Filtern
Dokumenttyp
Schlagworte
- Accident (9)
- Deutschland (9)
- Germany (9)
- Unfall (9)
- Conference (8)
- Konferenz (8)
- Cause (7)
- Ursache (7)
- Datenerfassung (5)
- Statistics (5)
Institut
Within the COST Action TU1101 the working group WG 1 is dealing with acceptance criteria and problems in helmet use while bicycling concerning conspicuity, thermal stress, ventilation deficits and other potential confounding. To analyze the helmet usage practice of bicyclists in Europe a questionnaire was developed in the scope of working group 1 to collect relevant information by means of a field study. The questionnaire consists of some 66 questions covering the fields of personal data of the cyclist, riding und helmet usage habits, information concerning the helmet model and the sensation of the helmet, as well as information on previous bicycle accidents. A second complementary study is conducted to analyze if the use of a bicycle helmet influences the seating geometry and the posture of cyclists when riding a bicycle and if the if the helmet vertically limits the vision. For this purpose cyclists with and without helmets were photographed in real world situations and relevant geometrical values such as the decline of the torso, the head posture of the upper vertical vision limit due to the helmet were established from the photos. The interim results of the field studies which were conducted in Germany by the Hannover Medical School are presented in this study. Some 227 questionnaires were filled out, of which 67 participants had used a helmet and 42 of the 227 participants have had a bicycle accident before. For the analysis of the riding position and posture of the cyclist over 40 pictures of riders with a helmet and over 240 pictures of riders without a helmet were measured concerning the seating geometry to describe the influence of using a bicycle helmet. Some results in summary: From the riders interviewed with the questionnaire only 11% of the city bike riders and 12% of the mountain bike riders always used the helmet, while 38% of the racing bike riders and 88% of the e-bike-riders always used the helmet. The helmet use seems not to change the sensation of safety of cycling compared to the use of a car. The arguments for not wearing a helmet are mostly stated to be the short distance of a trip, high temperatures or carelessness and waste of time. The reasons for using a helmet are stated to be the feeling of safety and being used to using a helmet. Being a role model for others was also stated to be a reason for helmet use. Concerning the sensation of the helmet 9% of the riders reported problems with the field of vision when using a helmet, 57% saw the problem of sweating too much, and 10% reported headaches or other unpleasant symptoms like pressure on the forehead when using the helmet. The analysis of the seating posture from the pictures taken of cyclists revealed that older cyclists generally have a riding position where the handle bar is higher than the seat (0-° to 10-° incline from seat to handlebar), while younger riders had a higher variance (between -10-° decline and 20-° incline). Further, elderly riders and riders with helmets seem to have a more upright position of the upper body when cycling. The vertical vision limit due to the helmet is determined by the front rim of the helmet (mostly the sun shade). Typical values here range from 0-° (horizontal line from the eye to the sun shade) to 75-° upwards, in which elderly riders tend to have a slightly higher vertical vision limit possibly due to the helmet being worn more towards the face.
Although the statistics show a decreasing rate of child injuries and fatalities in German road accidents more efforts can be made to protect children in cars e.g. by developing appropriate child restraint systems. An important part in of this work can be achieved with the help of crash tests using child dummies. However these crash tests cannot completely reflect the situation of real world crashes as factors like children moving out of the optimal position or children incorrectly fastened by their parents are difficult to predict. Therefore this study gives an overview over the current accident and injury situation of child occupants in cars in German road accidents.
From literature well-known analyzes on risks, hazards and causes of accidents of older drivers are amended by the present study in which a comparison of the specific features of accident causes of older car drivers (older than 60 years) and of younger car drivers (under 25 years) is conducted. Mainly the question is pursued if specific errors, mistakes and lapses are predominant in the two different age groups. The analysis system ACAS (Accident Causation Analysis System) used hereby consists of a sequential system of accident causation factors from the human, the technical and the infrastructural field, whereupon for this study the influence of the human features on the accident development in two different age groups is of interest. ACAS is both an accident model and an analysis and classification system, which describes the human participation factors of an accident and their causes in the temporal sequence (from the perceptibility to concrete action errors) taking into consideration the logical sequence of individual basic functions. In five steps (categories) of a logical and temporal sequence the hierarchical system makes human functions and processes as determinants of accident causes identifiable. The methodology specifically focuses on the use in so-called "In-Depth" and "On-Scene" investigation studies. With the help of the system for each accident participant one or more of five hypotheses of human cause factors are formed and then specified by appropriate verification criteria. These hypotheses in turn are further specified by indicators in such manner that the coding of the causation factors by a code system meets the needs of database processing and are accessible to a quantitative data analysis. The first results of the descriptive comparison of the two age groups concern mainly differences in the functional levels "information admission/perception" (where the elderly drivers have more difficulties than the young ones) and "information processing/evaluation" (where the younger drivers show more problems). Concerning the cognitive function of "planning" the group of younger drivers seems to be more often involved in an accident because of excessive speed.
For the avoidance of traffic accidents by means of advanced driver assistance systems the knowledge of failures and deficiencies a few seconds before the crash is of increasing importance. This information e.g. is collected in the German accident survey GIDAS by an interview derived from the ACAS methodology. However to display the whole range of accident causation factors additional information is needed on enduring factors of the system components "human", "infrastructure" and "machine". On the strategic level these accident moderating factors include long term influences such as medical preconditions or a general higher risk taking behavior as well as influences on the immediate conflict level such as an aggressive response to a perceived previous traffic conflict. This study was conducted to examine the feasibility of collecting such causation information in the scope of an in-depth accident investigation like GIDAS. Due to the comprehensive amount of information necessary to estimate the moderating factors the collection of the information is distributed to different methods. 5 cases of real world crashes have been investigated where information was collected on-scene and retrospective by interviews. The identified moderating factors of the accidents and the method for collecting the information are displayed.