ASSESS project successful concluded

Transcription

1 Final Newsletter Assessment of Integrated Vehicle Safety Systems for improved vehicle safety ASSESS project successful concluded The ASSESS project has been made possible by a finiancial contribution by the European Commission under Framework Programme. Project Partners Welcome to the final newsletter of ASSESS. This EU FP7 project under DG Research has been running for the last 3,5 years developing, test and assessment methods for integrated vehicle safety systems. These combined active passive safety systems, like for instance pre-crash systems with anti-collision warning or autonomous vehicle braking actions, have a high potential to improve vehicle safety. Therefore accelerated deployment and broad market take-up of such safety enhancing applications needs to be supported for their full potential to be unleashed. In support of this European OEM s, suppliers and research groups jointly developed procedures to evaluate such systems for future usage by Regulatory bodies and Consumer Rating organisations. The project was successfully completed in Dec 2012 with a set of test and assessment procedures related to driver reactions, pre-crash performance evaluations as well as studies into the influence of the pre-crash systems activation during the crash phase. Final results are presented in this newsletter. Harmonisation Platforms Because of their potential in crash avoidance and injury mitigation Euro NCAP includes assessment of Advance Emergency Brake Systems (AEB-C) in 2014 in cars. Procedures were defined by the PNCAP group using information from a number of projects, listed below. ASSESS played an important role in the so called Harmonisation Platforms (HP) mend to forward information from the below projects in a synthesized way to Euro NCAP. Advanced Forward-Looking Safety Systems (vfss) Cooperation between OEMs, research and insurance groups world-wide developing test and assessmentmethods for forward facing safety systems related to accidents with pedestrians and cars. vfss also develops and applies methods on system effectiveness. Advanced Emergency Brake systems (AEB) Cooperation between insurance organisations Thatcham and IIHS with support from research groups, a supplier and two OEMs. Aims and goals identical to vfss. Assessment of Integrated Vehicle Safety Systems (ASSESS) EU FP7 Project consortium of OEM s, suppliers, test houses, research organisations and universities. Total 14 partners. Research on test methods for car car accidents (no pedestrians) considering driver behavioural aspects (warning), pre-crash performance evaluation, crash performance evaluation and system effectiveness. Assessment methods for Integrated Pedestrian Safety Systems (ASPECSS) EU FP7 Project consortium of OEM s, suppliers, test houses, research organisations and universities. Research on test methods considering driver behavioural aspects (warning), pre-crash performance evaluation, crash performance evaluation and system effectiveness. Allgemeiner Deutscher Automobil-Club (ADAC) ADAC defined an evaluation method for AEBS considering the warning and autonomous braking actions to inform consumers on the system performance. The method was applied to various systems offered to the marked and reported in the media. To streamline input from the various projects so-called Harmonisation Platforms (HP s) have been established. Goal is to exchange information on key subjects, thereby generating a clear overview of similarities and differences on the approaches and results. The projects will run independently but via the HP s they are well informed of mutual developments.

2 Page 2 Safety impact assessment of integrated vehicle safety systems The safety impact assessment in the ASSESS project aims at an objective evaluation of a wide range of Integrated Vehicle Safety Systems (IVSS). In the assessment, system performance is measured in terms of the injury-reducing capacity of the IVSS. For reasons of relevance and technological readiness, it was decided to lay focus on the assessment of forward-looking crash avoidance and mitigation systems (pre-crash systems) in rear-end collision scenarios (which are called A scenarios in the ASSESS project). Within rear-end scenarios, three different sub-scenarios: slower lead vehicle, braking lead vehicle and stopped lead vehicle are considered. The picture below is representing the slower lead vehicle scenario. Once all available points and scored points are computed for a chosen injury for each of the three scenarios, a weighting of scenario performances provides an overall assessment. Scenario weights are determined by the ASSESS analysis of accident data in the German In-Depth Accident Study (GIDAS). Besides the overall evaluation, the model allows an assessment of the precrash system in different speed intervals. In both cases, the assessment is determined for each injury type or injury severity separately and no attempt is made to construct a combined assessment. The assessment method requires test scenarios that cover the whole speed range that is relevant to rear-end collisions. The assumed test conditions are compatible with Euro NCAP tests and test results in ASSESS are transformed to this framework via a careful selection procedure. In order to take human-machine interaction (HMI) into account, two tests are planned for each initial condition: one with purely autonomous activation of the pre-crash system and one with driver reaction. The evaluation of system performance within a scenario is performed in a system of available points and scored points. For a chosen injury type or injury level, available points for a test correspond to the number of occupants suffering relevant injuries at impact speeds close to the test speed. Scored points reflect the expected reduction in the number of injured occupants due to the impact speed reduction measured in the test. The expected injury reduction is quantified using the dose-response model which computes the number of injured car occupants from two dose functions. Injury reduction is computed separately for the test result with autonomous activation of the system and that with driver reaction. Scored points are determined using a careful balancing between the two reductions, with weights based on driving simulator studies The ASSESS assessment method can be used to compute the reduction in the number of injured occupants with respect to any injury type or injury severity as long as there is sufficient accurate accident data available. In the ASSESS deliverable D1.4: Safety impact assessment of integrated vehicle safety systems, injuries with long-term whiplash symptoms (lasting longer than 1 month) and MAIS2+ injuries are considered in order to give a good coverage of the most relevant injuries in rear-end collisions with longterm consequences. However, the same assessment method was used to provide input to the socio-economic evaluation described in the ASSESS deliverable 2.2: Socio-economic impact of safety systems, in which case the injury-reducing effect of pre-crash systems on fatal, serious and slight injuries was required. References ASSESS deliverable D1.4, Safety impact assessment of integrated vehicle safety systems (2012)by A. Bálint, H. Fagerlind, J-A. Bühne., A. Aparicio, M. McCarthy. ASSESS deliverable D2.2, Socio-economic impact of safety systems (2012) by J-A. Bühne, A. Lüdeke, S. Schönebeck, J. Dobberstein, H., Fagerlind, A. Bálint, and M. McCarthy. Assessment of Integrated Vehicle Safety Systems for improved vehicle safety

