiple cameras
The following users liked this post:
Comfy (06-02-2021)
#389
Team Owner
Both have their Pros and Cons in different situations and weather. When it is raining or foggy or both at the same time maybe throw some snow into it, you think Camara can analyze all that accurately all at once?
When there is different result, that is the job of Elon's super duper onboard computer to analyze and warn the driver?
I mean i am not expert in any of these but if Camera is better than Radar, then I think our military should ditch their radars and only use Camera to detect enemies.
Last edited by oonowindoo; 06-02-2021 at 06:23 PM.
#390
What are you talking about. Military use of radar is mostly in aviation /seafare where the distances are measured in miles and beyond visual range probably not feet or meters . That is absolutely not the case with roads. We are concerned with what is happening in the immediate (within 0-1000 ft or so) roads.
It is besides the fact that cameras can be made more sensitive than human eye and then supercomputers can analyze that better as well.
Per Elon’s own tweet, the cameras are an order of magnitude better than radars in this particular situation.
It is besides the fact that cameras can be made more sensitive than human eye and then supercomputers can analyze that better as well.
Per Elon’s own tweet, the cameras are an order of magnitude better than radars in this particular situation.
Last edited by Comfy; 06-02-2021 at 07:31 PM.
#391
Sanest Florida Man
and Camera is 100% accurate?
Both have their Pros and Cons in different situations and weather. When it is raining or foggy or both at the same time maybe throw some snow into it, you think Camara can analyze all that accurately all at once?
When there is different result, that is the job of Elon's super duper onboard computer to analyze and warn the driver?
I mean i am not expert in any of these but if Camera is better than Radar, then I think our military should ditch their radars and only use Camera to detect enemies.
Both have their Pros and Cons in different situations and weather. When it is raining or foggy or both at the same time maybe throw some snow into it, you think Camara can analyze all that accurately all at once?
When there is different result, that is the job of Elon's super duper onboard computer to analyze and warn the driver?
I mean i am not expert in any of these but if Camera is better than Radar, then I think our military should ditch their radars and only use Camera to detect enemies.
The following users liked this post:
Comfy (06-02-2021)
#392
Ex-OEM King
Tesla likely has AI that can see through fog better than you think using multiple cameras
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AM7Endf2x5M
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AM7Endf2x5M
What are you talking about. Military use of radar is mostly in aviation /seafare where the distances are measured in miles and beyond visual range probably not feet or meters . That is absolutely not the case with roads. We are concerned with what is happening in the immediate (within 0-1000 ft or so) roads.
It is besides the fact that cameras can be made more sensitive than human eye and then supercomputers can analyze that better as well.
Per Elon’s own tweet, the cameras are an order of magnitude better than radars in this particular situation.
It is besides the fact that cameras can be made more sensitive than human eye and then supercomputers can analyze that better as well.
Per Elon’s own tweet, the cameras are an order of magnitude better than radars in this particular situation.
2.) Cameras can be made more sensitive to light for low light visibility but not without returning more noise and other such issues. Beyond that, they are similar to your eyes unless they are sensitive to other wavelengths of light.
3.) Cars do not carry supercomputers though a computer's response will be more accurate and faster than a human without a doubt.
4.) I don't believe much of what Elon says and neither should you until it's actually real. According to him, we should have had robo taxis and real FSD 3 years ago.
Want to know how I know you have no idea what you're talking about?
#393
Team Owner
What are you talking about. Military use of radar is mostly in aviation /seafare where the distances are measured in miles and beyond visual range probably not feet or meters . That is absolutely not the case with roads. We are concerned with what is happening in the immediate (within 0-1000 ft or so) roads.
It is besides the fact that cameras can be made more sensitive than human eye and then supercomputers can analyze that better as well.
Per Elon’s own tweet, the cameras are an order of magnitude better than radars in this particular situation.
It is besides the fact that cameras can be made more sensitive than human eye and then supercomputers can analyze that better as well.
Per Elon’s own tweet, the cameras are an order of magnitude better than radars in this particular situation.
#394
Team Owner
They use both right now. Military grade shit is radar.
