Filtern
Erscheinungsjahr
Dokumenttyp
- Wissenschaftlicher Artikel (48) (entfernen)
Sprache
- Deutsch (32)
- Englisch (15)
- Mehrsprachig (1)
Schlagworte
- Safety (15)
- Sicherheit (15)
- Bewertung (11)
- Fahrzeug (11)
- Test (11)
- Vehicle (11)
- Versuch (11)
- Evaluation (assessment) (10)
- Fahrzeugführung (10)
- Driver information (9)
Institut
- Abteilung Fahrzeugtechnik (48) (entfernen)
Autonomous Emergency Braking (AEB) systems for pedestrians have been predicted to offer substantial benefit. On this basis, consumer rating programmes, e.g. Euro NCAP, are developing rating schemes to encourage fitment of these systems. One of the questions that needs to be answered to do this fully, is to determine how the assessment of the speed reduction offered by the AEB is integrated with the current assessment of the passive safety for mitigation of pedestrian injury. Ideally, this should be done on a benefit related basis. The objective of this research was to develop a benefit based methodology for assessment of integrated pedestrian protection systems with pre-crash braking and passive safety components. A methodology has been developed which calculates the cost of pedestrian injury expected, assuming all pedestrians in the target population (i.e. pedestrians impacted by the front of a passenger car) are impacted by the car being assessed, taking into account the impact speed reduction offered by the car’s AEB (if fitted) and the passive safety protection offered by the car’s frontal structure. For rating purposes, this cost can be normalised by comparing it to the cost calculated for selected cars. The methodology uses the speed reductions measured in AEB tests to determine the speed at which each casualty in the target population will be impacted. The injury to each casualty is then calculated using the results from standard Euro NCAP pedestrian impactor tests and injury risk curves. This injury is converted into cost using ‘Harm’ type costs for the body regions tested. These costs are weighted and summed. Weighting factors were determined using accident data from Germany and GB and the results of a benefit analysis performed by the EU FP7 AsPeCSS project. This resulted in German and GB versions of the methodology. The methodology was used to assess cars with good, average and poor Euro NCAP pedestrian ratings, with and without a current AEB system fitted. It was found that the decrease in casualty injury cost achieved by fitting an AEB system was approximately equivalent to that achieved by increasing the passive safety rating from poor to average. Also, it was found that the assessment was influenced strongly by the level of head protection offered in the scuttle and windscreen area because this is where head impact occurs for a large proportion of casualties. The major limitation within the methodology is the assumption used implicitly during weighting. This is that the cost of casualty injuries to body areas, such as the thorax, not assessed by the headform and legform impactors, and other casualty injuries such as those caused by ground impact, are related linearly to the cost of casualty injuries assessed by the impactors. A methodology for assessment of integrated pedestrian protection systems was developed. This methodology is of interest to consumer rating programmes which wish to include assessment of these systems. It also raises the interesting issue if the head impact test area should be weighted to reflect better real-world benefit.
Effects of time pressure on left-turn decisions of elderly drivers in a fixed-base driving simulator
(2019)
In countries with right lane traffic left-turn maneuvers at intersections are known to be particularly critical for elderly drivers. It has been suggested that the implementation and use of Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) might offer a solution to compensate for age-related weaknesses in driving-related skills. In the present paper an experiment is reported which explored the effects of time pressure on the performance of left-turn manoeuvers supported by an ADAS function (time gap assistant). The study was performed in a fixed-base driving simulator with 20 younger (22-37) and 21 elderly drivers (60-84) who were observed when negotiating left-turn manoeuvers on rural roads with and without the assistance function active. Subjects performed the task once under conditions of time pressure once without. Results indicate that both age groups used the assistance function to perform the left-turn manoeuvers with shorter time gaps. Under conditions of time pressure this effect was more pronounced, and the effects of time pressure were stronger for the elderly. However, there were only weak indications for a specific benefit of the assistance function for the elderly.
Although cruise control (CC) is available for most cars, no studies have been found which examine how this automation system influences driving behaviour. However, a relatively large number of studies have examined adaptive cruise control (ACC) which compared to CC includes also a distance control. Besides positive effects with regard to a better compliance to speed limits, there are also indications of smaller distances to lead vehicles and slower responses in situations that require immediate braking. Similar effects can be expected for CC as this system takes over longitudinal control as well. To test this hypothesis, a simulator study was conducted at the German Aerospace Center. Twenty-two participants drove different routes (highway and motorway) under three different conditions (assisted by ACC, CC and manual driving without any system). Different driving scenarios were examined including a secondary task condition. On the one hand, both systems lead to lower maximum velocities and less speed limit violations. There was no indication that drivers shift more of their attention towards secondary tasks when driving with CC or ACC. However, there were delayed driver reactions in critical situations, e.g., in a narrow curve or a fog bank. These results give rise to some caution regarding the safety effects of these systems, especially if in the future their range of functionality (e.g., ACC Stop-and-Go) is further increased.
