Sonstige
Refine
Document Type
- Conference Proceeding (3)
- Article (2)
Keywords
- Accident (2)
- Analyse (math) (2)
- Analysis (math) (2)
- Cyclist (2)
- Fatality (2)
- Injury (2)
- Radfahrer (2)
- Schweregrad (Unfall, Verletzung) (2)
- Severity (accid, injury) (2)
- Statistics (2)
- Statistik (2)
- Tödlicher Unfall (2)
- Unfall (2)
- Verletzung (2)
- Alte Leute (1)
- Benutzung (1)
- Bewertung (1)
- Car (1)
- Classification (1)
- Collision (1)
- Daytime running light (1)
- Demografie (1)
- Demography (1)
- Deutschland (1)
- Driver assistance system (1)
- EU (1)
- Economic efficiency (1)
- Europa (1)
- Europe (1)
- Evaluation (assessment) (1)
- Fahrerassistenzsystem (1)
- Frontalzusammenstoß (1)
- Fußgänger (1)
- Germany (1)
- Head on collision (1)
- Hospital (1)
- Insasse (1)
- Klassifizierung (1)
- Krankenhaus (1)
- Lkw (1)
- Lorry (1)
- Medical examination (1)
- Medizinische Untersuchung (1)
- Method (1)
- Motorcyclist (1)
- Motorradfahrer (1)
- Old people (1)
- Pedestrian (1)
- Pkw (1)
- Quality assurance (1)
- Qualitätssicherung (1)
- Safety (1)
- Schweregrad (Unfall (1)
- Severity (accid (1)
- Sicherheit (1)
- Tagesfahrlicht (1)
- Traffic (1)
- Traffic count (1)
- Traffic survey (1)
- Trend (stat) (1)
- Use (1)
- Vehicle occupant (1)
- Verfahren (1)
- Verkehr (1)
- Verkehrserhebung (1)
- Verkehrsuntersuchung (1)
- Verletzung) (1)
- Wirtschaftlichkeit (1)
- Zusammenstoß (1)
- injury) (1)
Institute
- Abteilung Verhalten und Sicherheit im Verkehr (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.
Europe has benefited from a decreasing number of road traffic fatalities. However, the proportion of older road users increases steadily. In an ageing society, the SENIORS project aims to improve the safe mobility of older road users by determining appropriate requirements towards passive vehicle safety systems. Therefore, the characteristics of road traffic crashes involving the elderly people need to be understood. This paper focuses on car occupants and pedestrians or cyclists in crashes with modern passenger cars. Ten crash databases and four hospital statistics from Europe have been analysed to answer the questions on which body regions are most frequently and severely injured in the elderly, and specific injuries sustained by always comparing older (65 years and above) with midâ€aged road users (25â€64 years). It was found that the body region thorax is of particularly high importance for the older car occupant with injury severities of AIS2 or AIS3+, where as the lower extremities, head and the thorax need to be considered for older pedestrians and cyclists. Further, injury risk functions were provided. The hospital data analysis showed less difference between the age groups. The linkage between crash and hospital data could only be made on a general level as their inclusion criteria were quite different.