You believe neither. If sensors don't agree then you throw a fault and shut the system down. If you have two sensing systems that consistently have vastly different return values then you did a bad job with your design. This is how engineering works.
Unless the cameras are seeing a different wavelength of light, which I don't believe they are, they cannot "see through fog". It's an inherent limitation of vision based systems along with not being able to see in the dark.
1.) The radar systems on ships and planes are orders of magnitude more powerful than those in a car exactly because of the range required. Also, radar does largely only work in line of sight applications, it can't see behind stuff.
2.) Cameras can be made more sensitive to light for low light visibility but not without returning more noise and other such issues. Beyond that, they are similar to your eyes unless they are sensitive to other wavelengths of light.
3.) Cars do not carry supercomputers though a computer's response will be more accurate and faster than a human without a doubt.
4.) I don't believe much of what Elon says and neither should you until it's actually real. According to him, we should have had robo taxis and real FSD 3 years ago.
Want to know how I know you have no idea what you're talking about?
You believe neither. If sensors don't agree then you throw a fault and shut the system down. If you have two sensing systems that consistently have vastly different return values then you did a bad job with your design. This is how engineering works.
Unless the cameras are seeing a different wavelength of light, which I don't believe they are, they cannot "see through fog". It's an inherent limitation of vision based systems along with not being able to see in the dark.
1.) The radar systems on ships and planes are orders of magnitude more powerful than those in a car exactly because of the range required. Also, radar does largely only work in line of sight applications, it can't see behind stuff.
2.) Cameras can be made more sensitive to light for low light visibility but not without returning more noise and other such issues. Beyond that, they are similar to your eyes unless they are sensitive to other wavelengths of light.
3.) Cars do not carry supercomputers though a computer's response will be more accurate and faster than a human without a doubt.
4.) I don't believe much of what Elon says and neither should you until it's actually real. According to him, we should have had robo taxis and real FSD 3 years ago.
Want to know how I know you have no idea what you're talking about?
So far almost none of his predications has materialized.
#395
Sanest Florida Man
Radar Safety Warning: ‘Don’t Cross the Streams’
...And by streams, EE Times is talking about cars’ radar sensors interfering with each other, and this can cause minor errors at best and total radar blindness at worst. I think we can all agree that having a car rely on radar, and then having that car go blind on you while you’re going down the highway, would be a bad thing. You probably won’t face total protonic reversal, but you could end up dead just the same.
Radar works by sending out radio waves and then listening for the echo of the radio waves that bounce back off of things. It’s not a perfect system, but it’s useful at seeing where things are and how far away they are. It’s not the only way for a car to know this, as vision-only systems like what Tesla is working on and lidar (light radar) systems most other AV developers rely on provide great alternatives.
The problem is kind of like walking around with a bunch of other people in the dark, and everybody has a flashlight. Except instead of carefully and methodically pointing one flashlight around to where you’re looking, the people in the crowd have a bunch of bright flashlights pointing every which way so everything around them is lit up. This approach to using flashlights might work okay for one person, but the problem is that your flashlights are pointing in other people’s eyes, and making their flashlights worthless because you’re blinding them. Also, their excessive flashlight setup blinds you, too, so everybody is now just as blind as they were with no flashlights at all.
Martin Duncan, general manager of ADAS and ASIC division of ST Microelectronics, told EE Times, “The fact that we have now 25% of new vehicles with radar systems, it is already an issue. If you try to capture in real time road conditions, it is very easy to see transmissions from multiple vehicles. As we are all using the same frequency band this, will potentially worsen as fitment rate increases.”
While the suppliers of automotive radar systems have been concerned about this for years, it’s largely been their problem to work on filtering out all of the interference from other radars. The suppliers, along with government agencies in Europe and the United States have been studying and worrying about the interference issue for years, but the automakers and those developing overall autonomy and driver assistance features haven’t had to deal with the issue so much themselves.
Instead of working on coordinating different radar systems so they don’t blind each other (like when I tell my kids to keep the flashlight pointed away from my face at night), the current industry standard for radar is to just be random and hope it works out. The radars use random frequencies and timing so they don’t hurt each other as badly, but this approach won’t work in the future when most cars on the road are using it.