Established in 1997, the European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP) provides consumers with a safety performance assessment for the majority of the most popular cars in Europe. Thanks to its rigorous crash tests, Euro NCAP has rapidly become an important driver safety improvement to new cars. After ten years of rating vehicles, Euro NCAP felt that a change was necessary to stay in tune with rapidly emerging driver assistance and crash avoidance systems and to respond to shifting priorities in road safety. A new overall rating system was introduced that combines the most important aspects of vehicle safety under a single star rating. The overall rating system has allowed Euro NCAP to continue to push for better fitment and higher performance for vehicles sold on the European market. In the coming years, the safety rating is expected to play an important role in the support of the roll-out of highly automated vehicles.
Estimation of the effects of new emission standards on motorcycle emissions by means of modeling
(2016)
Road traffic is, in addition to the energy sector and the industry, one main source of air pollution and carbon dioxide emissions. Although most countries and manufacturers agreed to environmental regulations to reduce the pollutant emissions, particularly in urban areas with high traffic density, the impact of road traffic emissions on the environment and human health has been growing in importance steadily. Due to stricter emission standards and the binding use of emission-reducing systems (e.g. three-way catalyst) hydrocarbon emissions from passenger cars have been reduced significantly since the last two decades. Unlike to passenger cars the emissions standards of powered two-wheelers have not been adjusted since 2006 although their share of hydrocarbon emissions to the total amount of hydrocarbon emissions of road traffic is estimated to be disproportionately high. Due to the new regulation (EU) No. 168/2013 powered two-wheelers have to fulfill new emission standards from 2016 (Euro 4) and 2020 (Euro 5) onwards. Besides new limits for the tailpipe emissions the evaporative emissions are regulated separately for the first time, as they make up a high proportion to the total hydrocarbon emissions in this vehicle class. In this context, the calculation and forecast of road traffic emissions is an important tool to verify compliance of climate targets and to assess the reduction potential of emission-reducing systems. For that purpose the Federal Highway Research Institute (BASt) uses the emission- and calculation tool TREMOD (Transport Emission Model) which provides baseline data and calculated results for pollutants in almost every differentiation e.g. vehicle category, traffic situation and road type. Moreover, estimations of future emission trends, stock information and mileage distribution can be made. The main objective is to illustrate the impact of the upcoming emission standards Euro 4 and Euro 5 on the operational hydrocarbon emissions of powered two-wheelers based on statistical estimations. The significant aspect is to generate scenarios to show the reduction potential of hydrocarbon emissions of powered two-wheelers, differentiated into motorcycles and small motorcycles, in relation to the total share of hydrocarbon emissions in this vehicle class and to the total hydrocarbon emissions from road traffic. As a part of their research, the authors can make initial statements about the possible effect of the new emission standards of regulation (EU) No. 168/2013 by means of modeling with TREMOD.
There is considerable evidence for the negative effects of driver distraction on road safety. In many experimental studies, drivers have been primarily viewed as passive receivers of distraction. Thus, there is a lack of research on the mediating role of their self-regulatory behavior. The aim of the current study was to compare drivers' performance when engaged in a system-paced secondary task with a self-paced version of this task and how both differed from baseline driving performance without distraction. Thirty-nine participants drove in a simulator while performing a secondary visual"manual task. One group of drivers had to work on this task in predefined situations under time pressure, whereas the other group was free to decide when to work on the secondary task (self-regulation group). Drivers' performance (e.g., lateral and longitudinal control, brake reaction times) was also compared with a baseline condition without any secondary task. For the system-paced secondary task, distraction was associated with high decrements in driving performance (especially in keeping the lateral position). No effects were found for the number of collisions, probably because of the lower driving speeds while distracted (compensatory behavior). For the self-regulation group, only small impairments in driving performance were found. Drivers engaged less in the secondary task during foreseeable demanding or critical driving situations. Overall, drivers in the self-regulation group were able to anticipate the demands of different traffic situations and to adapt their engagement in the secondary task, so that only small impairments in driving performance occurred. Because in real traffic drivers are mostly free to decide when to engage in secondary tasks, it can be concluded that self-regulation should be considered in driver distraction research to ensure ecological validity.
