Sonstige
Filtern
Erscheinungsjahr
Dokumenttyp
Sprache
- Englisch (16) (entfernen)
Volltext vorhanden
- nein (16) (entfernen)
Schlagworte
- Test method (16) (entfernen)
Institut
- Sonstige (16)
- Abteilung Fahrzeugtechnik (15)
- Abteilung Straßenbautechnik (1)
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.
Side-impact safety of passenger cars is assessed in Europe in a full-scale test using a moving barrier. The front of this barrier is deformable and represents the stiffness of an 'average' car. The EU Directive 96/27/EC on side impact protection has adopted the EEVC Side Impact Test Procedure, including the original performance specification for the barrier face when impacting a flat dynamometric rigid wall. The requirements of the deformable barrier face, as laid down in the Directive, are related to geometrical characteristics, deformation characteristics and energy dissipation figures. Due to these limited requirements, many variations are possible in designing a deformable barrier face. As a result, several barrier face designs are in the market. However, research institutes and car manufacturers report significant difference in test results when using these different devices. It appears that the present approval test is not able to distinguish between the different designs that may perform differently when they impact real vehicles. Therefore, EEVC Working Group 13 has developed a number of tests to evaluate the different designs. In these tests the barrier faces are loaded and deformed in a specific and/or more representative way. Barrier faces of different design have been evaluated. In the paper the set-up and the reasoning behind the tests is presented. Results showing specific differences in performance are demonstrated.
The Swedish National Road Administration (SNRA), the Japanese Automobile Research Institute (JARI) and the Federal Highway Research Institute (BASt) are co-operating in the International Harmonized Research Activities on Intelligent Transportation Systems (IHRA-ITS). Under this umbrella a joint study was conducted. The overall objective of this study was to contribute to the definition and validation of a "battery of tools" which enables a prediction and an assessment of changes in driver workload due to the use of in-vehicle information systems (IVIS) while driving. In this sense \"validation\" means to produce empirical evidence from which it can be concluded that these methods reliably discriminate between IVIS which differ in terms of relevant features of the HMI-design. Additionally these methods should also be sensitive to the task demands imposed on the driver by the traffic situation and their interactions with HMI-design. To achieve these goals experimental validation studies (on-road and in the simulator) were performed in Sweden, Germany and Japan. As a common element these studies focused on the secondary task methodology as an approach to the study of driver workload. In a joint German-Swedish on-road study the Peripheral Detection Task (PDT) was assessed with respect to its sensitivity to the complexity of traffic situations and effects of different types of navigation systems. Results show that the PDT performance of both the German and the Swedish subjects reflects the task demands of the traffic situations better than those of the IVIS. However, alternative explanations are possible which will be examined by further analyses. Results of this study are supplemented by the Japanese study where informational demands induced by various traffic situations were analysed by using a simple arithmetic task as a secondary task. Results of this study show that relatively large task demands can be expected even from simple traffic situations.
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.
Despite the steadily declining number of pedestrian fatalities and injuries in most European countries during recent decades, pedestrian protection is still of great importance in the European Union as well as in Germany. This is because they still constitute a large proportion of road user casualties and are more likely to suffer serious and fatal injuries than most other road users. In 1999 only car occupants suffered more fatal injuries than pedestrians in Germany. In December 1998, EEVC WG 17 completed their review and updating of the EEVC WG 10 pedestrian test procedure that made it possible to evaluate the protection afforded to pedestrians by the front of passenger cars in an accident. Within the scope of this procedure, four different impactors are used representing those parts of the body which are injured very often and/or very seriously in vehicle-pedestrian-collisions. In a project executed by IKA and BASt, a small family car was tested according to the EEVC WG 17 test procedure. Afterwards modifications to the car were carried out in order to improve the pedestrian protection provided by the vehicle design. There were certain restrictions placed on the level of modifications undertaken, e.g. only minor modifications to vehicle styling and to the vehicle structures, which provide passenger protection. The redesigned vehicle was tested again using the WG 17 test procedure. The test results of the modified vehicle were compared with those of the standard vehicle and evaluated. The results show that considered measures for pedestrian protection in many areas of the vehicle front structure and the use of innovative techniques can lead to a significant reduction of the loads of pedestrians at an acceptable expense.
