Abteilung Fahrzeugtechnik
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.
To improve vehicle safety in frontal collisions, the crash compatibility between the colliding vehicles is crucial. Compatibility aims to improve both the self and partner protection properties of vehicles. Although compatibility has received worldwide attention for many years, no final assessment approach has been defined. Within the Frontal Impact and Compatibility Assessment Research (FIMCAR) project, different frontal impact test procedures (offset deformable barrier [ODB] test as currently used for Economic Commission for Europe [ECE] R94, progressive deformable barrier test as proposed by France for a new ECE regulation, moveable deformable barrier test as discussed worldwide, full-width rigid barrier test as used in Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard [FMVSS] 208, and full-width deformable barrier test) were analyzed regarding their potential for future frontal impact legislation. The research activities focused on car-to-car frontal impact accidents based on accident investigations involving newer cars. Test procedures were developed with both a crash test program and numerical simulations. The proposal from FIMCAR is to use a full-width test procedure with a deformable element and compatibility metrics in combination with the current offset test as a frontal impact assessment approach that also addresses compatibility. By adding a full-width test to the current ODB test it is possible to better address the issues of structural misalignment and injuries resulting from high acceleration accidents as observed in the current fleet. The estimated benefit ranges from a 5 to 12 percent reduction of fatalities and serious injuries resulting from frontal impact accidents. By using a deformable element in the full-width test, the test conditions are more representative of real-world situations with respect to acceleration pulse, restraint system triggering time, and deformation pattern of the front structure. The test results are therefore expected to better represent real-world performance of the tested car. Furthermore, the assessment of the structural alignment is more robust than in the rigid wall test.
Within the automotive context camera monitor systems (CMS) can be used to present views of the traffic situation behind the vehicle to the driver via a monitor mounted inside the cabin. This offers the opportunity to replace classical outside rearview mirrors and therefore to implement new design concepts, aerodynamically optimized vehicle shapes and to reduce the width of the vehicle. Further, the use of a CMS offers the potential to implement functionalities like warnings or situation-adaptive fields of view that are not feasible with conventional rearview mirrors. Despite these potential advantages, it is important to consider the possible technical constraints of this technology and its effect on driver perception and behavior. On the technical side next to the field of view and die robustness of die system, aspects as its functionality at day and night as well as under varying weather conditions should be object to scientific investigation. Concerning human machine interaction, it has to be considered, that the perception of velocities and distances of approaching vehicles might be different for CMS as compared to conventional rearview mirrors and potential influences of factors as the Position of the displays or drivers' age should be taken into account. In order to shed light on these and further open issues, BASt is currently conducting a study that will cover the use of CMS under controlled conditions as well in real traffic. The first part of the study will focus on passenger cars, while in a second step the empirical investigation will be extended to heavy goods vehicles, where the potentials as well as the limitations of CMS might differ considerably. The presentation will cover the first part, with regard to the experimental design, implementation and initial results if already available.
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.
It is commonly agreed that active safety will have a significant impact on reducing accident figures for pedestrians and probably also bicyclists. However, chances and limitations for active safety systems have only been derived based on accident data and the current state of the art, based on proprietary simulation models. The objective of this article is to investigate these chances and limitations by developing an open simulation model. This article introduces a simulation model, incorporating accident kinematics, driving dynamics, driver reaction times, pedestrian dynamics, performance parameters of different autonomous emergency braking (AEB) generations, as well as legal and logical limitations. The level of detail for available pedestrian accident data is limited. Relevant variables, especially timing of the pedestrian appearance and the pedestrian's moving speed, are estimated using assumptions. The model in this article uses the fact that a pedestrian and a vehicle in an accident must have been in the same spot at the same time and defines the impact position as a relevant accident parameter, which is usually available from accident data. The calculations done within the model identify the possible timing available for braking by an AEB system as well as the possible speed reduction for different accident scenarios as well as for different system configurations. The simulation model identifies the lateral impact position of the pedestrian as a significant parameter for system performance, and the system layout is designed to brake when the accident becomes unavoidable by the vehicle driver. Scenarios with a pedestrian running from behind an obstruction are the most demanding scenarios and will very likely never be avoidable for all vehicle speeds due to physical limits. Scenarios with an unobstructed person walking will very likely be treatable for a wide speed range for next generation AEB systems.
