91 Fahrzeugkonstruktion
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Conference Proceeding (100)
- Article (1)
Keywords
- Conference (101) (remove)
Institute
The project UR:BAN "Cognitive assistance (KA)" aims at developing future assistance systems providing improved performance in complex city traffic. New state-of-the-art panoramic sensor technologies now allow comprehensive monitoring and evaluation of the vehicle environment. In order to improve protection of vulnerable road users such as pedestrians and cyclists, a particular objective of UR:BAN is the evaluation and prediction of their behaviour and actions. The objective of subproject "WER" is development support by providing quantitative estimates of traffic collisions at the very start and predict potential in terms of optimized accident avoidance and reduction of injury severity. For this purpose an integrated computer simulation toolkit is being devised based on real world accidents (GIDAS as well as video documented accidents), allowing the prediction of potential effectiveness and future benefit of assistance systems in this accident scenario. Subsequently, this toolkit may be used for optimizing the design of implemented assistance systems for improved effectiveness.
The evaluation of the expected benefit of active safety systems or even ideas of future systems is challenging because this has to be done prospectively. Beside acceptance, the predicted real-world benefit of active safety systems is one of the most important and interesting measures. Therefore, appropriate methods should be used that meet the requirements concerning representativeness, robustness and accuracy. The paper presents the development of a methodology for the assessment of current and future vehicle safety systems. The variety of systems requires several tools and methods and thus, a common tool box was created. This toolbox consists of different levels, regarding different aspects like data sources, scenarios, representativeness, measures like pre-crash-simulations, automated crash computation, single-case-analyses or driving simulator studies. Finally, the benefit of the system(s) is calculated, e.g. by using injury risk functions; giving the number of avoided/mitigated accidents, the reduction of injured or killed persons or the decrease of economic costs.
Since its creation in 2011 the Pre-Crash-Matrix (PCM) offers the possibility to observe the pre-crash phase until five seconds before crash for a wide range of accidents. Currently the PCM contains more than 8.000 reconstructed accidents out of the GIDAS (German In-Depth Accident Study) database and is enlarged continuously by more than 1.000 cases per year. Hence, a detailed investigation of active safety systems in real accident situations has been made feasible. The PCM contains all relevant data in database format to simulate the pre-crash phase until the first collision of the accident for a maximum of two participants. This includes the definition of the participants and their characteristics, the dynamic behavior of the participants as time-dependent course for five seconds before crash as well as the geometry of the traffic infrastructure. The digital sketch of the accident and information from GIDAS as well as from supplementary databases represent the main input for the simulation of the pre-crash phase of an accident with the VUFO simulation model VAST (Vufo Accident Simulation Tool). This simulation in turn embodies the foundation of the PCM. The PCM underlies continual improvements and enhancements in consultation with its users. In addition to collisions of cars with other cars, pedestrians, bicycles and motorcycles the PCM now also covers car to object and car to truck collisions. The paper illustrates car to truck collisions as a showcase and explains perspectives for further developments. In 2016 a more detailed definition of the contour of the vehicle was added. Furthermore, the geometrical surroundings of the accident site will be provided in a new structure with a higher level of detail. Thus, a precise classification of road marks and objects is possible to further improve the support of developing and evaluating ADAS. This paper gives an overview about the latest developments of the PCM with its innovations and provides an outlook to upcoming enhancements. Besides potential areas of application for the development of ADAS are shown.
