Filtern
Erscheinungsjahr
Dokumenttyp
- Konferenzveröffentlichung (188)
- Buch (Monographie) (158)
- Wissenschaftlicher Artikel (73)
- Arbeitspapier (14)
- Teil eines Buches (Kapitel) (7)
- Bericht (4)
Schlagworte
- Unfall (444) (entfernen)
Die zunehmende Beliebtheit des Pedelecs zeigt sich in jährlich steigenden Absatzzahlen. In ähnlichem Maße steigt die Zahl der in der amtlichen Unfallstatistik verzeichneten Pedelecunfälle, sodass das Thema der Verkehrssicherheit von Pedelecfahrern zunehmend an Bedeutung gewinnt. Bisherige Forschungsarbeiten bieten weder ein repräsentatives Bild der Nutzergruppe noch ein ganzheitliches Bild ihres Unfallgeschehens. Im Rahmen der vorliegenden Arbeit wurden daher drei verschiedene methodische Ansätze gewählt, um die Nutzergruppe von Pedelecs und deren Unfallgeschehen zu beschreiben. Die Repräsentativbefragung bietet erstmalig einen breiten Überblick über personen- und fahrzeugbezogene Charakteristika der Pedelecfahrer in Deutschland, ihr Fahr- und Nutzungsverhalten, mögliche Probleme im Umgang mit dem Pedelec sowie erlebte Unfälle binnen der vergangenen drei Jahre (n = 775). Die beiden Unfallanalysen – eine Klinikbefragung verunfallter Pedelecfahrer (n = 39) sowie eine Analyse der in der German In-Depth Accident Study (GIDAS) enthaltenen Pedelecunfälle (n = 214) – liefern eine detaillierte Beschreibung des jeweiligen Unfalls und seiner Folgen.
Die Gruppe der Pedelecfahrer erweist sich vorwiegend als ältere, aber aktive Nutzergruppe, die das Pedelec oft und für unterschiedliche Zwecke nutzt. Ihr überwiegend hohes Sicherheitsgefühl im Straßenverkehr geht mit einer eher niedrigen Risikobereitschaft einher. In den vergangenen zwei Jahren haben allerdings insbesondere jüngere Fahrer zwischen 18 und 44 Jahren das Pedelec für sich entdeckt, die derzeit (noch) einen geringen Anteil an der Nutzergruppe wie auch im Unfallgeschehen stellen. Als Unfallschwerpunkte zeichnen sich Kollisionen mit einem Pkw sowie die nur selten polizeilich erfassten Alleinunfälle ab. Auch wenn die meisten Fahrer eigenen Angaben zufolge mit dem Pedelec schneller unterwegs sind als mit einem konventionellen Fahrrad, ereignen sich nur wenige Unfälle bei Geschwindigkeiten am Maximum der mit legalen Mitteln erreichbaren Tretunterstützung von 25 km/h. Häufig erfolgen sie beim Stehen oder Anfahren und spiegeln somit die von vielen Fahrern berichteten Balanceprobleme bei niedrigen Geschwindigkeiten wider. In beiden Unfallanalysen wirken Selektionseffekte, aufgrund derer die Generalisierbarkeit der Ergebnisse eingeschränkt ist. So beinhaltet GIDAS ausschließlich die polizeilich erfassten Unfälle und damit vorwiegend Unfälle mit einem weiteren Beteiligten, während in der Klinikbefragung stationär behandelte, ältere Pedelecfahrer überrepräsentiert sind. Zu den Nutzern von S-Pedelecfahrern und ihrem Unfallgeschehen lassen sich aufgrund geringer Fallzahlen keine belastbaren Aussagen treffen.
Auf Basis der gewonnenen Erkenntnisse werden verschiedene Empfehlungen zur Verbesserung der Verkehrssicherheit für Pedelecfahrer abgeleitet, die gemäß dem Fokus der vorliegenden Arbeit primär beim Fahrer (z. B. Erhöhung der Helmtragequote) oder dessen Fahrzeug (z. B. technische Unterstützung zur Verbesserung der Fahrstabilität auch bei geringen Geschwindigkeiten) ansetzen. Ferner bedarf es weiterführender Studien zur Beschreibung von Pedelecunfällen und ihrer Ursachen, auch mit Fokus auf den Pkw-Fahrern als häufigsten Unfallgegnern bei Pedelecunfällen mit mindestens zwei Beteiligten, sowie einer Überprüfung und Verbesserung der Güte amtlicher Statistiken bezüglich der Erkennung elektrifizierter Räder und ihrer korrekten Klassifikation als Pedelecs oder S-Pedelecs.
