Search Results

Level 2 (L2) partial driving automation systems are rapidly emerging in the marketplace. L2 systems provide sustained automatic longitudinal and lateral vehicle motion control, reducing the need for drivers to continuously brake, accelerate and steer. Drivers, however, remain critically responsible for safely detecting and responding to objects and events. This paper summarizes variations of L2 systems (hands-on and/or hands-free) and considers human drivers’ roles when using L2 systems and for designing Human-Machine Interfaces (HMIs), including Driver Monitoring Systems (DMSs). In addition, approaches for examining potential unintended consequences of L2 usage and evaluating L2 HMIs, including field safety effect examination, are reviewed. The aim of this paper is to guide L2 system HMI development and L2 system evaluations, especially in the field, to support safe L2 deployment, promote L2 system improvements, and ensure well-informed L2 policy decision-making.

This paper explores the potential safety performance of “Future Generation” automated speed control crash avoidance systems for Commercial Vehicles. The technologies discussed in this paper include Adaptive Cruise Control (ACC), second and third generation Forward Collision Avoidance and Mitigation Systems (F-CAM) comprised of Forward Collision Warning (FCW) with Collision Mitigation Braking (CMB) technology as applied to heavy trucks, including single unit and tractor semitrailers. The research [1[ discussed in this paper is from a study conducted by UMTRI which estimated the safety benefits of current and future F-CAM systems and the comparative efficacy of adaptive cruise control. The future generation systems which are the focus of this paper were evaluated at two separate levels of product refinement, “second generation” and “third generation” systems.

This paper focuses on the safety performance of Commercial Vehicle Forward Collision Avoidance and Mitigation Systems (F-CAM) that include Forward Collision Warning (FCW) with Collision Mitigation Braking (CMB) technology as applied to heavy trucks, including single unit and tractor semitrailers. The study estimated the safety benefits of a commercially available F-CAM system considered to be representative of products currently in service. The functional characteristics were evaluated and its performance generically modeled to estimate safety benefits. This was accomplished through the following steps: (1) first characterize the actual performance of these systems in various pre-crash scenarios under controlled test track conditions, and then reverse engineering the algorithms that control warnings and automatic braking actions; (2) developing a comprehensive set of simulated crash events representative of actual truck striking rear-end crashes.

This project assessed current or proposed protocols for improving the usability of LATCH (Lower Anchors and Tethers for Children). LATCH hardware in the left second-row position of 98 2011 or 2010 model-year vehicles was evaluated using ISO and SAE LATCH usability rating guidelines. Child restraint/vehicle interaction was assessed using ISO and NHTSA proposed procedures. ISO ratings of vehicle LATCH usability ranged from 41% to 78%, while vehicles assessed using the SAE draft recommended practice met between 2 and all 10 of the recommendations that apply to all vehicles. There was a weak relationship between vehicle ISO usability ratings and the number of SAE recommended practices met by a vehicle. Twenty vehicles with a range of vehicle features were assessed using the ISO vehicle-child restraint form and 7 child restraints; ISO vehicle-child restraint interaction scores ranged from 14% to 86%.

A study of repeatability and reproducibility of the SAE J4002 and SAE J826 H-point machines (HPMs) was conducted using 15 operators, five of each type of HPM, and four different vehicle seats. Each operator performed 24 installations over two days. Across the 24 measurements, operators used 3-4 of each type of manikin in 2-4 of the seats. For each operator, some trials were repeated three times to generate measures of within-operator repeatability. Operators measured H-point x and z location, and torso angle. Variance decomposition showed that for H-point measurements, the J4002 manikin has better reproducibility (between-operator variance) but the J826 manikin has better repeatability (within-operator variance). For torso angle, both reproducibility and repeatability are better for the newer manikin. In addition, different manikins of one type produced negligible additional variability.

Current anthropomorphic test device (ATD) positioning procedures for drivers and front-seat passengers place the crash dummy within the vehicle by reference to the seat track. Midsize-male ATDs are placed at the center of the fore-aft seat track adjustment range, while small-female and large-male ATDs are placed at the front and rear of the seat track, respectively. Research on occupant positioning at UMTRI led to the development of a new ATD positioning procedure that places the ATDs at positions more representative of the driving positions of people who match the ATD's body dimensions. This paper presents a revised version of the UMTRI ATD positioning procedure. The changes to the procedure improve the ease and repeatability of ATD positioning while preserving the accuracy of the resulting ATD positions with respect to the driving positions of people matching the ATD anthropometry.