3 Page 3 Issue April 2013 Pre-crash performance in the ASSESS project The objective of the ASSESS work package 4 has been the development and evaluation of test and assessment methods for the precrash performance of Integrated Vehicle Safety Systems, suitable for regulatory testing and consumer assessment. After the update of the test facilities, the development of a test target and the definition of a test program and draft protocol the last activity for WP4 consisted of an extensive evaluation of this draft protocol. The test program was evaluated with 4 cars in 3 different labs (IDIADA, TNO and BASt) with different initial approaches. Additional tests were conducted at Daimler and ADAC to include even more labs. Brake robots were installed in test vehicles to mimic repeatable driver behaviour (braking) under warning. The data was analysed to study items like repeatability and reproducibility (R&R) in different conditions. Results were documented and forwarded for compilation and validation of the overall assessment methodology. It was found, that the proposed methodology was valid with respect to R&R and could be conducted similarly well in all 3 test laboratories no matter the different initial conditions like propulsion systems or in- / outdoor testing. Also, it was found, that warning times obtained with the test target ASSES- SOR were in line with warning times obtained when testing against a real car. Like in the first series of test conducted by BASt and IDIADA within the second series only rear-end manoeuvres were considered. This was in line with the specifications of the test vehicles and the available laboratory equipment. The main objective of the second series was to check the reproducibility and repeatability of the specified test program and the capability of the various laboratories with the newly implemented laboratory updates as realized within the ASSESS project. IDIADA, as state of the art laboratory, has carried out tests with both, OEM and IDIADA car lab vehicles, using a rabbit vehicle and the ASSESS target vehicle ASSESSOR. A part of the scenarios were carried out successfully; problems were recorded with test scenarios which results in inconsistent warning and target resistance after extensive use (100+ estimated impacts). The main activities of BASt were the development of a remote control kart (MARVIN) as propulsion system for the ASSESS target. The phase 2 tests with the OEM vehicles were focused on the feasibility and repeatability of the kart tests. During the test program many improvements on the kart system were carried out. Additionally, tests were carried out with ADAC target and a VW Passat to check tests feasibility with different types of targets. Phase 2 testing activities at TNO were carried out using a relative movement based rig where the tested vehicle drives stationary on roller benches. The OEM vehicles as well as the TNO car lab equipped with a solely for this project developed simplified precrash algorithm were tested to check feasibility and repeatability of the selected scenarios. Additional tests were done at Daimler using the AB Dynamics s robot vehicle in combination with the ASSESS target vehicle. Tests were conducted with the both OEM vehicles and were used to check test feasibility and repeatability of ASSESS test scenarios with an extended range of propulsion systems. The two prototype ASSESSOR targets have been used by the test labs for ASSESS testing as well as testing outside the project, mainly to compare the ASSESSOR also with alternative solutions such as balloon cars, the ADAC target and simple cone reflectors. The pre-crash testing on outdoor tracks and indoor facilities has to be safe for test drivers and operators as well for the vehicles under test, test equipment and environment. As the tests are carried out with high relative speeds and automatic robot systems, a set of safety routines has been development (see ASSESS deliverable D4.2). Finally the test results of the pre-crash tests, expressed in key safety indicators, such as TTC, impact speed, time exposure to TTC, timing of activation of passive safety features, timing of warning and time of braking, were analysed to check reproducibility and repeatability between vehicles and test labs. The ASSESS draft pre-crash test protocol preceded the Euro NCAP AEB protocols and was given to Euro NCAP for consideration. Though not the entire ASSESS test procedure was incooperated into the upcoming Euro NCAP AEB protocols, ASSESS is happy to conclude that parts (as the general set of manoeuvers or the driver reaction time) were taken on board. CARMEN PLAATJE Assessment of Integrated Vehicle Safety Systems for improved vehicle safety