The GRSP informal group on child restraint systems (CRS) finalised phase 1 of a new regulation for the homologation of CRS . This regulation is the subject of several discussions concerning the safety benefits and the advantages and disadvantages that certain specific points may bring. However, these discussions are sometimes not based on scientific facts and do not consider the whole package but only single items. Based on the experience of the CASPER partners in the fields of human behaviour, accident analysis, test procedures and biomechanics in the area of child safety, a consideration of the safety benefits of phase 1 of the new regulation and recommendations for phase 2 will be given.
Aufgrund des demografischen Wandels werden in der Zukunft immer mehr ältere Menschen ein Kraftfahrzeug führen. Das vorliegende Projekt soll Erkenntnisse dazu liefern, wie unter Berücksichtigung der Verkehrssicherheit die Mobilität der älteren Fahrer so lange wie möglich erhalten werden kann. Unfallanalysen zeigen, dass ältere Kraftfahrer typische Fahrfehler bzw. Unfälle begehen. Unklar ist derzeit die genaue Ursache hierfür, vor allem vor dem Hintergrund der langjährigen Erfahrung älterer Kraftfahrer, welche eher eine äußerst geringe Unfallrate vermuten ließe. Ziel der vorliegenden Untersuchung war es, tiefere Erkenntnisse äber die Ursache von Fahrfehlern älterer Kraftfahrer zu gewinnen, um daraus Anforderungen an die technische Weiterentwicklung von Fahrerassistenzsystemen ableiten zu können. Diese Fahrerassistenzsysteme sollen speziell älteren Autofahrern Hilfestellung zum sicheren Führen von Kraftfahrzeugen bieten. In dem folgenden Laborexperiment wurde ein Doppeltätigkeits-Paradigma verwendet, indem eine Spurhalteaufgabe mit einer peripheren Lichtreizaufgabe kombiniert wurde. Die peripheren Lichtreize wurden den Probanden bilateral in zwei verschiedenen Abständen vom zentralen Punkt des Sehens (20 Grad und 60 Grad) präsentiert. Die Aufgaben wurden von älteren (65+) und jüngeren Kraftfahrern (22-45) zuerst einzeln, dann in Kombination durchgeführt. Um Aufschluss über mögliche Ursachen von Leistungsbeeinträchtigungen erhalten zu können, wurde neben der Erfassung von Verhaltensdaten (Spurabweichungen, Reaktionszeit, Anzahl der Auslassungen) ein Elektroenzephalogramm abgeleitet, welches Einblicke in die zugrunde liegenden neuronalen Verarbeitungsmechanismen ermöglicht. Wie erwartet, zeigten Ältere in der Spurhalteaufgabe schlechtere Leistungen als Jüngere, besonders bei gleichzeitiger Durchführung der Lichtreizaufgabe (Doppel-Aufgabe). In der Lichtreizaufgabe unterschieden sich die Leistungen der Altersgruppen nur bei Lichtreizen, die im 60 Grad Sehwinkel auftraten. Die Älteren reagierten hier langsamer und zeigten mehr Auslassungen als die Jüngeren. Überraschenderweise zeigten alle Versuchspersonen weniger Auslassungen in der Doppel-Aufgabe. Mittels Elektroenzephalogramm wurde anhand der ereigniskorrelierten Potenziale (EKP) deutlich, dass die Defizite Älterer nicht in einer Einschränkung der frühen Verarbeitung peripherer Reize (P1) liegen, da die P1 Amplitude bei Älteren sogar höher war als bei Jüngeren. Die N2 Amplitude, welche Hinweise auf die Verschiebung der Aufmerksamkeit gibt, war bei Jüngeren hingegen bei weiter peripher liegenden Reizen (60 Grad Sehwinkel) erhöht, was einen fronto-zentral fokussierten Kontrollprozess widerspiegelt. Die Orientierung auf den peripheren Reiz (P3a) war bei Älteren geringer ausgeprägt sowie auch die Zuordnung von Verarbeitungsressourcen (P3b) vor allem bei peripheren Lichtreizen. Es liegen zudem Hinweise darauf vor, dass Ältere verlängerte Reaktionszeiten aufgrund einer verzögerten Reaktionsaktivierung aufweisen. Mit dem vorliegenden Experiment konnte also gezeigt werden, dass die schlechteren Leistungen der älteren Versuchspersonen nicht auf periphere Sehleistungsmängel zurückzuführen sind, sondern einem späteren kognitiven Verarbeitungsprozess zuzuschreiben sind. Die Ergebnisse werden vor dem Hintergrund der Literatur und der Erfordernisse technischer Unterstützungen älterer Kraftfahrer diskutiert.
