Safety of light goods vehicles - findings from the German joint project of BASt, DEKRA, UDV and VDA
(2011)
Light goods vehicles (LGVs) are an important part of the vehicle fleet, providing a vital component in the European transportation system. On the other hand, LGVs are in the focus of public discussion regarding road safety. In order to analyse the accident situation of LGVs in an objective manner, Federal Highway Research Institute (BASt), VDA, DEKRA and German Insurers Accident Research (UDV) launched a joint project. The aim of this project, which will be finished by mid of 2011, is to identify reasonable measures which will further improve the safety of LGVs. For the first time, these partners jointly together conducted a research project and put together their know-how in accident research. Analyses are based on real-life accident data from the GIDAS database, the Accident Database of UDV (UDB), the DEKRA database and national statistics. The findings deliver answers to questions within the arena of future legislative actions and consumer protection activities. The analyses of databases cover areas of primary and secondary safety of LGVs with a special focus on advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS), driver behaviour as well as partner and occupant protection. Key figures from national statistics are used to highlight hotspots of accidents of LGVs in Germany. Finally, the proposed countermeasures are assessed regarding their potential effectiveness. Amongst others, the results show that the accident situation of LGVs is very similar to that of passenger cars. Noteworthy variations could be found in collisions with pedestrians, at reversing and regarding accident causes. Occupant safety of LGVs is on a higher level compared to cars. Results indicate that seatbelt use is on a significantly lower level compared to cars. This leads to higher-than-average injury risk for unbelted LGV occupants. When it comes to partner protection, there are problems with compatibility at LGVs. For car occupants there is a very high injury risk when colliding with a LGV. It indicates that higher passive safety test standards for LGVs would be counterproductive if they further increase stiffness of LGVs. The analysis of LGV-pedestrian accidents shows that pedestrian kinematic differs significantly from car-pedestrian accidents. At this point, existing pedestrian related test standards developed for cars cannot be adopted to LGVs. When it comes to active safety, ESC proved its effectiveness once again. Beyond that, rear view cameras, advanced emergency braking systems and lane departure warning systems show a safety potential, too. In addition to any technical countermeasures previously discussed, the importance of the driver behavior and attitude regarding the accident risk was investigated. In order to develop successful actions it is important to understand the main target population. In the case of LGV especially the crafts business and smaller companies are the major contributors the safety issue.
Proposal for a test procedure of assistance systems regarding preventive pedestrian protection
(2011)
This paper is showing a proposal for a test procedure regarding preventive pedestrian protection based on accident analysis. Over the past years pedestrian protection has become an increasing importance also during the development phase of new vehicles. After a phase of focusing on secondary safety, there are current activities to detect a possible collision by assistance systems. Such systems have the task to inform the driver and/or automatically activate the brakes. How practical is such a system? In which kind of traffic situations will it work? How is it possible to check the effectiveness of such a system? To test the effectiveness, currently there are no generally approved identifiable procedures. It is reasonable that such a test should be based on real accidents. The test procedure should be designed to test all systems, independent of the system- working principle. The vFSS group (advanced Forward-looking Safety Systems) was founded to develop a proposal for a technology independent test procedure, which reflects the real accident situation. This contribution is showing the results of vFSS. The developed test procedure focuses on accidents between passenger cars and pedestrians. The results are based on analysis results of in-depth databases of GIDAS, German insurers and DEKRA and added by analysis of national and international statistics. The in-depth analysis includes many pre-crash situations with several influencing factors. The factors are e. g. speed of the car, speed of the pedestrian, moving direction and a possible obscuration of the pedestrian by an object. The results comprise also the different situations of adults and children. Furthermore, they include details regarding influence of the lighting conditions (daylight or night) especially with respect to the accident consequences. In fact, more accidents happen at daylight, but fatal accidents are more often at night. A clustering of parameter combinations was found which represents typical accident scenarios. There are six typical accident scenarios which were merged in four test scenarios. The test scenarios are varying the starting position of the pedestrian, the pedestrian size (adult or child) and the speed of the pedestrian, whereas the speed of the car will not be varied. To ensure the independency from used sensing technologies it is necessary to use a suitable dummy. For example, if sensors are based on infrared, the dummy should emit the temperature of a human being. The test procedure will identify the collision speed as the key parameter for assessing the effectiveness of the tested system. The collision speed is defined as the reduction between initial test speed of the car and impact speed. The assessment of the speed reduction value regarding the safety benefit, however, will be part of a separate procedure.
