Jump to content

Automatic Emergency Braking or Intelligent Brake Assist?

Another JR
 Share

Recommended Posts

Another JR Senior Enthusiast

Another JR

Posted
Posted

I was on the freeway in fairly heavy rain and the traffic ahead of me suddenly slowed rapidly. I was on it and never came closer than 30 feet from the car ahead of me, but I had the forward collision alert triggered (which I’ve experienced several times before) and, for the first time, at least one of the braking system assist features also triggered. I’m not sure which one, though. 
 

It almost seemed like the truck was already starting to brake as I hit the pedal, but I’m not sure. It definitely was applying more brake than my pedal input. It braked more heavily than I would have in that particular event, but it did its job and kept me from getting near the car in front of me. It sounded sort of like the noise ABS makes, but more of a steady noise rather than the stuttering sound ABS makes. 
 

I was impressed with how well and how smoothly it worked, but I’m curious whether AEB actuated versus just IBA. Anybody able to describe how to tell the difference when the braking is not obviously well before you hit the brake pedal?

BowtieOwner Enthusiast

BowtieOwner

Posted
Posted
13 hours ago, Another JR said:

I was on the freeway in fairly heavy rain and the traffic ahead of me suddenly slowed rapidly. I was on it and never came closer than 30 feet from the car ahead of me, but I had the forward collision alert triggered (which I’ve experienced several times before) and, for the first time, at least one of the braking system assist features also triggered. I’m not sure which one, though. 
 

It almost seemed like the truck was already starting to brake as I hit the pedal, but I’m not sure. It definitely was applying more brake than my pedal input. It braked more heavily than I would have in that particular event, but it did its job and kept me from getting near the car in front of me. It sounded sort of like the noise ABS makes, but more of a steady noise rather than the stuttering sound ABS makes. 
 

I was impressed with how well and how smoothly it worked, but I’m curious whether AEB actuated versus just IBA. Anybody able to describe how to tell the difference when the braking is not obviously well before you hit the brake pedal?

Was this in your '21 HD?

 

I'm fairly confident that the '20-'23 HDs don't have AEB or IBA, only following distance indicator and forward collision alert. These are just alerts (seat vibration, sound, and lights, if equipped) and don't actually provide braking assistance. 

Another JR Senior Enthusiast

Another JR

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, BowtieOwner said:

Was this in your '21 HD?

 

I'm fairly confident that the '20-'23 HDs don't have AEB or IBA, only following distance indicator and forward collision alert. These are just alerts (seat vibration, sound, and lights, if equipped) and don't actually provide braking assistance. 

Yes it was my 2021 3500hd SLT with convenience and safety packages (forgot what the packages were called). It definitely has those features. They were on the sticker and covered in the manual. The manual says “if you have FCA you also have AEB and IBA.” You can turn them off in the settings, but I have them turned on.  One of the two braking features definitely activated, but it’s not clear to me which one. 

Edited by Another JR
Typo
BowtieOwner Enthusiast

BowtieOwner

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, Another JR said:

Yes it was my 2021 3500hd SLT with convenience and safety packages (forgot what the packages were called). It definitely has those features. They were on the sticker and covered in the manual. The manual says “if you have FCA you also have AEB and IBA.” You can turn them off in the settings, but I have them turned on.  One of the two braking features definitely activated, but it’s not clear to me which one. 

I stand corrected, just looked up the owner's manual. I don't have the feature on my '22 LTZ, but I did have it on my '21 High Country, and I thought it was only the FCA. I guess I never got into a situation that required the automatic braking, but it is good to know the feature was there. I think I crossed up my thinking because of the Lane Change Alert only being a warning, and is not the same as Lane Keep Assist. 

Jettech1 Senior Enthusiast

Jettech1

Posted
Posted (edited)

I have this package that will alert me as well but I've never felt any brake action at all even when it is alerting me....

SAFETY CONFIDENCE PACKAGE 390.00 • FORWARD COLLISION ALERT • AUTOMATIC EMERGENCY BRAKING • STEERING WHEEL AUDIO CONTROLS • DRIVER INFO CENTER, 4.2"

Edited by Jettech1
Another JR Senior Enthusiast

Another JR

Posted
  • Author
Posted
2 hours ago, Jettech1 said:

I have this package that will alert me as well but I've never felt any brake action at all even when it is alerting me....