The goal of the project FIMCAR (Frontal Impact and Compatibility Assessment Research) was to define an integrated set of test procedures and associated metrics to assess a vehicle's frontal impact protection, which includes self- and partner-protection. For the development of the set, two different full-width tests (full-width deformable barrier [FWDB] test, full-width rigid barrier test) and three different offset tests (offset deformable barrier [ODB] test, progressive deformable barrier [PDB] test, moveable deformable barrier with the PDB barrier face [MPDB] test) have been investigated. Different compatibility assessment procedures were analysed and metrics for assessing structural interaction (structural alignment, vertical and horizontal load spreading) as well as several promising metrics for the PDB/MPDB barrier were developed. The final assessment approach consists of a combination of the most suitable full-width and offset tests. For the full-width test (FWDB), a metric was developed to address structural alignment based on load cell wall information in the first 40 ms of the test. For the offset test (ODB), the existing ECE R94 was chosen. Within the paper, an overview of the final assessment approach for the frontal impact test procedures and their development is given.
This paper presents findings of a laboratory experiment which aimed at evaluating the sensitivity and intrusiveness of Tactile Detection Response Task (TDRT) methodology. Various single-task, dual-task and triple-task scenarios were compared. The task scenarios included a surrogate of driving (tracking task) and different secondary tasks (N-back, surrogate reference task (SuRT)). The results suggest that the TDRT is sensitive to load levels of secondary tasks which primarily demand for cognitive resources (N-back). Sensitivity to variations of visual"manual load could not be shown (SuRT). TDRT seems also to be able to differentiate between modes of primary task which varies in terms of cognitive load (visual against auditory tracking task). Results indicated intrusiveness of TDRT on primary task performance and secondary task performance depending on the type of underlying task scenario. As a conclusion, TDRT can be recommended as a method to assess attentional effects of cognitive load of a secondary task, but should be used with caution for secondary tasks with strong motor demands.
Die Initiative der Einführung kooperativer Systeme in einem Korridor von Rotterdam über Frankfurt/Main nach Wien, dem sogenannten C-ITS Corridor, und damit auch in Deutschland wurde im Juni 2013 durch die Unterzeichnung einer entsprechenden Absichtserklärung des Bundesministeriums für Verkehr, Bau und Stadtentwicklung mit den Verkehrsministern der Niederlande und Österreichs offiziell gestartet. In vielen Forschungsprojekten wurden vorher die Grundlagen erarbeitet, um eine solche Einführung technisch überhaupt erst möglich zu machen. Im Beitrag werden diese Ergebnisse nochmals kurz aufgegriffen und um den aktuellen Stand bei den Entwicklungen im C-ITS Corridor erweitert. Als erstes Einführungsszenario wurden die Baustellenwarnung und Kooperatives Verkehrsmanagement unter Einbeziehung von Fahrzeugdaten gewählt. Nicht verschwiegen werden sollen hierbei auch die wesentlichen Herausforderungen, die im Übergang von Forschung und Feldtests zu realen Anwendungen liegen.
Müdigkeit am Steuer ist eine bedeutsame Ursache von Straßenverkehrsunfällen. Es steht eine Fülle unterschiedlicher Methoden zur Verfügung, um Müdigkeit beim Fahrer zu erkennen. Ziel des vorliegenden Projekts war es, auf Basis einer mehrstufigen Befragung von zwölf Experten aus Industrie- und Hochschulforschung die Stärken und Schwächen der derzeit validesten objektiven Müdigkeitsmessverfahren vergleichend zu beschreiben. Als Basis der Bewertung diente ein eigens erarbeiteter Gütekriterienkatalog. Zu den validesten Müdigkeitsmessverfahren gehören aus Expertensicht Lenkverhalten und Spurhaltung, Indikatoren des Lidschlussverhaltens und des EEG, das videobasierte Expertenrating sowie der kontrovers diskutierte Pupillografische Schläfrigkeitstest. Die Güteprofile der sechs ausgewählten Messverfahren werden aufgeführt. Je nach Einsatzgebiet sind alle ausgewählten Messverfahren (Forschung und Entwicklung), nur einige (Müdigkeitswarnsystem im Fahrzeug), oder kein einziges (Verkehrskontrolle) geeignet. Dem Urteil der Experten nach bedarf eine valide Müdigkeitserfassung der Kombination von mindestens zwei Messverfahren unter Berücksichtigung der spezifischen Stärke-Schwächenprofile.