4 Page 4 Final Newsletter Crash evaluation in ASSESS - Results of WP5 During the first phase of this WP (T.5.1), it was decided to use injury risk curves to assess the pre-crash systems during the crash phase. The idea was to define two different curves: one considering the improved restraint system effects and the other one without considering them. In this way, the benefit of the impact speed reduction and the benefit of the improved restraint systems could be observed separately. In order to design these curves, some simulations were scheduled. In addition, some sled tests were planned to corroborate the simulation results, allowing in this way the definition of the methodology specified in the WP objectives. The possibility of performing one or two full scale tests to validate the obtained results was also considered. After analysing the first simulation results, a problem related with the use of the injury risk curves appeared: Most of biomechanical criteria had a maximum injury risk value below 1% (AIS 3, according to Mertz and Eppinger sources), being in a zone of the graph were the benefit caused by the impact speed reduction is not noticeable (blue circle). The only biomechanical value which had a related injury risk above 1% was chest intrusion. Unfortunately, there are not existing AIS2+ curves for most of biomechanical values, so the most sensible curves to be used are AIS3+ and, as seen above, they are not sensible enough to be used as expected. In view of the abovementioned, the redefinition of the WP5 objectives, activities and resources was discussed. The turning point can be situated in the 2 nd Supervisory Board Meeting (Nov. 2011), were the problem was presented and it was agreed to proceed as follows: WP5 new objective is to perform simulation activities, sled tests and full crash tests in order to better understand the effect of the pre-crash systems activation during the crash phase, when the impact is unavoidable. The performance of these activities will detect possible limitations of the currently on-the-market passive safety tools in order to evaluate the effect of the pre-crash systems activation during the crash phase. The methodology for the pre-crash systems evaluation during the crash phase is not going to be defined. From then on, the sled test planning as well as the remaining simulation activities and the full scale tests were redefined according to the new objective of the WP5. Specifically, the following activities were planned and later performed: Braking manoeuvres: Some braking tests were performed with real people in order to analyse their forward motion due to the braking action. Simulation activities by using LS-DYNA: Some simulation activities were conducted focusing on the crash phase in a full frontal impact against rigid wall scenario. In these simulations impact speed reductions and out of positions due to the prebrake action were considered. The effect of the prepretensioner activation was also considered. These simulations were performed by using a Daimler E-class model. Sled tests: Sled tests were also done focusing on the crash phase in a full frontal impact against rigid wall scenario. They were conducted considering dummy forward displacement from pre-braking with and w/o pre-pretensioning. Speed reduction due to the braking action was also taken into account. These tests were performed by using a Daimler E-class buck and spare parts. Full Frontal impact test: One full frontal impact test was performed considering the activation of the Daimler E-class presafe system. The benefit coming from the pre-safe activation was analysed by comparing the results from this test with the ones from a reference test (TRIAS). Offset Deformable Barrier Impact Tests (ODB): Two ODB impact tests with pre-brake action were conducted, one activating the pre-pretensioner and the other one without activating it. By comparing these tests with the official Euro NCAP, it was possible to analyse the effect of the two pre-crash systems (pre-brake and pre-tensioner) separately. Both tests were performed with a Citröen C3 similar to the one crashed in the official Euro NCAP test. After analysing the results from the activities above, some conclusions are obtained. Find them below: The lower impact speed resulting from the pre-brake action reduced substantially the biomechanical values of the vehicle occupants. This effect can be observed in all the activities performed in this part of the work package 5, whichever was the passive safety tool used. The activation of the pre-pretensioner seems to be also beneficial to reduce the injuries on the occupants of the vehicle, but in a lesser extent than the pre-brake action. When evaluating the effect of the pre-pretensioner, some differences can be found between the results depending on the passive safety tool used. More sensitive tools/procedures would probably be required to better quantify the prepretensioner effect..