SAFETY CONFIDENCE PACKAGE 390.00 • FORWARD COLLISION ALERT • AUTOMATIC EMERGENCY BRAKING • STEERING WHEEL AUDIO CONTROLS • DRIVER INFO CENTER, 4.2"

There is a delay between the FCA warning and the application of brakes. I’ve had maybe a dozen FCA warnings, but this was the first one where the brakes did something in addition to what my foot was commanding. I suspect the delay is longer when the the closure rate is lower. In this case it seems like there was maybe a full second delay, but not much more. 

Jettech1 Senior Enthusiast

Jettech1

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Another JR said:

There is a delay between the FCA warning and the application of brakes. I’ve had maybe a dozen FCA warnings, but this was the first one where the brakes did something in addition to what my foot was commanding. I suspect the delay is longer when the the closure rate is lower. In this case it seems like there was maybe a full second delay, but not much more. 

My 2019 Ford Explorer Sport used to brake all the time.  It was kind of annoying because I was always aware of what was going on.  My truck says it has this feature, but I've never felt it.  Even when the lights go off and alerting me.  Never once when I know what's going on and I'm closing in on someone...not once has it ever hit the brakes for me.  The red lights show up and the sounds....but the brakes......nope...

Another JR Senior Enthusiast

Another JR

Posted
  • Author
Posted

That was my experience too prior to this recent event. I think the difference was I was going fast and the slowdown in front of me was very sudden. The thing did its job very well. I’m just trying to understand whether the AEB fired right before I hit the brake. 

Jettech1 Senior Enthusiast

Jettech1

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Another JR said:

That was my experience too prior to this recent event. I think the difference was I was going fast and the slowdown in front of me was very sudden. The thing did its job very well. I’m just trying to understand whether the AEB fired right before I hit the brake. 

I think it's a nice feature but do I trust it??  Hell no...It has not once starting braking for me when the red lights and sounds are going off.  Not once.

 

NWStever Enthusiast

NWStever

Posted
Posted

I disabled AEB as I don't want to risk inadvertent (false positive) hard braking because the system has confused an oncoming vehicle safely in its own lane as an imminent threat. I left the red warning alert enabled which I note sometime goes off as I approach an inside (RH) curve with an oncoming vehicle presenting the camera a collision threat. Seems like a recipe to get rear-ended.

 

As for Another JR's experience with enhanced braking, I believe the owner's manual describes an enhanced braking performance capability when the brakes are applied quick and hard by the operator. The reason being to give an initial extra braking capability that improves stopping distances of our big and heavy trucks.  Check out the owner's manual for more details of the braking system enhancement. 

Another JR Senior Enthusiast

Another JR

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, NWStever said:

I disabled AEB as I don't want to risk inadvertent (false positive) hard braking because the system has confused an oncoming vehicle safely in its own lane as an imminent threat. I left the red warning alert enabled which I note sometime goes off as I approach an inside (RH) curve with an oncoming vehicle presenting the camera a collision threat. Seems like a recipe to get rear-ended.

 

As for Another JR's experience with enhanced braking, I believe the owner's manual describes an enhanced braking performance capability when the brakes are applied quick and hard by the operator. The reason being to give an initial extra braking capability that improves stopping distances of our big and heavy trucks.  Check out the owner's manual for more details of the braking system enhancement. 

I have had two cases like you described where, in a right curve, an oncoming car switched to the center left turn lane, pointing their car at me briefly and setting off the red warning light. In both cases, if the car had actually been coming at me at that speed and distance, a head-on would have been unavoidable, so you’d think any automatic braking would have been applied immediately. However, in both cases, the brakes were not applied by the vehicle. I was reacting and covering the brake in each case, but both times the threat went away before I applied much brake if any. That makes me wonder if it’s not programmed to apply AEB in a head-on detection, maybe due to the false alarm propensity. Just a guess, though. None of the material I’ve found addresses behavior of the system in head-on warnings. 
 

I will say the system has given me numerous legitimate rear end warnings, zero rear end false alarms, and only those two well understood head on “false” alarms, that really were legitimate warnings until the other car changed direction away from pointing at me. The only brake inputs I’ve experienced were in the recent potential rear end event I described in the first post here, and as you said those may have been just IBA and not AEB. No unwanted braking. That’s in two years and 8,000 miles of mixed driving. Nothing about that record makes me distrust the system, so I’m leaving mine turned on. 

Edited by Another JR
Clarification of descriptions

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • SFC Retired
      2023 DRW Wheel Liners

      By SFC Retired · Posted

      Did have to make 1 modification because of the WeatherTech rear mud flaps and that was needing 3 longer screws than what came with the install package. 😄
    • SFC Retired
      2023 DRW Wheel Liners

      By SFC Retired · Posted

      Picked up the liners yesterday. Installed passenger side WITHOUT any modifications. All mounting holes lined up perfectly. Rain is interfering today with drivers side. Very Happy! Will add pics when finished
    • KARNUT
      OCI, not when but why?

