Sonstige
Refine
Document Type
- Conference Proceeding (5) (remove)
Keywords
- Classification (5) (remove)
Institute
- Sonstige (5) (remove)
In line with the new definition introduced by the European Commission (EC), the number of seriously injured road casualties in Germany for 2014 is assessed in this study. The number of MAIS3+ casualties is estimated by two different methodological approaches. The first approach is based on data from the German Inâ€Depth Accident Study (GIDAS), which is closely related to the German Road Traffic Accident Statistics. The second approach is based on data from the German TraumaRegister DGU-® (TRâ€DGU), which includes many more hospitals but not all MAIS3+ injuries.
The levels of continuous vehicle automation have become common knowledge. They facilitate overall understanding of the issue. Yet, continuous vehicle automation described therein does not cover "automated driving" as a whole: Functions intervening temporarily in accident-prone situations can obviously not be classified by means of continuous levels. Continuous automation describes the shift in workload from purely human driven vehicles to full automation. Duties of the driver are assigned to the machine as automation levels rise. Emergency braking, e.g., is obviously discontinuous and intensive automation. It cannot be classified under this regime. The resulting absence of visibility of these important functions cannot satisfy " especially in the light of effect they take on traffic safety. Therefore, in order to reach a full picture of vehicle automation, a comprehensive approach is proposed that can map out different characteristics as "Principle of Operation" at top level. On this basis informing and warning functions as well as functions intervening only temporarily in near-accident situations can be described. To reach a complete picture, levels for the discontinuous, temporarily intervening functions are proposed " meant to be the counterpart of the continuous levels already in place. This results in a detailed and independent classification for accident-prone situations. This finally provides for the visibility these important functions deserve.
The SafetyNet project was formulated in part to address the need for safety oriented European road accident data. One of the main tasks included within the project was the development of a methodology for better understanding of accident causation together with the development of an associated database involving data obtained from on-scene or "nearly onscene" accident investigations. Information from these investigations was complemented by data from follow-up interviews with crash participants to determine critical events and contributory factors to the accident occurrence. A method for classification of accident contributing factors, known as DREAM 3.0, was developed and tested in conjunction with the SafetyNet activities. Collection of data and case analysis for some 1 000 individual crashes have recently been completed and inserted into the database and therefore aggregation analyses of the data are now being undertaken. This paper describes the methodology development, an overview of the database and the initial aggregation analyses.
Each year the traffic accident research teams in Dresden and Hanover provide an in-depth investigation of approximately two thousand accidents, aggregated in the GIDAS database. To accomplish a comprehensive review of each traffic accident recorded, a sensible and thorough encoding of suffered injuries is indispensable. The Abbreviated Injury Scale by AAAM offers a valuable and handy solution to achieve this goal. However, there were a few difficulties in the use of the AIS that came up in the past, which let to necessary improvements for the utilization of the AIS 2005 for GIDAS.
The aim of this study is to investigate the differences in car occupant injury severity recorded in AIS 2005 compared to AIS 1990 and to outline the likely effects on future data analysis findings. Occupant injury data in the UK Cooperative Crash Injury Study Database (CCIS) were coded for the period February 2006 to November 2007 using both AIS 1990 and AIS 2005. Data for 1,994 occupants with over 6000 coded injuries were reviewed at the AIS and MAIS level of severities and body regions to determine changes between the two coding methodologies. Overall there was an apparent general trend for fewer injuries to be coded at the AIS 4+ severity and more injuries to be coded at the AIS 2 severity. When these injury trends were reviewed in more detail it was found that the body regions which contributed the most to these changes in severity were the head, thorax and extremities. This is one of the first studies to examine the implications for large databases when changing to an updated method for coding injuries.