Um die zukünftige Entwicklung von Fahrzeugen mit alternativem Antrieb in Deutschland verfolgen, analysieren und mögliche negative Auswirkungen auf die Verkehrssicherheit zeitnah identifizieren zu können, hat die Bundesanstalt für Straßenwesen (BASt) im Jahr 2010 die Einrichtung einer langfristigen Beobachtung des Fahrzeugmarktes und des Unfallgeschehens von Pkw mit alternativen Antriebsarten initiiert. Die Daten des vorliegenden Berichtes dokumentieren die Marktdurchdringung von Personenkraftwagen mit alternativen Antriebsarten und informieren über die Unfallbeteiligung von Fahrzeugen mit alternativem Antrieb bis 2011. Es hat sich gezeigt, dass Fahrzeuge mit Hybridantrieb nach wie vor ein starkes Marktwachstum aufweisen. Die Zuwachsrate ist nahezu auf dem gleichen hohen Niveau wie in den Vorjahren (ca. 28%, getypter Bestand). Bei den reinen Elektrofahrzeugen ist die Anzahl getypter Fahrzeuge sehr stark angestiegen, von 212 im Jahr 2010 auf 1880 im Jahr 2011. Der reale Bestand an Elektrofahrzeugen (inklusive ungetypter Fahrzeuge) hat sich demgegenüber von 2010 auf 2011 auf 4.541 Pkw verdoppelt. Dies deutet auf eine zunehmende Serienreife von Elektro-Kfz hin. Pkw mit alternativem Antrieb weisen 2011 (bis auf Gas) einen höheren Anteil an Unfällen innerorts auf als Pkw mit herkömmlichem Antrieb. Hybrid Fahrzeuge haben dabei eine erhöhte Beteiligungsquote innerorts von ca. 76%. Der relativ hohe Anteil von Innerortsunfällen von alternativ betriebenen Fahrzeugen ist vor allem vor dem Hintergrund der Nutzung der Fahrzeuge zu interpretieren.
The goal of the project FIMCAR (Frontal Impact and Compatibility Assessment Research) was to define an integrated set of test procedures and associated metrics to assess a vehicle's frontal impact protection, which includes self- and partner-protection. For the development of the set, two different full-width tests (full-width deformable barrier [FWDB] test, full-width rigid barrier test) and three different offset tests (offset deformable barrier [ODB] test, progressive deformable barrier [PDB] test, moveable deformable barrier with the PDB barrier face [MPDB] test) have been investigated. Different compatibility assessment procedures were analysed and metrics for assessing structural interaction (structural alignment, vertical and horizontal load spreading) as well as several promising metrics for the PDB/MPDB barrier were developed. The final assessment approach consists of a combination of the most suitable full-width and offset tests. For the full-width test (FWDB), a metric was developed to address structural alignment based on load cell wall information in the first 40 ms of the test. For the offset test (ODB), the existing ECE R94 was chosen. Within the paper, an overview of the final assessment approach for the frontal impact test procedures and their development is given.