In Germany, in-depth accident investigations are carried out in the Hannover area since 1973. In 1999 a second region was added with surveys in Dresden and the surrounding area. Internationally, the acronym GIDAS (German In-Depth Accident Study) is commonly used for these surveys. Compared to many other countries, the sample sizes of the GIDAS surveys are much larger. The goal is to collect 1.000 accidents involving personal injuries per year and region. Data collection takes place by using a sampling procedure, which can be interpreted as a two-stage process with time intervals as primary units and accidents as secondary units. An important question is, to what extend these samples are representative for the target population from which they are drawn. Analyses show, for example, that accidents with persons killed or seriously injured are overrepresented in the samples compared to accidents with slightly injured persons. This means, that these data are subject to biases due to uncontrolled variation of sample inclusion probability. Therefore, appropriate weighting and expansion methods have to be applied in order to adjust or correct for these biases. The contribution describes the statistical and methodological principles underlying the GIDAS surveys with respect to sampling procedure, data collection and expansion. In addition, some suggestions regarding potential improvements of study design are made from a methodological point of view.
The objectives of this paper are the analysis of the accident risk of drivers brain pathologies (Mild Cognitive Impairment, Alzheimer- disease, and Parkinson- disease), and the investigation of the impact of driver distraction on the accident risk of patients with brain pathologies, through a driving simulator experiment. The three groups of patients are compared to a healthy group of similar demographics, with no brain pathology. In particular, 125 drivers of more than 55 years old (34 "controls"" and 91 "patients") went through a large driving simulator experimental process, in which incidents were scheduled to occur. They drove in rural and urban areas, in low and high traffic volumes and in three distraction conditions (undistracted driving, conversation with a passenger and conversation through a mobile phone). The statistical analyses indicated several interesting findings; brain pathologies affect significantly accident risk and distraction affects more the groups of patients than the control one.
Ziel dieses Forschungsprojektes war es, die Situation im Radverkehr und die Gruppe Radfahrer unter der Fragestellung "Wie sicher ist die Fahrradnutzung" besser kennenzulernen. Hintergrund war die steigende Beteiligung von Radfahrern an Unfällen. Dazu wurden in einem Großstadt-Kernbereich, in einem Großstadt-Randbereich und in einer Mittelstadt radfahrende Schüler, Erwachsene und Ältere bei mehreren Alltagsfahrten begleitet (Fahrprobe Radfahrer). Ihr Verhalten wurde anhand eines Erfassungsschemas interpunktiert und unter Sicherheitsgesichtspunkten bewertet. Es ergab sich ein differenziertes Anforderungsprofil Radverkehr. Später gaben dieselben Radfahrer in einem freien Gespräch (Biographie Radfahrer) Einblicke in ihre Erfahrungen mit den Vor- und Nachteilen des Radfahrens, in ihr Sicherheits- und Unrechtsempfinden. Die Interviews wurden mit einem textanalytischen Codiersystem (TACOS) verschlüsselt und konnten damit quantitativ ausgewertet werden. Die Ergebnisse der Beobachtung und der Befragung wurden je Person zusammengespielt und unter den Fragestellungen Abhängigkeiten der sicheren Fahrradnutzung mit varianzanalytischen Methoden ausgewertet. Radfahrertypen wurden mit Hilfe einer Clusteranalyse identifiziert. Eine Kausalanalyse führte zu einem Erklärungsmodell "Sichere Fahrradnutzung". Nach einer Auswertung der selbst erlebten Verkehrsunfälle mit dem Fahrrad werden Vorschläge für neue Sicherheitsstrategien im Radverkehr gemacht.
Road accidents are typically analyzed to address influences of human, vehicle, and environmental (primarily infrastructure) factors. A new methodology, based on a "Venn diagram" analysis, gives a broader perspective on the probable factors, and combinations of factors, contributing both to the occurrence of a crash and to sustaining injuries in that crash. The methodology was applied to 214 accidents on the Mumbai-Pune expressway. Factors contributing to accidents and injuries were addressed. The major human factors influencing accidents on this roadway were speeding (30%) and falling asleep (29%), while injuries were primarily due to lack of seat belt use (46%). The leading infrastructure factor for injuries was impact with a roadside manmade structure (28%), and the main vehicle factor for injuries was passenger compartment intrusion (73%). This methodology can help identify effective vehicle and infrastructure-related solutions for preventing accidents and mitigating injuries in India.
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.
In spite of today's highly sophisticated crash test procedures like the different NCAP programs running world-wide, bad real world crash performance of cars is still an issue. There are crash situations which are not sufficiently represented by actual test configurations. This is especially true for car to car, as well as for car to object impacts. The paper describes reasons for this bad performance. The reasons are in principal bad structural interaction between the car and its impact partners (geometric incompatibility), unadjusted front end stiffness (stiffness incompatibility) and collapse of passenger compartments. To show the efficiency of improving cars' structural behaviour in accidents with different impact partners an accident data analysis has been taken out by members of European Project VC-COMPAT. Accident data analysis has shown that in Germany between 15,000 and 20,000 of the now severely injured car occupants might get less injured and between 600 and 900 car occupant fatalities might be saved. Similar results arise for the UK.
