Sonstige
Filtern
Erscheinungsjahr
Dokumenttyp
Volltext vorhanden
- nein (13) (entfernen)
Schlagworte
- Verletzung) (13) (entfernen)
Institut
- Sonstige (13) (entfernen)
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.
The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe Informal Group on GTR No. 7 Phase 2 are working to define a build level for the BioRID II rear impact (whiplash) crash test dummy that ensures repeatable and reproducible performance in a test procedure that has been proposed for future legislation. This includes the specification of dummy hardware, as well as the development of comprehensive certification procedures for the dummy. This study evaluated whether the dummy build level and certification procedures deliver the desired level of repeatability and reproducibility. A custom-designed laboratory seat was made using the seat base, back, and head restraint from a production car seat to ensure a representative interface with the dummy. The seat back was reinforced for use in multiple tests and the recliner mechanism was replaced by an external spring-damper mechanism. A total of 65 tests were performed with 6 BioRID IIg dummies using the draft GTR No.7 sled pulse and seating procedure. All dummies were subject to the build, maintenance, and certification procedures defined by the Informal Group. The test condition was highly repeatable, with a very repeatable pulse, a well-controlled seat back response, and minimal observed degradation of seat foams. The results showed qualitatively reasonable repeatability and reproducibility for the upper torso and head accelerations, as well as for T1 Fx and upper neck Fx. However, reproducibility was not acceptable for T1 and upper neck Fz or for T1 and upper neck My. The Informal Group has not selected injury or seat assessment criteria for use with BioRID II, so it is not known whether these channels would be used in the regulation. However, the ramping-up behavior of the dummy showed poor reproducibility, which would be expected to affect the reproducibility of dummy measurements in general. Pelvis and spine characteristics were found to significantly influence the dummy measurements for which poor reproducibility was observed. It was also observed that the primary neck response in these tests was flexion, not extension. This correlates well with recent findings from Japan and the United States showing a correlation between neck flexion and injury in accident replication simulations and postmortem human subjects (PMHS) studies, respectively. The present certification tests may not adequately control front cervical spine bumper characteristics, which are important for neck flexion response. The certification sled test also does not include the pelvis and so cannot be used to control pelvis response and does not substantially load the lumbar bumpers and so does not control these parts of the dummy. The stiffness of all spine bumpers and of the pelvis flesh should be much more tightly controlled. It is recommended that a method for certifying the front cervical bumpers should be developed. Recommendations are also made for tighter tolerance on the input parameters for the existing certification tests.
Aus der Gegenüberstellung der in England und in Deutschland ermittelten Kenngrößen konnten Vermutungen beziehungsweise Tendenzen bezüglich der Verhaltensweisen abgeleitet werden. Die durch die ermittelten Daten fundierten Aussagen lassen sich wie folgt zusammenfassen: - Die deutschen Fahrer nutzen im Mittel kleinere Zeitlücken beziehungsweise Zeitdifferenzen zum Einfahren in den Hauptstrom als die englischen Fahrer, weshalb ein riskanteres Verhalten vermutet werden kann. - Auf deutschen Landstraßen scheint schneller gefahren zu werden als auf englischen Landstraßen. - Die deutschen Fahrer nähern sich im Nebenstrom dem Knoten mit höherer Geschwindigkeit als die englischen Fahrer, was ebenfalls auf eine größere Risikobereitschaft oder sogar größere Aggressivität schließen läßt. Bezüglich des Unfallgeschehens lässt sich daher vermuten, dass in Deutschland durch riskanteres Einfahren in die Hauptstraße die Unfallzahl, und durch höhere Geschwindigkeiten die Unfallschwere erhöht werden. Es lässt sich weiter vermuten, dass die englische Fahrweise, da sich die Fahrer langsamer der Einmündung nähern, defensiver ist, woraus sich günstige Auswirkungen auf das Unfallgeschehen ergeben. In dieser Studie wurden am Beispiel der Einmündung die Probleme solcher Messungen und Vergleiche aufgezeigt und versucht, die Risikoakzeptanz messtechnisch zu quantifizieren; anhand der Ergebnisse konnte dabei generell ein etwas riskanteres Verhalten der deutschen Fahrer festgestellt werden. Die Aussagen beziehen sich dabei natürlich zunächst nur auf die den Messungen zugrundeliegenden Einmündungen. Um allgemeingültige Aussagen zum Verhalten der Verkehrsteilnehmer zu erhalten, bedarf es weiterführender Untersuchungen, in die weitere typische Verkehrssituationen mit entsprechenden Aufgaben für die Verkehrsteilnehmer aufgenommen werden.