Filtern
Erscheinungsjahr
Dokumenttyp
- Konferenzveröffentlichung (65)
- Buch (Monographie) (29)
- Wissenschaftlicher Artikel (9)
- Bericht (1)
- Arbeitspapier (1)
Schlagworte
- Fußgänger (105) (entfernen)
Institut
This study aimed at comparing head Wrap Around Distance (WAD) of Vulnerable Road User (VRU) obtained from the German in-depth Accident Database (GIDAS), the China in-depth Accident Database (CIDAS) and the Japanese in-depth Accident Database (ITARDA micro). Cumulative distribution of WAD of pedestrian and cyclist were obtained for each database (AIS2+) showing that WAD of cyclists were larger than the ones of pedestrians. Comparing three regions, the 50%tile WAD of GIDAS was larger than that of both Asian accident databases. Using linear regression that might predict WAD of pedestrians and cyclists from Impact speed and VRU height, WADs were calculated to be 206cm/219cm (Pedestrian/Cyclist) for GIDAS, 170cm/192cm for CIDAS and 211cm/235cm for ITARDA. In addition, this study may be helpful for reconsideration of WAD measurement alignment between accident reconstruction and test procedures.
Pedestrians represent about 20% of the overall fatalities in Europe- road traffic accidents. In this paper a methodology is proposed to understand why the numbers are so high, especially in the south of Europe and particularly in Portugal, . First a detailed statistical analysis using Ordinal Logistic Regression model (OLR) was applied to the gathered data from all Portuguese accidents with victims in the period 2010-2012. In a second stage accident reconstruction computational techniques using pedestrian biomechanical models are used to evaluate the accident conditions that lead to the injuries, such as the speed and the impact location. For biomechanical injury criterions, the AIS (Abbreviated Injury Scale), the HIC (Head Injury Criterion) and other injury criterions based on the resulting accelerations in the pedestrian's body are used. The statistical model reported that there were several predictors that significantly influenced the pedestrian injury severity in the event of a road accident, such as Pedestrian's age, Pedestrian's gender, Vehicle Design/Category or Driver's gender. The use of injury scales and biomechanical criterions in in-depth investigation of road accidents, such as AIS, can significantly improve the quality of the reconstruction process.
Accident simulation and reconstruction for enhancing pedestrian safety: issues and challenges
(2015)
The enhancement of pedestrian safety represents a major challenge in traffic accidents. This study allows a better understanding of the issues in pedestrian protection. It highlights the potential of in-depth studies in identifying relevant crash parameters interfering in the pedestrian safety. A computational simulation tool was developed to reconstruct pedestrian real-world crashes. A sample of 100 in-depth accident cases was reconstructed from two sources: 40 crashes provided by IFSTTAR-LMA and 60 crashes from CASR. To exemplify the methodology, two accident cases from each database were illustrated. A description of the sample of crashes was presented including the travel and impact speed of the vehicle, the driver reaction, the pedestrian walking speed, the scene configuration with the eventual obstacles, etc. This detailed description is pointing to the major factors affecting the limits of pedestrian safety systems.
Analysis of pedestrian leg contacts and distribution of contact points across the vehicle front
(2015)
Determining the risk to pedestrians that are impacted by areas of the front bumper not currently regulated in type-approval testing requires an understanding of the target population and the injury risk posed by the edges of the bumper. National statistics show that approximately 10% of all accident casualties are pedestrians, with 20% to 30% of these pedestrian casualties being killed or seriously injured. However, the contact position across the front of the bumper is not recorded in national statistics and so in-depth accident databases (OTS, UK and GIDAS, Germany) were used to examine injury risk in greater detail. The results showed that some injury types and severities of injuries appear to peak around the bumper edges. Although there are sometimes inconsistencies in the data, generally there is no evidence to suggest that the edges of the bumper are less likely to be contacted or cause injury.