Today, Euro NCAP is a well established rating system for passive car safety. The significance of the ratings must however be evaluated by comparison with national accident data. For this purpose accidents with involvement of two passenger cars have been taken from the German National Road Accident Register (record years 1998 to 2004) to evaluate the results of the NCAP frontal impact test configuration. Injury data from both drivers involved in frontal car to car collisions have been sampled and have been compared, using a "Bradley Terry Model" which is well established in the area of paired comparisons. Confounders " like mass ratio of the cars involved, gender of the driver, etc. " have been accounted for in the statistical model. Applying the Bradley Terry Model to the national accident data the safety ranking from Euro NCAP has been validated (safety level: 1star <2 star <3 star <4 star). Significant safety differences are found between cars of the 1 and 2 star category as compared to cars of the 3 and 4 star category. The impact of the mass ratio was highly significant and most influential. Changing the mass ratio by an amount of 10% will raise the chance for the driver of the heavier car to get better off by about 18%. The impact of driver gender was again highly significant, showing a nearly 2 times lower injury risk for male drivers. With regard to the NCAP rating drivers of a high rated car are more than 2 times more probable (70% chance) to get off less injured in a frontal collision as compared to the driver of a low rated car.
In this study, the mean profile depth (MPD) that expresses roughness of road pavements was calculated using the road survey equipment vehicle and the calculated MPD was compared with the real number of traffic accidents. The analysis method used in this study was to classify the appropriate clustering in relation to traffic accidents using the K-means clustering and to compare this with the presence of traffic accidents via the MPDs to derive the result. K-means clustering was used in the analysis method and four clusters were found using the clustering analysis results. The center of each cluster was 0.627, 0.850, 1.118, and 1.237, respectively. The result of this study is expected to be utilized as foundational research in the traffic safety area.
During the last 5 years, the number of cars fitted with side airbags has dramatically increased. They are now standard equipment, even on many smaller cars or less luxurious vehicles. While some side airbags offer thoracic protection alone, there are those that combine thoracic and head protection (of which most deploy from the seat). Other systems employ separate airbags for head and thorax protection, which are designed to be effective noticeably in a crash against a pole. This paper proposes an evaluation of the effectiveness of side airbags in preventing thoracic injuries to passenger car occupants involved in side crashes. First, the target population (who can take benefit of side airbag deployment and in what circumstances) is defined. Side airbags can be especially effective in cases of impacts on the door with intrusion at a certain impact speed. Then, an example case of a side impact with side airbag deployment is given were side airbag deployment is thought to have had a positive effect on injury outcome. A further case is presented where the impact configuration is likely to have reduced the effect of side airbag deployment on injury outcome. Finally, the estimation of side airbag effectiveness (in terms of additional occupant protection brought exclusively by the airbag) is proposed by comparing injury risk sustained by occupants in (more or less) similar cars (fitted or non fitted with airbags) because, during these years, car structure, and side airbag conception have considerably evolved. In-depth accident data from France, the UK and Germany has been collected. Out of 2,035 side impact accident cases available in the databases, we selected 435 occupants of passenger cars (built from 1998 onwards) involved in an injury accident between year 1998 and year 2004 for EES (Energy Equivalent Speed) values between 20km/h and 50km/h. The occupants, belted or not, were sat on the struck side, whatever the obstacle and type of accidents (intersection, loss of control, etc.). For multiple impact crashes, the side impact is assumed to be the more severe one. Passenger cars were fitted with (96) or without (339) side airbags. Most of the potential risk explanatory variables were correctly and reliably reported in the databases (velocity " impact zone " impact angle " occupant characteristics, etc.). The analysis compared injury risks for different levels of EES and different types of side airbags. A logistic regression model was also computed with injury variables (such as thoracic AIS 2+ or AIS 3+) as the dependant variable and other variables (including airbag type and EES) as explanatory injury risk factors. Results revealed statistically non-significant reductions in thoracic AIS 2+ and AIS 3+ injury risk in side airbag equipped cars in the impact violence range selected (odds ratio between 0.84 and 0.98 depending on types of airbags). The results are discussed. The non-significance is assumed to be due to a low number of cases. Statistical analysis for head injuries was not possible due to the low number of accident cases with passenger cars fitted with head airbags in the databases. Moreover, the discrepancies between the data coming from different countries (especially calculation of EES) might have introduced instability in the analysis.