Refine
Document Type
- Conference Proceeding (12)
- Article (2)
Has Fulltext
- no (14) (remove)
Keywords
- Aktives Sicherheitssystem (14) (remove)
Institute
- Abteilung Fahrzeugtechnik (11)
- Sonstige (3)
- Präsident (1)
Im Jahr 2004 fand an der Medizinischen Hochschule Hannover die erste ESAR-Konferenz (Expert Symposium on Accident Research) statt. Die Idee einer internationalen Konferenz war aus der Notwendigkeit entstanden, diejenigen Experten zusammen zu bringen, die weltweit tätig sind und Verkehrsunfälle wissenschaftlich analysieren, um ihre Ergebnisse gemeinsam zu diskutieren und einem Zielpublikum von Behördenvertretern, Entwicklungsingenieuren der Automobilindustrie und anderen Wissenschaftlern darzubringen. Die durch Professor Otte initiierte und nun zum vierten Male organisierte Konferenz fand eine breite Akzeptanz und ist mittlerweile Bestandteil einer Konferenzlandschaft mit Zielvorträgen von der Fahrzeugsicherheit bis hin zur Verletzungsanalyse und den Unfallursachen. ESAR kann als wissenschaftliches Kolloquium und Plattform für einen Informationsaustausch der Unfallforscher angesehen werden, die sich speziell mit Methoden der Unfalluntersuchung, mit Verletzungsmechanismen und der Bewertung von Verletzungen, Unfallursachen und anderen Bereichen der statistischen Unfalldatenanalyse befassen. Experten aus den Bereichen der Medizin, der Verkehrspsychologie und der Technik sowie Vertreter zuständiger Behörden kommen hier zusammen, um die Erfahrungen in der Unfallprävention und der Unfallrekonstruktion zu diskutieren und um der Forschung neue Felder zu eröffnen. Neben den Belangen der Europäischen Gemeinschaft werden auch die weltweit zu registrierenden hohen Verletztenzahlen berücksichtigt. Wissenschaftliche Vorträge aus aller Welt tragen dazu bei, geeignete Maßnahmen und Methoden zur Analyse und drastischen Verringerung der Zahl der bei Verkehrsunfällen Getöteten zu entwickeln. Die Zusammensetzung des Teilnehmerkreises dieser wie früherer ESAR-Konferenzen hat längst eine über Europa hinausgreifende Internationalitaet erreicht und bietet daher einen aufschlussreichen Überblick über die verschiedenen Standards bestehender Verkehrssicherheit und unterschiedlichen Unfallszenarien und über die Anforderungen an die Unfallanalysen. Die Ergebnisse langjähriger Forschungsarbeiten in Europa, USA, Australien und asiatischen Ländern beinhalten unterschiedliche infrastrukturelle Zusammenhänge und geben Erkenntnisse über Population, Fahrzeugbestand und Fahrereigenschaften. Derartige Informationen bilden eine exzellente Basis für abzuleitende Empfehlungen und Maßnahmen für die Erhöhung der Verkehrssicherheit international.
In 2012 the fifth ESAR conference (Expert Symposium on Accident Research) was held in Hannover. ESAR is an international convention of experts, who analyze traffic accidents all over the world and discuss their results in this context, conducted at the Medizinische Hochschule Hannover every 2 years. It connected representatives of public authorities, engineers in automotive development and scientists and offers a forum with particular emphasis on In-Depth-Analyses of accident statistics and accident analyses. Special focus is placed on research on the basis of so-called "In-Depth-Accident-Investigations" [data collections at the sites of the accidents], which are characterized by extensive documentations of the sites of the accidents, of the vehicles as well as of the injuries, encompassing several scientific fields. ESAR aims at a multi-disciplinary compilation of scientific results and at discussing them on an international, scientific level. It is thus a scientific colloquium and a platform for exchanging information for all accident researchers. Experiences in accident prevention as well as in the complex field of accident reconstruction are stated and new research fields are added. Existing results of long-term research work in Europe, the US, Australia and Japan include different infrastructural correlations and give findings on population, vehicle population and driver characteristics, which offer a basis for recommendations to be derived and measures for increasing road safety.