NXP Semiconductors paints a grim picture, but also has a solution:
“… Systems that operate well in environments with few other radars may suffer significant degradation of performance in radar congested environments. The results of the study show, levels of interference based on operation of current systems in congested environments will be significant. In scenarios with many vehicles operating radars in the 76–81 GHz band, the power from other radars will likely exceed the power of echoes from targets needed for specified performance, by several orders of magnitude.
“… Eventually, to support a high market penetration, some form of agreement between the manufacturers will be needed to more effectively share the sensing resources in a fair way. This last step means that all the players in the market will have to sit together to define a standardized way to access the channel while at the same time maintaining the possibility to have differentiating sensing performance.”
The problem is that most in the industry don’t want to go through all this hassle. They find it easier to keep working on improving their own radar to filter out the interference to avoid being blinded. This approach works today, and will work for a while, but could end up being overwhelmed by congestion on the frequencies if enough radar-equipped cars get on the road.
EE Times says the NHTSA thinks there are two big problems with radar that will be very difficult to solve:
In the case of traffic on a two-lane highway, assuming that the radars use randomly selected carrier frequencies, NHTSA predicted that “an automotive radar would encounter power from other radars far greater than the echoes of its own transmissions needed to track other vehicles. The interference approaches four orders of magnitude, or nearly 40 dB, greater than echoes typical of a reference target, as specified for the system.”
In radars that face rearward (as in blind-spot detection systems), “these units are vulnerable to the direct arrival of forward collision avoidance radars that utilize higher power and antenna gain.” The study said, “Our analysis shows these units could experience interfering power from a forward collision avoidance radar that is nearly five orders of magnitude, or 50 dB, greater than the reflections from their specified reference target.”
If the light gets bright enough, even closing your eyes at the right time won’t help. The signals could just be too strong.
Even lidar isn’t immune to problems like this, but the brief pulses they send make meaningful interference much less likely. Ultimately, vision is going to prove important on autonomous vehicles, even if only used as a backup to lidar and radar sensors, because they will prove to not be immune to interference.
Radar works by sending out radio waves and then listening for the echo of the radio waves that bounce back off of things. It’s not a perfect system, but it’s useful at seeing where things are and how far away they are. It’s not the only way for a car to know this, as vision-only systems like what Tesla is working on and lidar (light radar) systems most other AV developers rely on provide great alternatives.
The problem is kind of like walking around with a bunch of other people in the dark, and everybody has a flashlight. Except instead of carefully and methodically pointing one flashlight around to where you’re looking, the people in the crowd have a bunch of bright flashlights pointing every which way so everything around them is lit up. This approach to using flashlights might work okay for one person, but the problem is that your flashlights are pointing in other people’s eyes, and making their flashlights worthless because you’re blinding them. Also, their excessive flashlight setup blinds you, too, so everybody is now just as blind as they were with no flashlights at all.
Martin Duncan, general manager of ADAS and ASIC division of ST Microelectronics, told EE Times, “The fact that we have now 25% of new vehicles with radar systems, it is already an issue. If you try to capture in real time road conditions, it is very easy to see transmissions from multiple vehicles. As we are all using the same frequency band this, will potentially worsen as fitment rate increases.”
While the suppliers of automotive radar systems have been concerned about this for years, it’s largely been their problem to work on filtering out all of the interference from other radars. The suppliers, along with government agencies in Europe and the United States have been studying and worrying about the interference issue for years, but the automakers and those developing overall autonomy and driver assistance features haven’t had to deal with the issue so much themselves.
Instead of working on coordinating different radar systems so they don’t blind each other (like when I tell my kids to keep the flashlight pointed away from my face at night), the current industry standard for radar is to just be random and hope it works out. The radars use random frequencies and timing so they don’t hurt each other as badly, but this approach won’t work in the future when most cars on the road are using it.
