Comparison of Expected Crash and Injury Reduction from Production Forward Collision and Lane Departure Warning Systems
Comparison of Expected Crash and Injury Reduction from Production Forward Collision and Lane Departure Warning Systems
复制标题
DOI：
10.1080/15389588.2015.1063619
复制
发表时间：
2015-10-08
影响因子：
2
通讯作者：
Gabler, Hampton C.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Kusano, Kristofer D.;Gabler, Hampton C.
目的：美国新车评估计划（NCAP）现在测试前向碰撞警告（FCW）和车道偏离警告（LDW）。这些警告的设计在车辆之间有很大的不同，并且可能导致在防止或减轻碰撞影响方面的不同现实世界的现场性能。本研究的目的是比较的预期数量的碰撞和受伤的司机，可以防止，如果车队中的所有车辆都配备了FCW和LDW系统测试根据美国NCAP.Methods：为了预测潜在的碰撞和严重伤害，可以防止，我们的方法是计算模型的美国碰撞人口。这些模型模拟了全国代表性碰撞数据库（NASS-CDS）中发生的所有追尾和单车道路偏离碰撞。来自NASS-CDS 2012的478个单车碰撞样本是LDW的24，822个模拟的基础。NASS-CDS 1997-2013年的1,042起追尾碰撞样本是FCW 7,616次模拟的基础。对于每次碰撞，进行2次模拟：（1）不存在系统和（2）存在系统。每个生产安全系统的型号均基于54辆2010-2014年款车辆，这些车辆根据LDW和/或FCW的NCAP确认程序进行了评估。NCAP对这些车辆进行了40次LDW和45次FCW试验。结果：FCW系统的设计对其防止碰撞和伤害的潜力产生了巨大的影响。如果所有车辆都配备了FCW系统，则可以避免0 - 67%的撞车事故和2 - 69%的中度至致命伤害的追尾碰撞驾驶员。预警时间越早，效益越大。然而，对效益的最大影响是系统的运行速度阈值较低。仅以每小时20英里以上的速度运行的系统的有效性不到每小时5英里以上运行的系统的一半，警告时间相似。生产的LDW系统可以防止11%到23%的偏离车道的碰撞和13%到22%的严重到致命的受伤司机。大多数经过测试的LDW系统在车辆首次触及车道线时发出警告，从而带来类似的好处。最低运行速度也极大地影响LDW efficients.Conclusions：本研究的结果表明，预期的FCW和LDW系统的现场性能是高度依赖于设计和系统的限制。较早发出警告并以较低速度运行的系统可能比晚发出警告并仅在高速下运行的系统防止更多的碰撞和伤害。这些结果表明，未来的FCW和LDW评估应优先考虑早期预警和全速范围操作。本研究的一个局限性是，在NCAP测试期间或在我们的效益模型中，没有评估可能减轻碰撞的其他防撞功能，例如制动辅助、自动制动或车道保持辅助。本研究未量化这些系统的潜在额外缓解效应。
Objectives: The U.S. New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) now tests for forward collision warning (FCW) and lane departure warning (LDW). The design of these warnings differs greatly between vehicles and can result in different real-world field performance in preventing or mitigating the effects of collisions. The objective of this study was to compare the expected number of crashes and injured drivers that could be prevented if all vehicles in the fleet were equipped with the FCW and LDW systems tested under the U.S. NCAP.Methods: To predict the potential crashes and serious injury that could be prevented, our approach was to computationally model the U.S. crash population. The models simulated all rear-end and single-vehicle road departure collisions that occurred in a nationally representative crash database (NASS-CDS). A sample of 478 single-vehicle crashes from NASS-CDS 2012 was the basis for 24,822 simulations for LDW. A sample of 1,042 rear-end collisions from NASS-CDS years 1997-2013 was the basis for 7,616 simulations for FCW. For each crash, 2 simulations were performed: (1) without the system present and (2) with the system present. Models of each production safety system were based on 54 model year 2010-2014 vehicles that were evaluated under the NCAP confirmation procedure for LDW and/or FCW. NCAP performed 40 LDW and 45 FCW tests of these vehicles.Results: The design of the FCW systems had a dramatic impact on their potential to prevent crashes and injuries. Between 0 and 67% of crashes and 2 and 69% of moderately to fatally injured drivers in rear-end impacts could have been prevented if all vehicles were equipped with the FCW systems. Earlier warning times resulted in increased benefits. The largest effect on benefits, however, was the lower operating speed threshold of the systems. Systems that only operated at speeds above 20 mph were less than half as effective as those that operated above 5 mph with similar warning times. The production LDW systems could have prevented between 11 and 23% of drift-out-of-lane crashes and 13 and 22% of seriously to fatally injured drivers. A majority of the tested LDW systems delivered warnings near the point when the vehicle first touched the lane line, leading to similar benefits. Minimum operating speed also greatly affected LDW effectiveness.Conclusions: The results of this study show that the expected field performance of FCW and LDW systems are highly dependent on the design and system limitations. Systems that delivered warnings earlier and operated at lower speeds may prevent far more crashes and injuries than systems that warn late and operate only at high speeds. These results suggest that future FCW and LDW evaluation should prioritize early warnings and full-speed range operation. A limitation of this study is that additional crash avoidance features that may also mitigate collisionsfor example, brake assist, automated braking, or lane-keeping assistancewere not evaluated during the NCAP tests or in our benefits models. The potential additional mitigating effects of these systems were not quantified in this study.