A methodology to derive precision requirements for automatic emergency braking (AEB) test procedures
(2015)
AEB Systems are becoming important to increase traffic safety. Test procedures in testing for consumer information, manufacturer self-certification and technical regulations are used to ensure a certain minimum performance of these systems. Consequently, test robustness, test efficiency and finally test cost become increasingly important. The key driver for testing effort and test costs is the required repeatable accuracy in a test design - the higher the accuracy, the higher effort and test costs. On the other hand, the performance of active safety systems depends on time discretization in the environment perception and other sub-systems: for instance, typical sensors supply information with a cycle time of 50 - 150 ms. Time discretization results in an inherent spread of system performance, even if the test conditions are perfectly equal. The proposed paper shows a methodology to derive requirements for a test setup (e.g. test repeats, use of driving robots, ...) as function of AEB system generation and rating method (e.g. Euro NCAP points awarded, pass/fail, ...). While the methodology itself is applicable to AEB pedestrian and AEB Car-Car scenarios, due to the lack of sufficient test data for AEB Car-Car, the focus of this paper is on AEB pedestrian scenarios. A simulation model for the performance of AEB Pedestrian systems allows for the systematic variation of the discretization time as well as test condition accuracy. This model is calibrated with test results of 4 production vehicles for AEB Pedestrian, all fully tested by BASt according to current Euro NCAP test protocols. Selected parameters to observe the accuracy of the test setup in case of pedestrian AEB is the calculated impact position of pedestrian on the vehicle front (as if no braking would have occurred), and the test vehicle speed accuracy. These variable was shown in real tests to be repeatable in the range of ± 5 cm and ± 0,25 km/h, respectively, with a fully robotized state of the art test setup. The sensitivity of AEB performance (measured in achieved speed reduction as well as overall rating result according to current Euro NCAP rating methods) towards discretization and the sensitivity of performance towards test accuracy then is compared to identify economic yet robust test concepts. These comparisons show that the available repeatability accuracy of current test setups is more than sufficient for today's AEB system capabilities. Time discretization problems dominate the performance spread especially in test scenarios with a limited pedestrian dummy reveal time (e.g. child behind obstruction, running adult scenarios with low car speeds). This would allow to increase test tolerances to decrease test cost. A methodology which allows to derive the required tolerances in active safety tests might be valuable especially for NCAPs of emerging countries that do not have the necessary equipment (e.g. driving robots, positioning units) available for the full-scale and high tolerance EuroNCAP active safety procedures yet still want to rate active safety systems, thus improving the global safety.
It is commonly agreed that active safety will have a significant impact on reducing accident figures for pedestrians and probably also bicyclists. However, chances and limitations for active safety systems have only been derived based on accident data and the current state of the art, based on proprietary simulation models. The objective of this article is to investigate these chances and limitations by developing an open simulation model. This article introduces a simulation model, incorporating accident kinematics, driving dynamics, driver reaction times, pedestrian dynamics, performance parameters of different autonomous emergency braking (AEB) generations, as well as legal and logical limitations. The level of detail for available pedestrian accident data is limited. Relevant variables, especially timing of the pedestrian appearance and the pedestrian's moving speed, are estimated using assumptions. The model in this article uses the fact that a pedestrian and a vehicle in an accident must have been in the same spot at the same time and defines the impact position as a relevant accident parameter, which is usually available from accident data. The calculations done within the model identify the possible timing available for braking by an AEB system as well as the possible speed reduction for different accident scenarios as well as for different system configurations. The simulation model identifies the lateral impact position of the pedestrian as a significant parameter for system performance, and the system layout is designed to brake when the accident becomes unavoidable by the vehicle driver. Scenarios with a pedestrian running from behind an obstruction are the most demanding scenarios and will very likely never be avoidable for all vehicle speeds due to physical limits. Scenarios with an unobstructed person walking will very likely be treatable for a wide speed range for next generation AEB systems.
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.