The off-set assessment procedure potentially contributes to the FIMCAR objectives to maintain the compartment strength and to assess load spreading in frontal collisions. Furthermore it provides the opportunity to assess the restraint system performance with different pulses if combined with a full-width assessment procedure in the frontal assessment approach. Originally it was expected that the PDB assessment procedure would be selected for the FIMCAR assessment approach. However, it was not possible to deliver a compatibility metric in time so that the current off-set procedure (ODB as used in UNECE R94) with some minor modifications was proposed for the FIMCAR Assessment Approach. Nevertheless the potential to assess load spreading, which appears not to be possible with any other assessed frontal impact assessment procedure was considered to be still high. Therefore the development work for the PDB assessment procedure did not stop with the decision not to select the PDB procedure. As a result of the decisions to use the current ODB and to further develop the PDB procedure, both are covered within this deliverable. The deliverable describes the off-set test procedure that will be recommended by FIMCAR consortium, this corresponds to the ODB test as it is specified in UN-ECE Regulation 94 (R94), i.e. EEVC deformable element with 40% overlap at a test speed of 56 km/h. In addition to the current R94 requirements, FIMCAR will recommend to introduce some structural requirements which will guarantee sufficiently strong occupant compartments by enforcing the stability of the forward occupant cell. With respect to the PDB assessment procedure a new metric, Digital Derivative in Y direction - DDY, was developed, described, analysed, and compared with other metrics. The DDY metric analyses the deformation gradients laterally across the PDB face. The more even the deformation, the lower the DDY values and the better the metric- result. In order analyse the different metrics, analysis of the existing PDB test results and the results of the performed simulation studies was performed. In addition, an assessment of artificial deformation profiles with the metrics took place. This analysis shows that there are still issues with the DDY metric but it appears that it is possible to solve them with future optimisations. For example the current metric assesses only the area within 60% of the half vehicle width. For vehicles that have the longitudinals further outboard, the metric is not effective. In addition to the metric development, practical issues of the PDB tests such as the definition of a scan procedure for the analysis of the deformation pattern including the validation of the scanning procedure by the analysis of 3 different scans at different locations of the same barrier were addressed. Furthermore the repeatability and reproducibility of the PDB was analysed. The barrier deformation readings seem to be sensitive with respect to the impact accuracy. In total, the deliverable is meant to define the FIMCAR off-set assessment procedure and to be a starting point for further development of the PDB assessment procedure.
The objective of this deliverable is to describe the expected influence of the candidate test procedures developed in FIMCAR for frontal impact on other impact types. The other impact types of primary interest are front-to-side impacts, collisions with road restraint systems (e.g. guardrails), and heavy goods vehicle impacts. These collision types were chosen as they involve structures that can be adapted to improve safety. Collisions with vulnerable road users (VRU) were not explicitly investigated in FIMCAR. It is expected that the vehicle structures of interest in FIMCAR can be designed into a VRU friendly shell. Information used for this deliverable comes from simulations and car-to-car crash tests conducted in FIMCAR or review of previous research. Three test configurations (full width, offset, and moving deformable barriers) were the input to the FIMCAR selection process. There are three different types of offset tests and two different full width tests. During the project test procedures could be divided into three groups that provide different influences or outcomes on vehicle designs: 1. The ODB barrier provides a method to assess part of the vehicles energy absorption capabilities and compartment test in one test. 2. The FWRB and FWDB have similar capabilities to control structural alignment, further assess energy absorption capabilities, and promote the improvements in the occupant restraint system for high deceleration impacts. 3. The PDB and MPDB can be used to promote better load spreading in the vehicle structures, in addition to assessing energy absorption and occupant compartment strength in an offset configuration. The consortium selected the ODB and FWDB as the two best candidates for short term application in international rulemaking. The review of how all candidates would affect vehicle performance in other impacts (beside front-to-front vehicle or frontal impacts with fixed obstacles) however is reported in this deliverable to support the benefit analysis reported in FIMCAR. The grouping presented above is used to discuss all five test candidates using similarities between certain tests and thereby simplify the discussion.
The objectives of the FIMCAR (Frontal Impact and Compatibility Assessment Research) project are to answer the remaining open questions identified in earlier projects (such as understanding of the advantages and disadvantages of force based metrics and barrier deformation based metrics, confirmation of specific compatibility issues such as structural interaction, investigation of force matching) and to finalise the frontal impact test procedures required to assess compatibility. Research strategies and priorities were based on earlier research programs and the FIMCAR accident data analysis. The identified real world safety issues were used to develop a list of compatibility characteristics which were then prioritised within the consortium. This list was the basis for evaluating the different test candidates. This analysis resulted in the combination of the Full Width Deformable Barrier test (FWDB) with compatibility metrics and the existing Offset Deformable Barrier (ODB) as described in UN-ECE Regulation 94 with additional cabin integrity requirement as being proposed as the FIMCAR assessment approach. The proposed frontal impact assessment approach addresses many of the issues identified by the FIMCAR consortium but not all frontal impact and compatibility issues could be addressed.
