Lobbying for Common ADAS Terms Welcomes CIC Adoption in Industry Wiki


Lobbying for Common ADAS Terms Welcomes CIC Adoption in Industry Wiki

Through Jean Huetter
Announcements | Associations | Business practices | Education | Market trends | Technology

Developers ‘clearing up the confusion’ gave the Collision Industry Conference “their blessing” to replicate and use the generic SAE nomenclature for various advanced driver assistance systems, a CIC committee co-chair said last month.

This final maintenance phase, announced on January 21 by Emerging Technologies co-president Chuck Olsen, ends an initiative to include terminology within a CIC’s free official glossary for industry.

Eighty-eight percent of the CIC audience approved the decision in the July 2020 CIC poll – a “strong vote,” according to Olsen (AirPro).

This overwhelming show of support from a top level of bodybuilders, insurers, information providers and suppliers gives momentum to a large-scale national effort to promote clarity and understanding of ADAS systems.

An explosion of OEM-specific ADAS brands had threatened to turn various features into a Tower of Babel for consumers – and possibly repairers and insurers as well.

SAE International, the standards organization for vehicle engineers; JD Power; Consumer reports; AAA; and the National Safety Council had collaborated on a series of generic terms as a solution to this problem.

The effort adopted a single sentence and definition to describe every ADAS feature – compared to the barrage of competing OEM brands that might exist in the market. The worst offender was automatic braking, which according to a 2019 AAA study was described using 40 separate terms among 34 OEMs.

The CAS formally approved the conditions in May 2020 and said it would incorporate them into its J-3063 technical standard.

For example, the umbrella term for automatic braking has been defined as “automatic emergency braking,” defined as “detects potential collisions with a vehicle in front, provides forward collision warning, and automatically brakes to avoid a collision or reduce the severity of the impact. Some systems also detect pedestrians or other objects.

“These recommendations are not intended to replace the names of the automakers’ proprietary systems or packages, but rather help identify key functions within those packages and provide clarity to consumers,” said Keith Wilson, manager. of the SAE Technical Program, in a May 2020 release. “As security technologies advance, and as new systems are developed, we plan to work with stakeholders to refine the blueprint for denomination to keep the public and industry informed.

Olsen made a similar point on January 21. (See his presentation slides.) OEM brand names are not going away because of these generic terms, and automakers have been involved in efforts to develop them, he said. Rather, that set of terms gives repairers a “common understanding” of what the features do instead of having to learn many separate brand names, he said.

Olsen said that “we have their blessing” for using the terms of CIC’s free official wiki and their “appreciation” for maintaining consistency between the various auto repair verticals.

“They are very grateful for it,” he said.

More information:

“CIC Wiki-Glossary Updates” slides (also presentation slides for Equipment and Tools Institutes)

Collision Industry Conference, January 21, 2021

“SAE International Endorses Joint Efforts of AAA, Consumer Reports, JD Power and National Safety Council for Common Name Advanced Driver Assistance Systems”

SAE, May 12, 2020


Emerging Technology Co-Chair Chuck Olsen (AirPro) at the collision industry virtual conference on January 21, 2021, said the “Clear the Confusion” collaboration has given CIC approval to use its generic terms of advanced driver assistance system. (Screenshot of virtual CIC)

AAA’s study of 34 vehicle brands found that automatic braking had the most unique names of all ADAS features, at 40. (Provided by AAA)

Share this:


About Author

Comments are closed.