Bicyclists and pedestrians belong to the most endangered groups in urban traffic. The EU-funded collaborative research project PROSPECT (‘PROactive Safety for PEdestrians and CyclisTs´) aims to significantly improve safety of those unprotected traffic participants by expanding the scope of scenarios covered by future active safety systems in passenger cars. Concepts for sensor control systems are built into three prototypes covering emergency interventions such as Autonomous Emergency Braking (AEB) as well as Autonomous Emergency Steering (AES). These systems tackle the well-known challenges of currently available systems including limited field-of-view by sensors, fuzzy path prediction, unreliable intent reaction times and slow reaction times. These highly innovative functions call for extensive validation methodologies based on already established consumer testing procedures. Since these functions are developed towards the prevention of intersection accidents in urban areas, a key aspect of the advanced testing methodology is the valid approximation of naturalistic trajectories using driving robots. Eventually, several simulator studies complemented a user acceptance and benefit analysis to evaluate the expected overall impact of the PROSPECT systems. The results achieved within the PROSPECT project are highly relevant for upcoming test protocols regarding the most critical situations with Vulnerable Road Users (VRU). With introducing the new methods in Euro NCAP (European New Car Assessment Programme) a significant increase in road safety is expected.
The Intersection 2020 project was initiated to develop a test procedure for Automatic Emergency Braking systems in intersection car-to-car scenarios to be transferred to Euro NCAP. The project aims to address current road traffic accidents on European roads and therefore sets a priority of the identification of the most important car-to-car accidents and Use Cases. Taking into account technological and practical limitations, Test Scenarios are derived from the Use Cases in a later stage of the project. This paper presents parts of a larger study and provides an overview of common car-to-vehicle(at least four wheels) collision types at junctions in Europe and specifies seven Accident Scenarios from which the three scenarios “Straight Crossing Paths (SCP)”, “Left Turn Across Path – Opposite Direction Conflict (LTAP/OD)” and “Left Turn Across Path – Lateral Direction (LTAP/LD)” are most important due to their high relevance regarding severe car-to-car accidents. Technical details about crash parameters such as collision and initial speeds are delivered. The analysis work performed is input for the definition and selection of the Use Cases as well as for the project’s benefit estimation. The numbers of accidents and fatalities in accidents at intersections involving a passenger car were shown per intersection type. In both statistics, it was found that accidents at crossroads and T- or staggered junctions are of highest relevance, followed by roundabouts. Focusing on accidents at intersections between one passenger car and another road user shows that around one-third of all accidents and related fatalities could have been assigned to car-to-PTW accidents and one-fifth of all accidents and fatalities to car-to-car accidents. Regarding car-to-car accidents with at least serious injury outcome 38% out of 34,489 car-to-car accidents happened at intersections. These figures correspond to 18% of the fatalities (4,236 fatalities in total). Considering all intersection types, around half of all related accidents happened in urban environments whereas this number decreased to one-third of all fatalities. Further, the proportion of road fatalities per country occurring at intersections varies widely across the EU. Also, there are proportionately more fatalities in daylight or twilight conditions at junctions. Use Cases are supposed to be derived from Accident Scenarios and by adding detailed information for example about the road layout, right-of-way and the vehicle trajectories prior to the collision. Instead of applying cluster algorithms to the accident data, a pragmatic approach was finally preferred to create them. Note: Use Cases serve as an intermediate step between the Accident Scenarios and the Test Scenarios which describe the actual testing conditions. Finally, 74 Use Cases were identified. This large number indicates the complexity of intersection crashes due to the combination of several parameters.
Within this paper different European accident data sources were used to investigate the causations and backgrounds of road traffic accidents with pedestrians. Analyses of high level national data and in-depth accident data from Germany and Great Britain was used to confirm and refine preliminary accident scenarios identified from other sources using a literature review. General observations made included that a high proportion of killed or seriously injured pedestrian casualties impacted by cars were in "dark" light conditions. Seven accident scenarios were identified (each divided into "daylight" and "dark" light conditions) which included the majority of the car front-to-pedestrian crash configurations. Test scenarios were developed using the identified accident scenarios and relevant parameters. Hypothetical parameters were derived to describe the performance of pedestrian pre-crash systems based on the assumption that these systems are designed to avoid false positives as a very high priority, i.e. at virtually all costs. As result, three "Base Test Scenarios" were selected to be developed in detail in the AsPeCSS project. However, further Enhanced Test Scenarios may be needed to address environmental factors such as darkness if it is determined that system performance is sensitive to these factors. Finally, weighting factors for the accident scenarios for Europe (EU-27) were developed by averaging and extrapolation of the available data. This paper represents interim results of Work Package 1 within the AsPeCSS project.