Since the beginning of the testing activities related to passive pedestrian safety, the width of the test area being assessed regarding its protection level for the lower extremities of vulnerable road users has been determined by geometrical measurements at the outer contour of the vehicle. During the past years, the trend of a decreased width of the lower extremity test and assessment area realized by special features of the outer vehicle frontend design could be observed. This study discusses different possibilities for counteracting this development and thus finding a robust definition for this area including all structures with high injury risk for the lower extremities of vulnerable road users in the event of a collision with a motor vehicle. While Euro NCAP is addressing the described problem by defining a test area under consideration of the stiff structures underneath the bumper fascia, a detailed study was carried out on behalf of the European Commission, aiming at a robust, worldwide harmonized definition of the bumper test area for legislation, taking into account the specific requirements of different certification procedures of the contracting parties of the UN/ECE agreements from 1958 and 1998. This paper details the work undertaken by BASt, also serving as a contribution to the TF-BTA of the UN/ECE GRSP, towards a harmonized test area in order to better protect the lower extremities of vulnerable road users. The German In-Depth Accident Database GIDAS is studied with respect to the potential benefit of a revised test area. Several practical options are discussed and applied to actual vehicles, investigating the differences and possible effects. Tests are carried out and the results studied in detail. Finally, a proposal for a feasible definition is given and a suggestion is made for solving possible open issues at angled surfaces due to rotation of the impactor. The study shows that, in principle, there is a need for the entire vehicle width being assessed with regard to the protection potential for lower extremities of vulnerable road users. It gives evidence on the necessity for a robust definition of the lower extremity test area including stiff and thus injurious structures at the vehicle frontend, especially underneath the bumper fascia. The legal definition of the lower extremity test area will shortly be almost harmonized with the robust Euro NCAP requirements, as already endorsed by GRSP, taking into account injurious structures and thus contributing to the enhanced protection of vulnerable road users. After finalization of the development of a torso mass for the flexible pedestrian legform impactor (FlexPLI) it is recommended to consider again the additional benefit of assessing the entire vehicle width.
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.
During the past five years, a Euro NCAP technical working group on pedestrian safety has been working on improving test and assessment procedures for enhanced passive pedestrian safety. After harmonizing the tools and procedures as much as possible with legislation, the work was mainly focused on the development of grid procedures for the pedestrian body regions head, upper leg with pelvis and lower leg with knee. Furthermore, the test parameters for the head and the upper leg were revised, a new lower legform impactor was introduced and the injury thresholds were adjusted or, where necessary, the injury criteria were changed. Finally, the assessment limits and colour scheme were refined, widening the range and adding two more colours in order to provide a more detailed description of the pedestrian safety performance. By abstaining from an assessment based on a worst point selection philosophy, the improved test point determination procedures that were introduced during the years 2013 and 2014 give a more homogeneous, high resolution picture of the pedestrian safety performance of the vehicle frontends. By using a uniform grid for each test zone approximately 200 test points, evenly distributed within each area, can now be assessed per vehicle. The introduction of the flexible pedestrian legform impactor in 2014 enables a more realistic injury prediction of the knee and the tibia using a biofidelic test tool. With the new upper legform test that has been launched in 2015 the assessment in that area is now focusing on the injured body region instead of the injury causing vehicle part and thus is aligned with the approach in the remaining body regions head and lower leg. At the same time, a monitoring test with the headform impactor against the bonnet leading edge is closing the possible gap between the test areas to identify injury causing vehicle parts that moved out of focus due to the introduction of the new upper legform test. The paper describes the new test and assessment procedures with their underlying philosophy and gives an outlook in terms of open issues, specifying the needs for further improvement in the future. In parallel to the work of the pedestrian subgroup, a Euro NCAP working group on heavy vehicles introduced a set of protocol changes in 2011 that were related to the assessment of M1 vehicles derived from commercial vehicles, with a gross vehicle weight between 2.5 and 3.5 tons and 8 or 9 seats. The paper also investigates the applicability of the new pedestrian test and assessment procedures to heavy vehicles.