5 Page 5 In the full scale crash tests, the lower impact speed resulting from the pre-brake action reduced the deformation of the structural parts of the vehicle, diminishing consequently the intrusion of the bodywork into the passengers compartment. The forward movement of the occupants due to the braking action has a negative effect on some biomechanical values. The neck shear level is the parameter more clearly affected by this phenomenon. High variability has been noticed regarding the occupants forward motion, depending on the kind of occupant (human, dummy) and the braking deceleration curve. Need of better analyse, in the future, this consequence of the braking action. An improvement of the dummies readings would be possible by adapting the restraint system to the new energy level, which has been reduced by the pre-brake action. Injury risk curves with AIS 3 are not sensitive enough to evaluate the effect of the pre-crash systems during the crash phase. Only chest deflection has a related injury high enough to be considered. In order to perform crash tests with pre-brake action, it is necessary to better analyse how to brake the car in order to ensure a minimum of repeatability and reliability. The external systems used in this WP to activate the brakes of the cars have some strengths but also weaknesses. It seems that the best option would be to activate electronically the emergency braking system of the car. It is necessary to better understand the forward motion of the dummies at low deceleration ranges, since its repeatability and reliability are nowadays debatable. In a similar way, some of the models used to perform the activities conducted in this WP are correlated for crash phases but not for low deceleration scenarios. It is also necessary to clarify if these limitations are acceptable or which steps should be followed to solve them. Since biomechanical values are meaningless by themselves, it is necessary to relate them to a specific injury risk. In this way, the possibility of using AIS < 3 curves should be considered. Kinematics comparison for passenger side, 40kph crash pulse: no pre-braking and no pre-pretensioning (V4 left), pre-braking and no pre-pretensioning (V5 middle), pre-braking and pre-pretensioning (V6 right); Mercedes E-Class in TRIAS 47 configuration Summarizing, after the first simulation activities it was noticed that injury risk curves could be not sensible enough to quantify the benefit of the pre-crash systems activation during the crash phase. In view of this, it was decided to change the objective of the work package, which was to provide an analysis of the effect of the pre-crash systems activation during the crash phase instead of a proposal of test procedure. In order to perform this analysis, all the currently on-the-market passive safety tools were used: simulation, sled tests and full scale tests. The results from any of these tools are in the same line: a clear benefit on the occupants injuries is observed when pre-crash systems are activated from the biomechanical values point of view. Additionally, it is also observed that the current injury risk curves are not sensible enough to quantify this benefit.

6 Page 6 The ASSESS project would like to thank all the project partners for their contribution, the other initiatives for valuable discussion and input and finally the European Commission for the co-funding. Contact details: HUMANETICS Paul Lemmen plemmen@humanetics.eu The ASSESS project is closely working together with: AEB vffs ADAC CAMP - ARS CAMP - CIB Photograph of the audience during the final ASSESS workshop LIST of PAPERS And will use results from projects like: APROSYS evalue Aparicio et. al., Pre-Crash Performance of Collision Mitigation and Avoidance Systems Results from the ASSESS Project, 2012 FISITA 2012 World Automotive Congress, Being, China, paper number F2012-F Unselt et. al., Assessment of Behavioural Aspects in Integrated Safety Systems, 2011 ESV Conference, Washington DC, paper number Seiniger et. al., Development of a target propulsion system for ASSESS, 2011 ESV Conference, Washington DC This project is supported by: Euro NCAP EUCAR Fagerlind et. al., Analysis of accident data for test scenario definition in the ASSESS project, 2010 ESAR Conference, Hannover. Seiniger et. al., Ein validiertes Testverfahren für Notbremssysteme - Ergebnisse des ASSESS- Projekts, Konferenz fur Fahrerassistenzsysteme, München, May Lemmen et. al., Assessment of integrated vehicle safety systems for improved vehicle safety, 2012 TRA Conference, Athens, April Facts and figures Total Budget 5.4 M EC Funding 3.6M Duration 42 Months DG Research Coordinator Paul Lemmen, Humanetics Start date 1 July 2009 End date 31 December 2012 Website: Main objectives procedures and related tools for frontal pre crash sensing systems. Procedures will be developed for driver behaviour evaluation, pre crash system performance evaluation, crash performance evaluation and socio economic assessment. The mentioned FP7 projects have been made possible by a finiancial contribution by the European Commission under Framework Programme 7. The Publication as provided reflects only the authors view. Every effort has been made to ensure complete and accurate information concerning the articles in this newsletter. However, the author(s) and members of the consortia cannot be held legaly responsible for any mistake in printing or faulty instructions. The authors and consortia members reserve the right not to be responsible for the topicality, correctness, completeness or quality of the information provided. The main objective of the study is to develop harmonised and standardised assessment