Sonstige
Refine
Document Type
- Book (2)
- Part of a Book (1)
- Conference Proceeding (1)
Language
- English (4) (remove)
Keywords
- Technische Vorschriften (Kraftfahrzeug) (4) (remove)
Institute
- Sonstige (4)
- Abteilung Fahrzeugtechnik (3)
The term driver assistance systems in the chapter title shall be understood to include vehicle automation. This chapter starts with a homogeneous and consistent classification and nomenclature of all kinds of driver assistance systems known and under discussion today (including vehicle automation). It thereby builds upon familiar classification schemes by the German Federal Highway Research Institute (BASt) and the standardization body SAE international. Detailed evaluation of the German legal situation for driver assistance systems and vehicle automation is provided in the following Sect. 2. In Sect. 3, an overview is given on the legal system in the US to reveal aspects relevant for vehicle automation. This is intended as initial information for those not acquainted to the US legal system which has been the first to regulate automation in several federal states. Finally, in Sect. 4, the current rating scheme of the European New Car Assessment Programme (EuroNCAP) is presented in comparison to legal instruments. The model of a consumer protection based approach proves to be a flexible instrument with great advantages in promoting new technologies. Technical vehicle regulations on the other hand rule minimum requirements. Both approaches are needed to achieve maximum vehicle safety.
Although the bus belongs to the safest traffic means, single accidents can be particularly severe and concern many passengers. Especially in case of fires a high number of injured and killed persons can be the outcome. Fire safety of buses therefore is of high importance. With the increase of plastic materials as a material for the interior equipment of buses and coaches due to their good mechanical properties combined with low weight, the question arises whether the safety level has decreased in case of a fire during the last years " also compared to other means of transport. Because of the combustible plastics and their ability to release a high amount of heat the main fire load in buses is no longer the fuel but the plastic materials which are also often easy to ignite. Besides the flammability of the equipments, also the production of smoke, the smoke development and propagation as well as its toxicity are of interest. That counts for the passengers as well as for the test methods and its limit values. The severe fire in Germany near Hanover in 2008 with 20 fatalities showed how disastrous such fires can be. For those reasons several research projects were initiated on behalf of the German Federal Highway Research Institute. At the one hand the fire behaviour of coach interiors was examined in general focusing on fire propagation as well as fire detection and signalling. As result, recommendations with regard to early fire detection systems for the engine compartments and onboard extinguishing equipment were elaborated. On the other hand research was carried out to examine heat release, smoke, smoke propagation and its toxicity due to burning bus interior materials. In this project small and real scale experiments on material specimens, interior parts and vehicles were performed. Trains and buses often have very similar operation conditions. Consequently, bus interior material was tested according to the regulations for rail vehicles, i.e. DIN EN 45545 as well as DIN 5510. None of the tested bus interior materials would have been allowed to use in a train. The fire safety regulations for bus materials are on a low level compared to other transport sectors, i.e. railway, ship and aircraft. Also numerical investigations with the Fire Dynamics Simulator (FDS) were performed. The very rapid fire development during the severe bus fire from 2008 could be predicted with the numerical model. The model was then used to investigate the influence of different materials, ventilation conditions and ignition sources. The bus materials contribute significantly to a very rapid fire development in bus fires. Especially, the flammable ceiling and the passenger seats were identified to be key issues of the fire propagation in a bus and can be explained by the rapid fire spread along the ceiling and the high fire load of passenger seats. As conclusion of the project effective and economically reasonable fire safety requirements for interiors of buses are recommended which would improve the current situation. Proposals for amendments of current requirements are recommended including the specification of appropriate limit values. In particular, it is taken into consideration which reasonable fire safety standards from other transport sectors, especially the rail sector, should be transferred to buses
A series of drop tests and vehicle tests with the adult head impactor according to Regulation (EC) 631/2009 and drop tests with the phantom head impactor according to UN Regulation No. 43 have been carried out by the German Federal Highway Research Institute (BASt) on behalf of the German Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Development (BMVBS). Aim of the test series was to study the injury risk for vulnerable road users, especially pedestrians, in case of being impacted by a motor vehicle in a way described within the European Regulations (EC) 78/2009 and (EC) 631/2009. Furthermore, the applicability of the phantom head drop test described in UN Regulation No. 43 for plastic glazing should be investigated. In total, 30 drop tests, thereof 18 with the adult head impactor and 12 with the phantom head impactor, and 49 vehicle tests with the adult head impactor were carried out on panes of laminated safety glass (VSG), polycarbonate (PC) and laminated polycarbonate (L-PC). The influence of parameters such as the particular material properties, test point locations, fixations, ambient conditions (temperature and impact angle) was investigated in detail. In general, higher values of the Head Injury Criterion (HIC) were observed in tests on polycarbonate glazing. As the HIC is the current criterion for the assessment of head injury risk, polycarbonate glazing has to be seen as more injurious in terms of vulnerable road user protection. In addition, the significantly higher rebound of the head observed in tests with polycarbonate glazing is suspected to lead to higher neck loads and may also cause higher injury risks in secondary impacts of vulnerable road users. However, as in all tests with PC glazing no damage of the panes was observed, the risk of skin cut injuries may be expected to be reduced significantly. The performed test series give no indication for the test procedure prescribed in UN Regulation No. 43 as a methodology to approve glass windscreen not being feasible for polycarbonate glazing, as all PC panes tested fulfilled the UN R 43 requirements. The performance of the windscreen area will not be relevant for vehicle type approval according to the upcoming UN Regulation for pedestrian protection. However, it is recommended that pedestrian protection being considered for plastic windscreens to ensure at least the same level of protection as glass windscreens.
Although the number of road accident casualties in Europe (EU27) is falling the problem still remains substantial. In 2011 there were still over 30,000 road accident fatalities. Approximately half of these were car occupants and about 60 percent of these occurred in frontal impacts. The next stage to improve a car's safety performance in frontal impacts is to improve its compatibility. The objective of the FIMCAR FP7 EU-project was to develop an assessment approach suitable for regulatory application to control a car's frontal impact and compatibility crash performance and perform an associated cost benefit analysis for its implementation. This paper reports the cost benefit analyses performed to estimate the effect of the following potential changes to the frontal impact regulation: • Option 1 " No change and allow current measures to propagate throughout the vehicle fleet. • Option 2 " Add a full width test to the current offset Deformable Barrier (ODB) test. • Option 3 " Add a full width test and replace the current ODB test with a Progressive Deformable Barrier (PDB) test. For the analyses national data were used from Great Britain (STATS 19) and from Germany (German Federal Statistical Office). In addition in-depth real word crash data were used from CCIS (Great Britain) and GIDAS (Germany). To estimate the benefit a generalised linear model, an injury reduction model and a matched pairs modelling approach were applied. The benefits were estimated to be: for Option 1 "No change" about 2.0%; for Option 2 "FW test" ranging from 5 to 12% and for Option 3 "FW and PDB tests" 9 to 14% of car occupant killed and seriously injured casualties.