The presence and performance of Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) has increased over last years. Systems available on the market address also conflicts with vulnerable road users (VRUs) such as pedestrians and cyclists. Within the European project PROSPECT (Horizon2020, funded by the EC) improved VRU ADAS systems are developed and tested. However, before determining systems" properties and starting testing, an up-to-date analysis of VRU crashes was needed in order to derive the most important Use Cases (detailed crash descriptions) the systems should address. Besides the identified Accident Scenarios (basic crash descriptions), this paper describes in short the method of deriving the Use Cases for car-to-cyclist crashes. Method Crashes involving one passenger car and one cyclist were investigated in several European crash databases looking for all injury severity levels (slight, severe and fatal). These data sources included European statistics from CARE, data on national level from Germany, Sweden and Hungary as well as detailed accident information from these three countries using GIDAS, the Volvo Cars Cyclist Accident database and Hungarian in-depth accident data, respectively. The most frequent accident scenarios were studied and Use Cases were derived considering the key aspects of these crash situations (e.g., view orientation of the cyclist and the car driver- manoeuvre intention) and thus, form an appropriate basis for the development of Test Scenarios. Results Latest information on car-to-cyclist crashes in Europe was compiled including details on the related crash configurations, driving directions, outcome in terms of injury severity, accident location, other environmental aspects and driver responsibilities. The majority of car-to-cyclist crashes occurred during daylight and in clear weather conditions. Car-to-cyclist crashes in which the vehicle was traveling straight and the cyclist is moving in line with the traffic were found to result in the greatest number of fatalities. Considering also slightly and seriously injured cyclists led to a different order of crash patterns according to the three considered European countries. Finally the paper introduced the Use Cases derived from the crash data analysis. A total of 29 Use Cases were derived considering the group of seriously or fatally injured cyclists and 35 Use Cases were derived considering the group of slightly, seriously or fatally injured cyclists. The highest ranked Use Case describes the collision between a car turning to the nearside and a cyclist riding on a bicycle lane against the usual driving direction. A unified European dataset on car-to-cyclist crash scenarios is not available as the data available in CARE is limited, hence national datasets had to be used for the study and further work will be required to extrapolate the results to a European level. Due to the large number of Use Cases, the paper shows only highest ranked ones.
Das Fahren mit Licht am Tag wird seit dem 1. Oktober 2005 vom damaligen Bundesministerium für Verkehr, Bau und Stadtentwicklung (BMVBS) empfohlen. Weiterhin wurde im Februar 2011 auf europäischer Ebene beschlossen, alle neuen Fahrzeugtypen der Fahrzeugklasse M1 (Fahrzeuge zur Personenbeförderung mit vier Rädern und maximal 8 Sitzplätzen außer dem Fahrersitz) sowie der Fahrzeugklasse N1 (Kraftfahrzeuge zur Güterbeförderung mit mindestens vier Rädern und mit einem zulässigen Gesamtgewicht bis zu 3,5 t) mit speziellen Tagfahrleuchten (TFL) auszustatten. Seit August 2012 gilt diese Regelung auch für alle anderen Fahrzeugklassen. Vor dem Hintergrund dieser Entwicklung wird davon ausgegangen, dass sich das Fahren mit Licht am Tag immer weiter verbreitet. Um daraus resultierende Sicherheitsgewinne bewerten zu können, ist eine kontinuierliche Beobachtung der Lichteinschaltquoten am Tag erforderlich. Die Grundidee der kontinuierlichen Erfassung der Lichteinschaltquoten am Tag mit der angewendeten Erhebungsmethodik wird beschrieben. Im Fokus stehen die neuen Qualitätssicherungsmaßnahmen. Abschließend werden die bisher ermittelten Zeitreihen analysiert.
Nutzen-Kosten- sowie Kosten-Wirksamkeits-Analysen sind als methodische Konzepte zur Bewertung von Verkehrssicherheitsmaßnahmen anerkannt, werden jedoch bisher eher selten von den verantwortlichen Entscheidungsträgern angewendet. Die konsequente Nutzung dieser Bewertungsverfahren würde jedoch einen effizienteren Einsatz öffentlicher Mittel im Bereich der Verkehrssicherheitsmaßnahmen ermöglichen. Im Oktober 2002 startete daher das Europäische Thematische Netzwerk ROSEBUD ("Road Safety and Environmental Benefit-Cost and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis for Use in Decision-Making"), dessen Ziel es ist, langfristig die Akzeptanz ökonomischer Bewertungsverfahren für Verkehrssicherheitsmaßnahmen zu verbessern und so zu einem verstärkten Einsatz dieser Bewertungsinstrumente beizutragen. Das Netzwerk wird von der Europäischen Kommission finanziert und hat eine Laufzeit von 3 Jahren.