Das Ziel des Forschungsvorhabens war es festzustellen, welche Bordsteinformen für den Einsatz an Überquerungsstellen mit einer Einbauhöhe von 3 cm (eine Einbauhöhe (oder Auftrittshöhe) von 3 cm bedeutet, dass die Oberkante der Auftrittsfläche des Bordsteins 3 cm über dem Niveau der angrenzenden Fahrbahn liegt) sowie vorzugsweise zu verwendeten Bodenindikatoren aus Sicht unterschiedlicher Gruppen behinderter Menschen geeignet sind. Zunächst wurde eine umfangreiche Literaturanalyse nationaler und internationaler Literatur durchgeführt, um allgemeine Gestaltungsgrundsätze für barrierefreie Überquerungsstellen abzuleiten. Zusätzlich dazu sollte eine umfangreiche Befragung sehbehinderter Menschen zu ihren Erfahrungen bei der Mobilität im Straßenraum weiteren Aufschluss geben. Auf Grundlage der Literaturanalyse und Befragung wurde im Rahmen der Untersuchungen ein mehrschichtiges Verfahren aus qualitativen sowie objektiven und subjektiven Methoden angewendet. Dieses sollte darüber Aufschluss geben, welche Borsteinformen und Bodenindikatoren aus Sicht von blinden und sehbehinderten Menschen mit Langstock sowie der Nutzer von rollbaren Hilfsmitteln (Rollator, Rollstuhl) für einen Einbau an Überquerungsstellen bevorzugt werden. Die Untersuchungsergebnisse bestätigen die Einbauhöhe von 3 cm als weiterhin brauchbaren Kompromiss, auch wenn sich mit dieser Einbauhöhe die unterschiedlichen Anforderungen von Rollstuhl- und Rollatornutzern einerseits sowie blinden und stark sehbehinderten Menschen andererseits nicht optimal erfüllen lassen. Allerdings konnten auf Grundlage der Untersuchungsergebnisse Empfehlungen für eine im Rahmen des Kompromisses gut geeignete Bordsteinform an Überquerungsstellen abgeleitet werden. Die Messungen und Versuche mit unterschiedlichen Bodenindikatoren gaben Aufschluss darüber, welche Strukturen im Hinblick auf die Taktilität und die Überrollbarkeit an Überquerungsstellen grundsätzlich gut geeignet sind. Es wurde grundlegende und detaillierte Empfehlungen für die Ausbildung und Anwendung der Bordsteine und Bodenindikatoren an Überquerungsstellen an Hauptverkehrsstraßen ausgearbeitet. Diese sollten in die Fortschreibung relevanter Regelwerke einfließen. Darüber hinaus konnte durch das Forschungsvorhaben zusätzlicher Forschungsbedarf für weitere Verbesserungsmöglichkeiten an Überquerungsstellen aufgezeigt werden.
Der zweite Kinderunfallatlas der Bundesanstalt für Straßenwesen beschreibt die Unfallbelastung der bei Straßenverkehrsunfällen verunglückten Kinder für alle Kreise, Städte und Gemeinden in Deutschland. Für die Jahre 2006 bis 2010 wird die regionale Verteilung der Kinderverkehrsunfälle analysiert; darüber hinaus werden die Daten mit denen der Jahre 2001 bis 2005 in Beziehung gesetzt. Dadurch ist es möglich, die Verkehrssicherheitssituation von Kindern vor Ort mit der in anderen Kreisen und Gemeinden gleicher Größe zu vergleichen und somit einen Hinweis darüber zu erhalten, ob und wie sich die Unfallbelastung vor Ort von anderen unterscheidet.
In Germany the number of casualties in passenger car to pedestrian crashes has been reduced by a considerable amount of 40% as regards fatalities and 25% with regard to seriously injured pedestrians since the year 2001. Similar trends can be seen in other European countries. The reasons for that positive development are still under investigation. As infrastructural or behavioral changes do in general take a longer time to be effective in real world, explanations related to improved active and passive safety of passenger vehicles can be more relevant in providing answers for this trend. The effect of passive pedestrian protection " specified by the Euro NCAP pedestrian test result " is of particular interest and has already been analyzed by several authors. However, the number of vehicles with some valid Euro NCAP pedestrian score (post 2002 rating) was quite limited in most of those studies. To overcome this problem of small datasets German National Accident Records have been taken to investigate a similar objective but now based on a much bigger dataset. The paper uses German National Accident Records from the years 2009 to 2011. In total 65.140 records of pedestrian to passenger car crashes have been available. Considering crash parameters like accident location (rural / urban areas) etc., 27.143 of those crashes have been classified to be relevant for the analysis of passive pedestrian safety. In those 27.143 records 7.576 Euro NCAP rated vehicles (post 2002 rating) have been identified. In addition it was possible to identify vehicles which comply with pedestrian protection legislation (2003/102/EG) where phase 1 came into force in October 2005. A significant correlation between Euro NCAP pedestrian score and injury outcome in real-life car to pedestrian crashes was found. Comparing a vehicle scoring 5 points and a vehicle scoring 22 points, pedestrians" conditional probability of getting fatally injured is reduced by 35% (from 0.58% to 0.37%) for the later one. At the same time the probability of serious injuries can be reduced by 16% (from 27.4% to 22.9%). No significant injury reducing effect, associated with the introduction of pedestrian protection legislation (phase 1) was detected. Considerable effects have also been identified comparing diesel and gasoline cars. Higher engine displacements are associated with a lower injury risk for pedestrians. The most relevant parameter has been "time of accident", whereas pedestrians face a more than 2 times higher probability to be fatally injured during night and darkness as compared to daytime conditions.