For the assessment of vehicle safety in frontal collisions compatibility (which consists of self and partner protection) between opponents is crucial. Although compatibility has been analysed worldwide for over 10 years, no final assessment approach has been defined to date. Taking into account the European Enhanced Vehicle safety Committee (EEVC) compatibility and frontal impact working group (WG15) and the FP5 VC-COMPAT project activities, two test approaches have been identified as the most promising candidates for the assessment of compatibility. Both are composed of an off-set and a full overlap test procedure. In addition another procedure (a test with a moving deformable barrier) is getting more attention in current research programmes. The overall objective of the FIMCAR project is to complete the development of the candidate test procedures and propose a set of test procedures suitable for regulatory application to assess and control a vehicle- frontal impact and compatibility crash safety. In addition an associated cost benefit analysis should be performed. The objectives of the work reported in this deliverable were to review existing full-width test procedures and their discussed compatibility metrics, to report recent activities and findings with respect to full-width assessment procedures and to assess test procedures and metrics. Starting with a review of previous work, candidate metrics and associated performance limits to assess a vehicle- structural interaction potential, in particular its structural alignment, have been developed for both the Full Width Deformable Barrier (FWDB) and Full Width Rigid Barrier (FWRB) tests. Initial work was performed to develop a concept to assess a vehicle- frontal force matching. However, based on the accident analyses performed within FIMCAR frontal force matching was not evaluated as a first priority and thus in line with FIMCAR strategy the focus was put on the development of metrics for the assessment of structural interaction which was evaluated as a first priority.
Accident analysis
(2014)
For the assessment of vehicle safety in frontal collisions compatibility (which consists of self and partner protection) between opponents is crucial. Although compatibility has been analysed worldwide for years, no final assessment approach has been defined to date. Taking into account the European Enhanced Vehicle safety Committee (EEVC) compatibility and frontal impact working group (WG15) and the EC funded FP5 VC-COMPAT project activities, two test approaches have been identified as the most promising candidates for the assessment of compatibility. Both are composed of an off-set and a full overlap test procedure. In addition another procedure (a test with a moving deformable barrier) is getting more attention in today- research programmes. The overall objective of the FIMCAR project is to complete the development of the candidate test procedures and propose a set of test procedures suitable for regulatory application to assess and control a vehicle- frontal impact and compatibility crash safety. In addition an associated cost benefit analysis should be performed. The specific objectives of the work reported in this deliverable were: - Determine if previously identified compatibility issues are still relevant in current vehicle fleet: Structural interaction, Frontal force matching, Compartment strength in particular for light cars. - Determine nature of injuries and injury mechanisms: Body regions injured o Injury mechanism: Contact with intrusion, Contact, Deceleration / restraint induced. The main data sources for this report were the CCIS and Stats 19 databases from Great Britain and the GIDAS database from Germany. The different sampling and reporting schemes for the detailed databases (CCIS & GIDAS) sometimes do not allow for direct comparisons of the results. However the databases are complementary " CCIS captures more severe collisions highlighting structure and injury issues while GIDAS provides detailed data for a broader range of crash severities. The following results represent the critical points for further development of test procedures in FIMCAR.
Cost benefit analysis
(2014)
Although the number of road accident casualties in Europe is falling the problem still remains substantial. In 2011 there were still over 30,000 road accident fatalities [EC 2012]. Approximately half of these were car occupants and about 60 percent of these occurred in frontal impacts. The next stage to improve a car- safety performance in frontal impacts is to improve its compatibility for car-to-car impacts and for collisions against objects and HGVs. Compatibility consists of improving both a car- self and partner protection in a manner such that there is good interaction with the collision partner and the impact energy is absorbed in the car- frontal structures in a controlled way which results in a reduction of injuries. Over the last ten years much research has been performed which has found that there are four main factors related to a car- compatibility [Edwards 2003, Edwards 2007]. These are structural interaction potential, frontal force matching, compartment strength and the compartment deceleration pulse and related restraint system performance. The objective of the FIMCAR FP7 EC-project was to develop an assessment approach suitable for regulatory application to control a car- frontal impact and compatibility crash performance and perform an associated cost benefit analysis for its implementation.