      By KARNUT · Posted

      As a matter of amusement I’ll leave this conversation with this. Do you beat the government average fuel estimate? Statistics are a guide to me. Not a rule. Someone once said I have to have the last word. If true and possible may be. I’ll blame that on working in a family business.
    • bluev8
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By bluev8 · Posted

      That is a fair point, and I agree that trying to log “everything in the truck” would be the wrong direction.   There are a lot of modules and a lot of traffic. If the product became a full-truck datalogger, the amount of data would get huge very quickly, and most owners would never use it.   I think the first useful version would need to be narrow: - powertrain-side event evidence - selected high-value parameters - communication / voltage / reset events - pre/post event window - short report first, raw log only as backup   One distinction I should make is between active OBD/PID polling and passive bus capture. If you are polling PIDs through OBD, then yes: the more parameters you request, the lower the effective sample rate becomes, and you are adding diagnostic traffic to a vehicle that is already busy running itself. With passive CAN capture, the recorder is not asking all the modules for data. It is listening to traffic that is already on the bus. So it does not consume vehicle bus bandwidth in the same way that a scan tool polling hundreds of PIDs would. But your point still applies in a different way.   Even if passive capture does not add bus traffic, the recorder still has limits: - processing rate - storage rate - timestamp accuracy - decoder workload - event filtering - report size - user attention span   So the answer cannot be “log everything and let the user figure it out.” The product would need to store enough raw evidence to be useful, but only decode, graph, and present the important parts around the event.   A practical report should probably show: - what triggered the capture - how much pre/post data was preserved - which selected parameters changed - how those values compared to baseline - whether the same pattern happened before - whether any voltage, reset, bus-off, lost-message, or communication fault occurred - selected graphs around the event - raw data only as supporting evidence   So I agree with you. More data is not automatically better. The real product is the reduction from raw data into a useful event report.
    • bluev8
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By bluev8 · Posted

      That makes sense, and I agree with most of that.   I think the product would need both: 1. a default powertrain template, so it is useful out of the box; 2. user-selected priority parameters, so the owner or shop can choose what they want to see first.   Different users are going to care about different things. One owner may care about oil pressure and voltage. Another may care about misfire trend, AFM/DFM behavior, or U-codes. A shop may want communication events and repeatability first. Your baseline point is probably the most important one. Raw data is not very useful unless the report can show what normal looked like for that vehicle under similar conditions.   The way I would think about it is: - start with a basic known-good baseline - learn normal behavior for that specific vehicle over time - allow the event to be overlaid against baseline - show whether the event was a one-time spike or a repeatable pattern - provide a simple severity level, but with clear limits on what that severity means   For example, early severity could be something like: - Info: event captured, no obvious abnormal pattern - Watch: value moved outside baseline, but not repeated - Warning: repeatable abnormal pattern under similar conditions - Critical: communication loss, voltage drop, bus-off, reset, or severe repeated event   I would not want the first version to say “replace this part.” That would be overclaiming unless there is repair-confirmed data behind it. It would be more honest to say “this pattern deserves inspection.”   On the OBD port question, I think OBD absolutely has a role. OBD is probably the right place for: - DTCs - freeze frame - VIN - calibration information - normal scan-tool parameters - Mode 6 / enhanced diagnostic data if available The reason I am still looking at an ECM-side recorder is that the failure may happen before anyone connects a scan tool. If the owner plugs in a scanner after the event, the pre-event evidence may already be gone unless the ECU happened to save it. So I do not see this as “OBD versus ECM-side.” I see it more like: - ECM-side recorder: always armed, rolling buffer, event evidence - OBD/DLC companion: DTCs, freeze frame, VIN, calibration, normal scan data - phone/cloud: status, notes, upload, report generation, notifications   I agree that phone connection and push notifications would be useful. I just would not want the phone or cloud connection to be required for capture. The recorder should save the event locally even if the phone is not connected. The phone should help with event marking, download, notes, upload, alerts, and report viewing.   For a default GM V8 event report, would this list make sense? - RPM - calculated load / MAP - throttle position - vehicle speed - gear / torque converter state if available - coolant temperature - oil pressure - oil temperature if available - battery voltage - commanded AFM/DFM state if available - actual AFM/DFM state if available - misfire counters / roughness by cylinder if available - fuel trims - relevant U-codes / communication events - bus-off / lost periodic message / module reset / voltage drop events Which of those would you remove, and what would you add?

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...