The 2BeSafe project (2-Wheeler Behaviour and Safety) is a collaborative project (co financed by the European Commission) that aims to study the naturalistic behaviour of Powered-Two-Wheeler (PTW) riders in normal and critical riding situations. That includes the interaction between PTW riders and other road users and possible conflicts between them. One of the predominant causes of accidents involving PTWs is that PTWs are often overlooked by other road users. One task of the project lead by BASt therefore deals with possible improvements in conspicuity and the development of recommendations. Particularly using the findings of the studies on conflict situations, promising lighting arrangements to enhance conspicuity of PTWs during the day and at night are selected. An abstract recognizing pattern for PTWs is defined, enabling other road users (e.g. car drivers) to clearly identify riders. Lamps and outfit like lighting configurations of different colours, different helmet lights, reflect / luminescent clothing parts and retro-reflective markings are designed and manufactured. Then, the different solutions are tested in a laboratory setting using experimental motorcycles together with riders to which the equipment is fitted. As result a proposal for a uniform signal pattern or lamp configuration in the front of all motorcycles and riders will be outlined. The contribution first gives a short overview of the topics of the research project that deal with conflicts and their connection with poor conspicuity and then presents in detail the methods used in the activities concerning solutions for the improvement of conspicuity together with first results.
Euro NCAP will start to test pedestrian Automatic Emergency Braking Systems (AEB) from 2016 on. Test procedures for these tests had been developed by and discussed between the AsPeCSS project and other initiatives (e.g. the AEB group with Thatcham Research from the UK). This paper gives an overview on the development process from the AsPeCSS side, summarizes the current test and assessment procedures as of March 2015 and shows test and assessment results of five cars that had been tested by BASt for AsPeCSS and the respective manufacturer. The test and assessment methodology seems appropriate to rate the performance of different vehicles. The best test result - still one year ahead of the test implementation - is around 80%, while the worst rating result is around 10%. Other vehicles are between these boundaries.
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.
Since 2005 the German In-Depth Accident Study (GIDAS) also records aspects of active vehicle safety. This is done because vehicles are fitted with an increasing number of active safety devices which have undoubtedly an influence on the number, severity and course of accidents. Accident researchers expect that collecting active safety data will facilitate to assess and quantify the impact of these and future devices. It is the aim of this paper to outline benefits and limitations associated with the recording of active safety aspects within indepth studies. An overview about possible areas where active safety data can be useful will be given. For that purpose single safety or comfort systems will be selected to estimate the effects of an accident database which includes variables associated with these systems. Questions with regard to the limitations of collecting active safety data will be addressed. Possible items are for example the usability of the data recorded, the real accident cause, the small number of relevant accidents, the time span needed to gather a sufficient dataset, the small share of vehicles equipped with a certain system or different functionalities of systems that are supposed to fall in the same category. As a result user needs for a reasonable data collection of active safety elements will be elaborated.