For the assessment of vehicle safety in frontal collisions compatibility (which consists of self and partner protection) between opponents is crucial. Although compatibility has been analysed worldwide for over 10 years, no final assessment approach has been defined to date. Taking into account the European Enhanced Vehicle safety Committee (EEVC) compatibility and the final report to the steering committee on frontal impact [Faerber 2007] and the FP5 VC-COMPAT[Edwards 2007] project activities, two test approaches were identified as the most promising candidates for the assessment of compatibility. Both are composed of an off-set and a full overlap test procedure. In addition another procedure (a test with a moving deformable barrier) is getting more attention in current research programmes. The overall objective of the FIMCAR project is to complete the development of the candidate test procedures and propose a set of test procedures suitable for regulatory application to assess and control a vehicle- frontal impact and compatibility crash safety. In addition an associated cost benefit analysis will be performed. In the FIMCAR Deliverable D 3.1 [Adolph 2013] the development and assessment of criteria and associated performance limits for the full width test procedure were reported. In this Deliverable D3.2 analyses of the test data (full width tests, car-to-car tests and component tests), further development and validation of the full width assessment protocol and development of the load cell and load cell wall specification are reported. The FIMCAR full-width assessment procedure consists of a 50 km/h test against the Full Width Deformable Barrier (FWDB). The Load Cell Wall behind the deformable element assesses whether or not important Energy Absorbing Structures are within the Common Interaction Zone as defined based on the US part 581 zone. The metric evaluates the row forces and requires that the forces directly above and below the centre line of the Common Interaction Zone exceed a minimum threshold. Analysis of the load spreading showed that metrics that rely on sum forces of rows and columns are within acceptable tolerances. Furthermore it was concluded that the Repeatability and Reproducibility of the FWDB test is acceptable. The FWDB test was shown to be capable to detect lower load paths that are beneficial in car-to-car impacts.
Established in 1997, the European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP) provides consumers with a safety performance assessment for the majority of the most popular cars in Europe. Thanks to its rigorous crash tests, Euro NCAP has rapidly become an important driver safety improvement to new cars. After ten years of rating vehicles, Euro NCAP felt that a change was necessary to stay in tune with rapidly emerging driver assistance and crash avoidance systems and to respond to shifting priorities in road safety. A new overall rating system was introduced that combines the most important aspects of vehicle safety under a single star rating. The overall rating system has allowed Euro NCAP to continue to push for better fitment and higher performance for vehicles sold on the European market. In the coming years, the safety rating is expected to play an important role in the support of the roll-out of highly automated vehicles.
There is considerable evidence for the negative effects of driver distraction on road safety. In many experimental studies, drivers have been primarily viewed as passive receivers of distraction. Thus, there is a lack of research on the mediating role of their self-regulatory behavior. The aim of the current study was to compare drivers' performance when engaged in a system-paced secondary task with a self-paced version of this task and how both differed from baseline driving performance without distraction. Thirty-nine participants drove in a simulator while performing a secondary visual"manual task. One group of drivers had to work on this task in predefined situations under time pressure, whereas the other group was free to decide when to work on the secondary task (self-regulation group). Drivers' performance (e.g., lateral and longitudinal control, brake reaction times) was also compared with a baseline condition without any secondary task. For the system-paced secondary task, distraction was associated with high decrements in driving performance (especially in keeping the lateral position). No effects were found for the number of collisions, probably because of the lower driving speeds while distracted (compensatory behavior). For the self-regulation group, only small impairments in driving performance were found. Drivers engaged less in the secondary task during foreseeable demanding or critical driving situations. Overall, drivers in the self-regulation group were able to anticipate the demands of different traffic situations and to adapt their engagement in the secondary task, so that only small impairments in driving performance occurred. Because in real traffic drivers are mostly free to decide when to engage in secondary tasks, it can be concluded that self-regulation should be considered in driver distraction research to ensure ecological validity.