Since integrated safety systems combine active and passive safety elements in one safety system, it is necessary to define new procedures to evaluate vehicle safety from the overall system point of view. The main goal of the ASSESS project is to develop harmonized and standardized assessment procedures for collision mitigation and avoidance systems. Methods and Data Sources: In ASSESS, procedures are developed for: driver behaviour evaluation, pre-crash system performance evaluation, crash performance evaluation, socio-economic assessment. This paper will concentrate on the activities related to the crash evaluation. The objective is to perform simulations, sled tests and crash tests in order tounderstand the influence of the activation of the pre-crash systems on the occupants" injuries during the crash phase. When a traffic accident is unavoidable, pre-crash systems work on various safety devices in order to improve the vehicle occupants" protection. Braking assistance and adaptive restraint systems are the main pre-crash systems whose effect on the occupants" protection will be described in this paper. Results: The results will be a description of the effect of the activation of the pre-crash systems on the crash phase. Additionally, a set of recommendations for future methodology developments will be delivered. Furthermore, a first approach to the study of the effect of the pre-crash systems activation on the occupants" protection when the impact is unavoidable will be presented. This effect will be quantified using the biomechanical values obtained from the simulation and testing activities and their related injury risks. Simulation and testing activities will consider the following scenarios: - No activation of any pre-crash system, - Activation of one or a combination of several pre-crash systems. In this way, differences in the results obtained from different scenarios will show the effect of each pre-crash system separately during the crash phase. Discussion and Limitations: The set of activities developed in this research project is limited by the fact that with the given resources only a limited number of vehicle models could be investigated. In addition, there are also limitations related to the injury risk curves and the passive safety tools currently on the market. Conclusion and Relevance to session submitted: The paper will present a complete analysis of the effect of pre-crash systems during the crash phase when the impact is unavoidable. Details, limitations and first application experience based on a few examples will be discussed. Currently, there is not any regulation, assessment program, or other similar official procedure able to assess pre-crash systems during the crash phase. This project comprises phases of traffic accidents which have been historically analysed separately, and aims to evaluate them taking into account their interrelationship. ASSESS is one of the first European projects which deals in depth with the concept of integrated safety, defining methodologies to analyse vehicle safety from a global point of view.
Die zukünftige Entwicklung der Straßenverkehrssicherheit und damit auch der Fahrzeugsicherheit wird durch gesellschaftliche, wirtschaftliche, klimapolitische und verkehrspolitische Rand- und Rahmenbedingungen und die voranschreitende technische Entwicklung geprägt sein, die auch für den Gesetzgeber eine Herausforderung darstellen. So wird sich auch das Folgeprogramm des Bundesministeriums für Verkehr, Bau und Stadtentwicklung (BMVBS) für das derzeitige aus dem Jahr 2001 stammende "Programm für mehr Sicherheit im Straßenverkehr" an den Schwerpunkten des "4th Road Safety Action Programme" ausrichten, das im Frühjahr 2010 durch die EU-Kommission veröffentlicht werden soll. Im Prozess zu einer weiteren Verbesserung der Straßenverkehrssicherheit werden unter anderem der demografische Wandel in unserer Gesellschaft, die durch eine erforderliche CO2-Reduktion bedingte Einführung alternativer Antriebe (Elektromobilität) verbunden mit Leichtbau sowie die gesetzlichen Rahmenbedingung (Wiener Abkommen) eine bedeutende Rolle spielen. Die Klärung der gesetzlichen Rahmenbedingungen ist unerlässlich, um die Vision vom unfallfreien Fahren Realität werden lassen zu können.