Follow this blog:
RSS

Japan’s driverless trucks to cut fuel consumption

By | March 4, 2013, 4:38 AM PST

Uh-oh. There's no one driving this truck. Will it avoid the broken down car ahead of it? Click the first video below to find out.

Self-driving cars? Child’s play!

Japan has tested a small fleet of driverless trucks, Phys.org reports. The idea is that if you keep a convoy running at a constant speed in a perfectly straight line at exactly the same distance apart, then you create a slipstream that reduces drag and adds significant fuel efficiency.

Four trucks, one driver, and a lot of electronics.

That’s what the country’s New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organization (NEDO) did recently.

It ran three unmanned trucks at 80 kilometers per hour (50 mph) behind one truck piloted by a human. Each vehicle remained 4 meters (13 feet) from the next one.

NEDO thinks that such technology can decrease fuel consumption by at least 15 percent. But the Phys.org story does not report fuel results from the trial, so perhaps the homo sapiens-light formation didn’t yield the hoped for energy savings. But NEDO will try again soon. It plans more tests later this year.

“NEDO hopes to have a practical version of this automated driving system ready around 2020,” the story notes.

The trucks used a combination of milliwave radar, infrared laser radar and cameras to detect obstacles and white lines. They communicated with each other via wireless technologies including infrared. Two printed circuit boards helped maintained the caravan’s formation.

Industrial and academic partners in the project include Mitsubishi Electric, NEC, Oki Electric Industry, Denso, Hino Motors, the University of Tokyo and Nihon University.

Video from the driverless seat:

Wherever wheels are rolling, there’s barely a driver in town:

Images: Videos are from responsejp via YouTube. Photos are screen grabs from the videos.

Take a ride on the driverless highway via many SmartPlanet stories. Here are just a few:

Start your week smarter with our weekly e-mail newsletter. It's your cheat sheet for good ideas. Get it.

Mark Halper

About Mark Halper

Mark Halper is a contributing editor for SmartPlanet.

Mark Halper

Mark Halper

Contributing Editor

Mark Halper has written for TIME, Fortune, Financial Times, the UK's Independent on Sunday, Forbes, New York Times, Wired, Variety and The Guardian. He is based in Bristol, U.K.

Follow him on Twitter.

Mark Halper

Mark Halper

Mark has no financial holdings in the companies he writes about. He occasionally travels at the expense of companies or their press relations agencies in order to report on a company or industry event related to it; Mark will prominently disclose this information when appropriate. This relationship will have no influence on his coverage. Companies he covers do not get to review columns in advance, or select or reject topics.

He writes for SmartPlanet and is not an employee of CBS.

If you liked this, don't miss...
9
Comments

Join the conversation!

Follow via:
RSS
0 Votes
+ -
Truckers Unions Are Going To HATE This
Millions of people are employed in the trucking industry. How do you think the public is going to respond when all those people lose their jobs?
Posted by wbaltzley
4th Mar
-1 Votes
+ -
I'm going to hate it
Just what I want...80,000 lbs driverless and hackable..I thought Google Cars were bad enough.. Hopefully neither of them really take hold. I realize that robotics have progressed amazingly, but I've also seen the results of just a couple of bits shy of a full program and you can rename what ever piece of equipment Destructo.
Posted by GregGold
4th Mar
+1 Vote
+ -
The future is already here..
Changing the transport industry to a largely automated one is inevitable... and some mining companies in Australia have already taken the leap with driver-less Haul Trucks.

Having a 'driver' that never gets tired, can drive 24/7 and is inherently safer (this could be argued) is a good thing. Companies will be able to move stock and supplies around with much more efficiency (in time alone) if they can also be configured to also save fuel I think it's a no-brainer.

@wbaltzley - Manufacturing employed millions of people and yet it was industrialised and automated where possible,

@GregGold - Clearly you've never heard of truckers that fall asleep at the wheel, after driving for 30+ hours straight to get the delivery on time... there are issues with any system, hacking trucks is not one I'd be particularly worried about to be honest...
Posted by shaddowofadream
4th Mar
+1 Vote
+ -
Reducing fuel consumption is not the biggest win...
and the trucking companies are not even bothering to mention where their biggest savings would be, for fear of or reprisals.

The fuel savings might happen, but, that would just be an incidental gain. The biggest gain for the truck companies would be in the savings in salaries and benefits that wouldn't have to be paid. That could amount to thousands in savings, per week, for each trucker that is replaced by a driverless truck. In addition, if those things prove to be effective and safe, then the savings would be a lot higher, with insurance costs becoming less and perhaps non-existent. A large trucking company could self-insure now, but, for those who can't, the insurance costs could do down tremendously.
Posted by adornoe
4th Mar
0 Votes
+ -
I forgot about the labour costs...
Say one of these systems costs ~500k to install onto your truck (not a bad estimate based off speculation from the google car project), it'd take at least a few years to recoup those costs...

I still think the fact a human can physically only drive for so long (sleep/eating/toilet breaks/fatigue/distractions) vs a machine will be the biggest driving (pun not intended) factor.

I also suspect that initially these systems will be deployed with human drivers as co-pilots with the computer taking over for sleep breaks/rests (and alerting the driver for any emergencies/issues) but that's just pure speculation happy
Posted by shaddowofadream
4th Mar
0 Votes
+ -
The costs of "installation" would be recovered within a year for
mid-size companies, and within months for a larger trucking company. If a trucker makes $50-100 thousand dollars per year, and you add another $20,000 per year for benefits per trucker, than you are looking at a savings of at least $70,000 per year per trucker that a company no longer needs. Multiply that by 10 or 20 or 100 truckers, and you're talking about savings that can go into the millions per year, and perhaps per month. Then, you have to consider the huge savings on insurance that will no longer be necessary. That could easily add hundreds of thousand more in savings, and perhaps millions, depending on the size of the company.

Cost of installation might not be a worry in the future, since, if the technology proves worthy and safe, trucks would come with the technology pre-installed from the factories. Plus, even if the trucks have to be retro-fitted with the technology, chances are that, it won't be so expensive on a per truck basis, and it might amount to perhaps $10,000 (perhaps a bit more) per truck.
Posted by adornoe
5th Mar
0 Votes
+ -
How safe would this be ?
Advances in technology are good but it also adds tools in the hands of terrorists. Think about that.
Posted by pmshah@...
4th Mar
0 Votes
+ -
If one were to be constantly worrying about how terrorists could use a new
invention or a new technology, then we'd still be in the stone age, or, optimistically, perhaps in the middle ages. Guns and knives might never have been invented, and neither would the wheel or fire. All of those are potential weapons in the wrong hands. Heck, even karate in the wrong hands, could be very damaging.
Posted by adornoe
5th Mar
0 Votes
+ -
never compromise safety
is this already fully operational using unmanned automotive vehicles, as well, in mass production for the buying market?

soundcloud downloads
Posted by sabecolbert
3rd Apr
Join the conversation
Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]

Join the SmartPlanet community and join the conversation! Signing up is fast and free. Don't wait -- we want to hear your opinion!