During the last 5 years, the number of cars fitted with side airbags has dramatically increased. They are now standard equipment, even on many smaller cars or less luxurious vehicles. While some side airbags offer thoracic protection alone, there are those that combine thoracic and head protection (of which most deploy from the seat). Other systems employ separate airbags for head and thorax protection, which are designed to be effective noticeably in a crash against a pole. This paper proposes an evaluation of the effectiveness of side airbags in preventing thoracic injuries to passenger car occupants involved in side crashes. First, the target population (who can take benefit of side airbag deployment and in what circumstances) is defined. Side airbags can be especially effective in cases of impacts on the door with intrusion at a certain impact speed. Then, an example case of a side impact with side airbag deployment is given were side airbag deployment is thought to have had a positive effect on injury outcome. A further case is presented where the impact configuration is likely to have reduced the effect of side airbag deployment on injury outcome. Finally, the estimation of side airbag effectiveness (in terms of additional occupant protection brought exclusively by the airbag) is proposed by comparing injury risk sustained by occupants in (more or less) similar cars (fitted or non fitted with airbags) because, during these years, car structure, and side airbag conception have considerably evolved. In-depth accident data from France, the UK and Germany has been collected. Out of 2,035 side impact accident cases available in the databases, we selected 435 occupants of passenger cars (built from 1998 onwards) involved in an injury accident between year 1998 and year 2004 for EES (Energy Equivalent Speed) values between 20km/h and 50km/h. The occupants, belted or not, were sat on the struck side, whatever the obstacle and type of accidents (intersection, loss of control, etc.). For multiple impact crashes, the side impact is assumed to be the more severe one. Passenger cars were fitted with (96) or without (339) side airbags. Most of the potential risk explanatory variables were correctly and reliably reported in the databases (velocity " impact zone " impact angle " occupant characteristics, etc.). The analysis compared injury risks for different levels of EES and different types of side airbags. A logistic regression model was also computed with injury variables (such as thoracic AIS 2+ or AIS 3+) as the dependant variable and other variables (including airbag type and EES) as explanatory injury risk factors. Results revealed statistically non-significant reductions in thoracic AIS 2+ and AIS 3+ injury risk in side airbag equipped cars in the impact violence range selected (odds ratio between 0.84 and 0.98 depending on types of airbags). The results are discussed. The non-significance is assumed to be due to a low number of cases. Statistical analysis for head injuries was not possible due to the low number of accident cases with passenger cars fitted with head airbags in the databases. Moreover, the discrepancies between the data coming from different countries (especially calculation of EES) might have introduced instability in the analysis.
This study is aimed to investigate the correlations of impact conditions and dynamic responses with the injuries and injury severity of child pedestrians by accident reconstruction. For this purpose, the pedestrian accident cases were selected from Sweden and Germany with detailed information about injuries, accident cars, and accident environment. The selected accident cases were reconstructed using mathematical models of pedestrian and passenger car. The pedestrian models were generated based on the height, weight, and age of the pedestrian involved in accidents. The car models were built up based on the corresponding accident car. The impact speeds in simulations were defined based on the reported data. The calculated physical quantities were analyzed to find the correlation with injury outcomes registered in the accident database. The reconstruction approaches are discussed in terms of data collection, estimating vehicle impact speeds, pedestrian moving speeds and initial posture, secondary ground impact, validity of the mathematical models, as well as impact biomechanics.
The current Brussels EU Regulation No. 1235/2011, valid from May 30, 2012, has introduced an European Tyre Label with wet grip index G classes from A to G for passenger car tyres C1, light commercial vehicles tyres C2 and heavy truck- and bus tyres C3. Every wet grip class for each vehicle category has a defined band of numerical values for the wet grip index G. The legislated wet grip values G in this EU- Regulation are very low. The measured braking distances and corresponding impact speeds of the test vehicles are showing very critical results. Regulation No. 1235/2011 of the European Parliament and the Council for Type Approval of Vehicles (EU) should be changed in such a way, that for C1-tyres (normal passenger cars tyres) the minimum wet grip index G is 1.25. All C2-tyres (light commercial vehicles tyres) should at least meet a minimum wet grip index of G = 1.1. All C3-tyres (heavy trucks and buses tyres) should at least meet a minimum wet grip index of G = 0.95. Due to the missing lower limits for G in the wet grip class F for C1, C2 and C3 tyres according to Commission Regulation (EU) No. 1235/2011, officially valid from 30 May 2012, a tyre-to-road coefficient of adhesion in the extreme of 0 (zero) is legally permitted. This is an apparent flaw in above cited EU Regulation, which causes a potential danger to the road traffic safety for all motor vehicles in Europe with such tyres. The wet grip class F has to be removed urgently from said EURegulation, since a direct liability of the responsible EU-Commission can not be excluded.