NXP Semiconductors paints a grim picture, but also has a solution:
“… Systems that operate well in environments with few other radars may suffer significant degradation of performance in radar congested environments. The results of the study show, levels of interference based on operation of current systems in congested environments will be significant. In scenarios with many vehicles operating radars in the 76–81 GHz band, the power from other radars will likely exceed the power of echoes from targets needed for specified performance, by several orders of magnitude.
“… Eventually, to support a high market penetration, some form of agreement between the manufacturers will be needed to more effectively share the sensing resources in a fair way. This last step means that all the players in the market will have to sit together to define a standardized way to access the channel while at the same time maintaining the possibility to have differentiating sensing performance.”
The problem is that most in the industry don’t want to go through all this hassle. They find it easier to keep working on improving their own radar to filter out the interference to avoid being blinded. This approach works today, and will work for a while, but could end up being overwhelmed by congestion on the frequencies if enough radar-equipped cars get on the road.
EE Times says the NHTSA thinks there are two big problems with radar that will be very difficult to solve:
In the case of traffic on a two-lane highway, assuming that the radars use randomly selected carrier frequencies, NHTSA predicted that “an automotive radar would encounter power from other radars far greater than the echoes of its own transmissions needed to track other vehicles. The interference approaches four orders of magnitude, or nearly 40 dB, greater than echoes typical of a reference target, as specified for the system.”
In radars that face rearward (as in blind-spot detection systems), “these units are vulnerable to the direct arrival of forward collision avoidance radars that utilize higher power and antenna gain.” The study said, “Our analysis shows these units could experience interfering power from a forward collision avoidance radar that is nearly five orders of magnitude, or 50 dB, greater than the reflections from their specified reference target.”
If the light gets bright enough, even closing your eyes at the right time won’t help. The signals could just be too strong.
Even lidar isn’t immune to problems like this, but the brief pulses they send make meaningful interference much less likely. Ultimately, vision is going to prove important on autonomous vehicles, even if only used as a backup to lidar and radar sensors, because they will prove to not be immune to interference.
Good thing Tesla can just disable radar on a million+ vehicles with an OTA update.
https://cleantechnica.com/2021/05/09...s-the-streams/
https://www.eetimes.com/radar-safety...s-the-streams/
https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.go...18_v2b-tag.pdf
#396
Ex-OEM King
Radar can operate on different frequencies. The 76-81 GHz band is really quite wide.
#397
Team Owner
I dont think Radar is perfect.. Nothing is perfect...
I thought the discussion was about Tesla switching Camera... because Elon is saying that it is superior than radar.....
Since both have pro and cons in different situations, so how could he say that the Camera is better or safer? that is the part i dont understand.
I thought the discussion was about Tesla switching Camera... because Elon is saying that it is superior than radar.....
Since both have pro and cons in different situations, so how could he say that the Camera is better or safer? that is the part i dont understand.
#398
Ex-OEM King
I dont think Radar is perfect.. Nothing is perfect...
I thought the discussion was about Tesla switching Camera... because Elon is saying that it is superior than radar.....
Since both have pro and cons in different situations, so how could he say that the Camera is better or safer? that is the part i dont understand.
I thought the discussion was about Tesla switching Camera... because Elon is saying that it is superior than radar.....
Since both have pro and cons in different situations, so how could he say that the Camera is better or safer? that is the part i dont understand.
#399
Sanest Florida Man
This video is the culmination of 9 months of research on Tesla Battery Day and also includes projections, estimates, and insights as a result of that research. It's the eighteenth and final video of the Lithium Mine to Battery Line series to investigate what Tesla unveiled at Battery Day.
#400
Sanest Florida Man
This is the effect of the structural battery pack. By making the structural battery pack perform double duty where it acts as the bottom frame of the vehicle and encloses and protects/manages/cools the battery cells you save so much weight from the vehicle that battery pack increases battery pack energy density. Every other EV made loses energy density when the batteries are put in a battery pack, Tesla will do it so effectively that overall energy density will increase
And you guys wonder why I'm not buying a Tesla rn...
And you guys wonder why I'm not buying a Tesla rn...
The following users liked this post:
Comfy (06-07-2021)