Motorcycling is a fascinating kind of transportation. While the riders' direct exposure to the environment and the unique driving dynamics are essential to this fascination, they both cause a risk potential which is several times higher than when driving a car. This chapter gives a detailed introduction to the fundamentals of motorcycle dynamics and shows how its peculiarities and limitations place high demands on the layout of dynamics control systems, especially when cornering. The basic principles of dynamic stabilization and directional control are addressed along with four characteristic modes of instability (capsize, wobble, weave, and kickback). Special attention is given to the challenges of braking (brake force distribution, dynamic over-braking, kinematic instability, and brake steer torque induced righting behavior). It is explained how these challenges are addressed by state-of-the-art brake, traction, and suspension control systems in terms of system layout and principles of function. It is illustrated how the integration of additional sensors " essentially roll angle assessment " enhances the cornering performance in all three categories, fostering a trend to higher system integration levels. An outlook on potential future control systems shows exemplarily how the undesired righting behavior when braking in curves can be controlled, e.g., by means of a so-called brake steer torque avoidance mechanism (BSTAM), forming the basis for predictive brake assist (PBA) or even autonomous emergency braking (AEB). Finally, the very limited potential of brake and chassis control to stabilize yaw and roll motion during unbraked cornering accidents is regarded, closing with a promising glance at roll stabilization through a pair of gimbaled gyroscopes.
Kamera-Monitor-Systeme (KMS) können bei Kraftfahrzeugen dazu verwendet werden, die Sicht nach hinten für den Fahrer auf einem im Fahrzeug montierten Monitor darzustellen. Dies bietet auch die Möglichkeit, herkömmliche Außenspiegel durch geeignete KMS zu ersetzen und damit neue Designvarianten mit aerodynamischen Vorteilen umsetzen zu können. Da es sich bei den Außenspiegeln jedoch um ein sicherheitsrelevantes Fahrzeugteil zur Gewährleistung der indirekten Sicht nach hinten handelt (Anforderungen sind in der UN-Regelung Nr. 46 festgelegt), stellt sich die Frage, ob KMS einen gleichwertigen Ersatz für Spiegel bieten können. In der vorliegenden Studie wurden das KMS und der herkömmliche Außenspiegel während der Durchführung von Versuchsfahrten und statischen Tests unter verschiedenen äußeren Bedingungen verglichen und bewertet. Untersuchungsgegenstand waren zum einen technische Aspekte, zum anderen Fragestellungen zur Gestaltung der Mensch-Maschine-Interaktion. Für die Versuche mit Pkw standen zwei Fahrzeuge zur Verfügung: Ein Fahrzeug, das in Kleinserie hergestellt wird und bereits nur mit KMS als Ersatz für Außenspiegel ausgerüstet ist, sowie ein Fahrzeug der Kompaktklasse, an dem sowohl ein KMS als Nachrüstsatz verbaut war als auch die herkömmlich vorhandenen Außenspiegel. Letztere konnten für Fahrten ausschließlich mit KMS abgedeckt werden. Für die Versuche am Lkw stand eine Sattelzugmaschine mit Auflieger zur Verfügung. Die Fahrerkabine war mit einem nachgerüsteten KMS ausgestattet. Grundsätzlich hat sich gezeigt, dass es möglich ist, die indirekte Sicht nach hinten sowohl bei Pkw als auch bei Lkw durch KMS, die gewisse Qualitätskriterien erfüllen, für den Fahrer ausreichend darstellen zu können. Je nach Ausgestaltung bietet ein KMS sogar die Möglichkeit, mehr Information über den rückwärtigen Raum zu präsentieren als es mit Spiegelsystemen möglich ist. Es hat sich auch gezeigt, dass der Umstieg von Spiegeln auf KMS immer einer gewissen Gewöhnungsphase bedarf, diese jedoch verhältnismäßig kurz ist und nicht notwendigerweise zu sicherheitskritischen Situationen führt.