Rear-end collisions are the most frequent same and opposite-direction crashes. Common causes include momentary inattention, inadequate speed or inadequate distance. While most rear-end collisions in urban traffic only result in vehicle damage or slight injuries, rear-end collisions outside built-up areas or on motorways usually cause fatal or serious injuries. Driver assistance systems that detect dangerous situations in the longitudinal vehicle direction are therefore an essential safety plus. In view of this, for ADAC, systems that alert drivers to dangerous situations and initiate autonomous braking complement ESC as one of the most important active safety features in modern vehicles. The aim of ADAC is to provide consumers with technical advice and competent information about the systems available on the market. Reliable comparative tests that are based on standardised test criteria may provide motorists with important information and help them make a buying decision. In addition, they raise consumer awareness of the systems and speed up their market penetration. The assessment must focus on as many aspects of effectiveness as possible and include not only autonomous braking but also collision warning and autonomous brake assist. The work of the ADAC accident research is the development of the testing scenarios with direct link to accident situations and the identification of useful test criteria for testing.
Impact severity is a fundamental measure for all in-depth crash investigation projects. One methodology used in the UK is based on the US Calspan software package CRASH3. The UK- in-depth crash investigation studies routinely use AiDamage3 a software package which is based on an updated version of the original CRASH3 algorithm, including enhancements to the vehicle stiffness coefficients. Real world accident-damaged vehicles are measured and their crush is correlated with a library of stiffness coefficients. These measurements are then used, along with other parameters, to calculate the crash energy and equivalent changes of velocity of the vehicles (delta-v), which is a measure of the impact severity. UK in-depth accident studies routinely validate the crash severity methodologies applied as the vehicle fleet changes. This is achieved by analysing crash test data and using the appropriate residual crush damage and other inputs to AiDamage3 and checking the program- outputs with the known crash severity parameters. This procedure checks, at least in part, the default stiffness values in the data libraries and the reconstruction methods used.
In spite of today's highly sophisticated crash test procedures like the different NCAP programs running world-wide, bad real world crash performance of cars is still an issue. There are crash situations which are not sufficiently represented by actual test configurations. This is especially true for car to car, as well as for car to object impacts. The paper describes reasons for this bad performance. The reasons are in principal bad structural interaction between the car and its impact partners (geometric incompatibility), unadjusted front end stiffness (stiffness incompatibility) and collapse of passenger compartments. To show the efficiency of improving cars' structural behaviour in accidents with different impact partners an accident data analysis has been taken out by members of European Project VC-COMPAT. Accident data analysis has shown that in Germany between 15,000 and 20,000 of the now severely injured car occupants might get less injured and between 600 and 900 car occupant fatalities might be saved. Similar results arise for the UK.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance and accuracy of Event Data Recorders (EDRs). The analysis was based on J-NCAP crash tests from 2006"2007, with the corresponding EDR datasets. The pre-crash velocity, maximum delta-V and delta-V versus time history data recorded in the EDRs were compared with the reliable crash test data. The difference between the EDR pre-crash velocity and the laboratory test speed was less than 4 percent. In contrast, in several cases the maximum delta-V and delta-V versus time history data obtained from the EDRs showed uncertainty of measurement in comparisons with the reliable delta-V data. The difference in maximum delta-V in these comparisons was more than 5 percent in 10 of 14 tests and more than 10 percent in 4 of 14 tests. The EDRs underestimated the maximum delta-V in almost all tests. It was also concluded that the calculated acceleration from the EDR delta-V versus time history data showed good agreement with the instrumented accelerometer signal during the collision in almost all tests.