91 Fahrzeugkonstruktion
Filtern
Dokumenttyp
- Konferenzveröffentlichung (7) (entfernen)
Schlagworte
- Compatibility (7) (entfernen)
Institut
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.
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.
For the assessment of vehicle safety in frontal collisions, the crash compatibility between the colliding vehicles is crucial. Compatibility compromises both the self protection and the partner protection properties of vehicles. For the accident data analysis, the CCIS (GB) and GIDAS (DE) in-depth data bases were used. Selection criteria were frontal car accidents with car in compliance with ECE R94. For this study belted adult occupants in the front seats sustaining MAIS 2+ injuries were studied. Following this analysis FIMCAR concluded that the following compatibility issues are relevant: - Poor structural interaction (especially low overlap and over/underriding) - Compartment strength - Frontal force mismatch with lower priority than poor structural interaction In addition injuries arising from the acceleration loading of the occupant are present in a significant portion of frontal crashes. Based on the findings of the accident analysis the aims that shall be addressed by the proposed assessment approach were defined and priorities were allocated to them. The aims and priorities shall help to decide on suitable test procedures and appropriate metrics. In general it is anticipated that a full overlap and off-set test procedure is the most appropriate set of tests to assess a vehicle- frontal impact self and partner protection.
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.
As set out in the Terms of Reference, the objective of European Enhanced Vehicle-safety Committee (EEVC) Working Group (WG) 15 Car Crash Compatibility and Frontal Impact is to develop a test procedure(s) with associated performance criteria for car frontal impact compatibility. This work should lead to improved car to car frontal compatibility and self protection without decreasing the safety in other impact configuration such as impacts with car sides, trucks, and pedestrians. Since 2003, EEVC WG 15 served as a steering group for the car-to-car activities in the "Improvement of Vehicle Crash Compatibility through the development of Crash Test Procedures" (VC-COMPAT) project that was finalised at the end of 2006 and partly funded by the European Commission. This paper presents the research work carried out in the VC-COMPAT project and the results of its assessment by EEVC WG 15. Other additional work presented by the UK and French governments and industry " in particular the European industry - was taken into consideration. It also identifies current issues with candidate testing approaches. The candidate test approaches are: - an offset barrier test with the progressive deformable barrier (PDB) face in combination with a full width rigid barrier test - a full width wall test with a deformable aluminium honeycomb face and a high resolution load cell wall supplemented by the forces measured in the offset deformable barrier (ODB) test with the current EEVC barrier. These candidate test approaches must assess the structural interaction and give information of frontal force levels and compartment strength for passenger vehicles. Further, this paper presents the planned route map of EEVC WG 15 for the evaluation of the proposed test procedures and assessment criteria.