Abteilung Fahrzeugtechnik
Filtern
Erscheinungsjahr
Dokumenttyp
Sprache
- Englisch (35) (entfernen)
Schlagworte
- Safety (35) (entfernen)
Institut
- Abteilung Fahrzeugtechnik (35) (entfernen)
The "Autonomous driving on the roads of the future: Villa Ladenburg Project" by the Daimler und Benz-Stiftung looks at degrees of automation that will only become technically feasible in the distant future. The treatment of the legal questions in the present chapter therefore draws heavily on the description of the use cases, which begin to provide a concrete basis for evaluating individual issues. Uncertainties in predicting future technical developments can be expected and will have a commensurate impact on the assumptions and conclusions of this chapter. The resulting uncertainty is nevertheless unavoidable if one wants to press ahead with important interrelated issues. This chapter is therefore intended as a contribution to the debate on societal aspects of automated driving from a legal perspective and not as a legalistic evaluation of the subject. The consideration will largely focus on the situation within the context of current German law. The legal views expressed are those of the author and are based on nine years of experience in the field of driver assistance system research. In terms of the underlying conception presented here, the societal dimension of autonomous vehicles addressed in the present project goes well beyond the adjustments to the legal framework currently being called for in Germany. The following will examine the question of "societal acceptance" in the context of the legal questions raised by autonomous vehicles. This line of investigation is not immediately obvious and covers only a segment of the more thoroughgoing focus of the project.
The term driver assistance systems in the chapter title shall be understood to include vehicle automation. This chapter starts with a homogeneous and consistent classification and nomenclature of all kinds of driver assistance systems known and under discussion today (including vehicle automation). It thereby builds upon familiar classification schemes by the German Federal Highway Research Institute (BASt) and the standardization body SAE international. Detailed evaluation of the German legal situation for driver assistance systems and vehicle automation is provided in the following Sect. 2. In Sect. 3, an overview is given on the legal system in the US to reveal aspects relevant for vehicle automation. This is intended as initial information for those not acquainted to the US legal system which has been the first to regulate automation in several federal states. Finally, in Sect. 4, the current rating scheme of the European New Car Assessment Programme (EuroNCAP) is presented in comparison to legal instruments. The model of a consumer protection based approach proves to be a flexible instrument with great advantages in promoting new technologies. Technical vehicle regulations on the other hand rule minimum requirements. Both approaches are needed to achieve maximum vehicle safety.
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.
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.
The levels of continuous vehicle automation have become common knowledge. They facilitate overall understanding of the issue. Yet, continuous vehicle automation described therein does not cover "automated driving" as a whole: Functions intervening temporarily in accident-prone situations can obviously not be classified by means of continuous levels. Continuous automation describes the shift in workload from purely human driven vehicles to full automation. Duties of the driver are assigned to the machine as automation levels rise. Emergency braking, e.g., is obviously discontinuous and intensive automation. It cannot be classified under this regime. The resulting absence of visibility of these important functions cannot satisfy " especially in the light of effect they take on traffic safety. Therefore, in order to reach a full picture of vehicle automation, a comprehensive approach is proposed that can map out different characteristics as "Principle of Operation" at top level. On this basis informing and warning functions as well as functions intervening only temporarily in near-accident situations can be described. To reach a complete picture, levels for the discontinuous, temporarily intervening functions are proposed " meant to be the counterpart of the continuous levels already in place. This results in a detailed and independent classification for accident-prone situations. This finally provides for the visibility these important functions deserve.
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.
Camera-monitor systems (CMS) can be used in motor vehicles to display the driver's rear view on a monitor mounted inside the vehicle. This also offers the possibility of replacing conventional exterior mirrors with suitable CMS and thereby implementing new design concepts with aerodynamic advantages. However, as exterior mirrors are safety-relevant vehicle parts for securing the driver's indirect rear view (requirements specified in UN Regulation No. 46), the question arises whether CMS can provide an equivalent substitute for mirrors. In the scope of this study, CMS and conventional exterior mirrors were compared and assessed in test drives and static tests under different external conditions. On the one hand, the examination of technical aspects, and on the other hand, issues pertaining to the design of the human-machine interaction, were the objects of the study. Two vehicles were available for the trials with passenger vehicles: A vehicle, manufactured in small series, which is already equipped with CMS as sole replacement for the exterior mirrors, as well as a compact class vehicle which had a CMS retrofitted by the car manufacturer in addition to conventionally used exterior mirrors. The latter could be covered exclusively for trips with CMS. A tractor unit with semitrailer was available for the truck trials. The driver's cabin was equipped with a CMS system developed by the vehicle manufacturer. In general, it was shown that it is possible to display the indirect rear view sufficiently for the driver, both for cars and trucks, using CMS which meet specific quality criteria. Depending on the design, it is even possible to receive more information about the rear space from a CMS than is possible with mirror systems. It was also shown that the change from mirrors to CMS requires a certain period of familiarisation. However, this period is relatively short and does not necessarily result in safety-critical situations.
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.
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.