Die UNECE Regelung R58 regelt die Beschaffenheit und die Installation von Heckunterfahrschutzsystemen an schweren Güterkraftfahrzeugen, deren Ziel die Verbesserung der Kompabilität zwischen Pkw-Frontstrukturen und Lkw-Hecks ist. Dennoch verunglücken laut amtlicher Unfallstatistik allein in Deutschland rund 30 Pkw-Insassen in Heckauffahrunfällen auf Lkw tödlich, da diese Vorrichtungen hinsichtlich Einbauhöhe und Steifigkeit den Anforderungen des realen Unfallgeschehens nicht genügen. Das Ziel dieser Studie ist eine quantitative Abschätzung der möglichen Reduzierung der Verletzungsschwere mit Hilfe eines statistischen Modells, die durch eine Anpassung der geltenden Bestimmungen und die damit verbundenen technischen Veränderungen des bereits vorgeschriebenen Heckunterfahrschutzes zu erreichen wäre. In einer Nutzen-Kosten-Analyse wird die Wirtschaftlichkeit dieser Modifizierungen mit einem idealen Notbremsassistenten verglichen. Die Untersuchung orientiert sich dabei an den aktuell in der UN-ECE WP29/GRSG in Genf diskutierten Vorschlägen zur Anpassung der ECE-R58. Das verwendete ordinale Probit-Modell stellt einen Zusammenhang zwischen der Verletzungsschwere im auffahrenden PKW und erklärenden Größen her, in diesem Fall der kinetischen Energie des unterfahrenden Pkws und der strukturellen lnteraktion zwischen Lkw-Heck und Pkw-Front. Diese Maßnahmen könnten demnach 53 - 78% der Getöteten sowie 27 - 49% der Schwerverletzten bei diesen Unfallkonstellationen reduzieren, was pro Jahr 20 Getöteten und 95 Schwerverletzten entsprechen würde. Somit würde eine Modifikation einer bestehenden passiven Schutzmaßnahme an jährlich 100.000 neuzugelassenen Lkw und Anhängern bereits 20 Getötete adressieren. Im Vergleich dazu müssten jährlich 3 Millionen Pkw mit zusätzlicher Sensorik und Aktuatorik für einen idealen Notbremsassistenten ausgestattet werden, um im Idealfall alle Heckauffahrunfälle von Pkw auf andere Pkw oder Lkw und damit 53 Getötete zu vermeiden. Daher fällt auch das Nutzen-Kosten-Verhältnis deutlich zugunsten des verbesserten Heckunterfahrschutzes aus.
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.
In spite of today's highly sophisticated crash test procedures like the different NCAP programs running world-wide, bad real world crash performance of cars is still an issue. There are crash situations which are not sufficiently represented by actual test configurations. This is especially true for car to car, as well as for car to object impacts. The paper describes reasons for this bad performance. The reasons are in principal bad structural interaction between the car and its impact partners (geometric incompatibility), unadjusted front end stiffness (stiffness incompatibility) and collapse of passenger compartments. To show the efficiency of improving cars' structural behaviour in accidents with different impact partners an accident data analysis has been taken out by members of European Project VC-COMPAT. Accident data analysis has shown that in Germany between 15,000 and 20,000 of the now severely injured car occupants might get less injured and between 600 and 900 car occupant fatalities might be saved. Similar results arise for the UK.
The share of high-tensile steel in car bodies has increased over the last years. While occupant safety has generally benefited from this measure, there is a potential risk that, as a result, rescue time may increase considerably. In more than 60% of all car occupant fatalities a technical rescue has been necessary. These are in particular those cases where occupants die immediately at the accident scene. Therefore, in these cases "rescue time" is a very sensitive parameter. In addition to the general analysis of the need of technical rescue and the actual rescue time depending on model years, the injury pattern of occupants requiring technical rescue will be analysed to provide advice for rescue teams. Furthermore, a detailed analysis of rescue measures for the most popular car models depending on the safety cell design is given.
Today, Euro NCAP is a well established rating system for passive car safety. The significance of the ratings must however be evaluated by comparison with national accident data. For this purpose accidents with involvement of two passenger cars have been taken from the German National Road Accident Register (record years 1998 to 2004) to evaluate the results of the NCAP frontal impact test configuration. Injury data from both drivers involved in frontal car to car collisions have been sampled and have been compared, using a "Bradley Terry Model" which is well established in the area of paired comparisons. Confounders " like mass ratio of the cars involved, gender of the driver, etc. " have been accounted for in the statistical model. Applying the Bradley Terry Model to the national accident data the safety ranking from Euro NCAP has been validated (safety level: 1star <2 star <3 star <4 star). Significant safety differences are found between cars of the 1 and 2 star category as compared to cars of the 3 and 4 star category. The impact of the mass ratio was highly significant and most influential. Changing the mass ratio by an amount of 10% will raise the chance for the driver of the heavier car to get better off by about 18%. The impact of driver gender was again highly significant, showing a nearly 2 times lower injury risk for male drivers. With regard to the NCAP rating drivers of a high rated car are more than 2 times more probable (70% chance) to get off less injured in a frontal collision as compared to the driver of a low rated car.