It is well known that most accidents with pedestrians are caused by the driver not being alert or misinterpreting the situation. For that reason advanced forward looking safety systems have a high potential to improve safety for this group of vulnerable road users. Active pedestrian protection systems combine reduction of impact speed by driver warning and/or autonomous braking with deployment of protective devices shortly before the imminent impact. According to the Euro NCAP roadmap the Autonomous Emergency Braking system tests for Pedestrians Protection will be set in force from 2016 onwards. Various projects and organisations in Europe are developing performance tests and assessment procedures as accompanying measures to the Euro NCAP initiative. To provide synthesised input to Euro NCAP so-called Harmonisation Platforms (HP-) have been established. Their main goal is to foster exchange of information on key subjects, thereby generating a clear overview of similarities and differences on the approaches chosen and, on that basis, recommend on future test procedures. In this paper activities of the Harmonisation Platform 2 on the development of Test Equipment are presented. For the testing targets that mimic humans different sensing technologies are required. A first set of specifications for pedestrian targets and the propulsion systems as collected by Harmonisation Platform 2 are presented together with a first evaluation for a number of available tools.
Proposal for a test procedure of assistance systems regarding preventive pedestrian protection
(2011)
This paper is showing a proposal for a test procedure regarding preventive pedestrian protection based on accident analysis. Over the past years pedestrian protection has become an increasing importance also during the development phase of new vehicles. After a phase of focusing on secondary safety, there are current activities to detect a possible collision by assistance systems. Such systems have the task to inform the driver and/or automatically activate the brakes. How practical is such a system? In which kind of traffic situations will it work? How is it possible to check the effectiveness of such a system? To test the effectiveness, currently there are no generally approved identifiable procedures. It is reasonable that such a test should be based on real accidents. The test procedure should be designed to test all systems, independent of the system- working principle. The vFSS group (advanced Forward-looking Safety Systems) was founded to develop a proposal for a technology independent test procedure, which reflects the real accident situation. This contribution is showing the results of vFSS. The developed test procedure focuses on accidents between passenger cars and pedestrians. The results are based on analysis results of in-depth databases of GIDAS, German insurers and DEKRA and added by analysis of national and international statistics. The in-depth analysis includes many pre-crash situations with several influencing factors. The factors are e. g. speed of the car, speed of the pedestrian, moving direction and a possible obscuration of the pedestrian by an object. The results comprise also the different situations of adults and children. Furthermore, they include details regarding influence of the lighting conditions (daylight or night) especially with respect to the accident consequences. In fact, more accidents happen at daylight, but fatal accidents are more often at night. A clustering of parameter combinations was found which represents typical accident scenarios. There are six typical accident scenarios which were merged in four test scenarios. The test scenarios are varying the starting position of the pedestrian, the pedestrian size (adult or child) and the speed of the pedestrian, whereas the speed of the car will not be varied. To ensure the independency from used sensing technologies it is necessary to use a suitable dummy. For example, if sensors are based on infrared, the dummy should emit the temperature of a human being. The test procedure will identify the collision speed as the key parameter for assessing the effectiveness of the tested system. The collision speed is defined as the reduction between initial test speed of the car and impact speed. The assessment of the speed reduction value regarding the safety benefit, however, will be part of a separate procedure.
When the EEVC proposed the full-scale side impact test procedure, it recommended that consideration should be given to an interior headform test in addition. This was to evaluate areas of contact not assessed by the dummy. EEVC Working Group 13 has been researching the parameters of a possible European headform test procedure in four phases. Earlier stages of the research have been presented at previous ESV conferences. The conclusions from these have suggested that the US free motion headform should be used in any European test procedure and that it should be a free flight test, not guided. This research has now culminated in proposals for a European test procedure. This paper presents the proposed EEVC side impact interior headform test procedure, giving the rationale for the test and the first results from the validation phase of the test protocol.
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.
The Netherlands is on the way to change its existing skid resistance measuring method for its highway network from the Dutch RAW 72, a longitudinal force method, to the Sideway Force method. This method is described in the Technical Specification 15901-8 (SKM device) as well as 15901-6 (SCRIM device) and is in use in 9 European countries. The CEN TC 227 WG5 on Surface Characteristics is currently working on combining of these two technical Specifications into a European standard for Sideway-Force (SWF) measurement devices. The idea of this change in the Netherlands was perceived in 2013 and since then a lot of meetings have been held with the different Dutch decision makers as well as with countries which currently operate SWF devices. There was an intensive exchange of knowledge about these devices and their corresponding quality assurance systems, because the Netherlands wanted to incorporate and rely on an existing system of a neighbor country without losing their present level of quality. The Netherlands has therefore decided to incorporate the German SKM approach. The network monitoring with the new system will start in 2017. To ensure the quality of skid resistance measurements and further cooperation in this field, it has been decided to initiate an alliance between BASt and the Dutch road owner Rijkswaterstaat (RWS). This alliance will facilitate an exchange of research activities, calibration of the Dutch systems according to the existing German Standard as well as control measurements with a BASt-device on the Dutch network during the network monitoring. During 2016 also comparative measurements will be performed on a network level with the current Dutch device and with an SKM device to determine a conversion between the two and to be able to define new threshold values.