New Safety Technology: Does it Work?

Transcription

1

2 New Safety Technology: Does it Work? Kay Wakeman Research Analyst Schaumburg, IL July 19, 2016 iihs.org

3 IIHS is an independent, nonprofit scientific and educational organization dedicated to reducing the losses deaths, injuries and property damage from crashes on the nation s roads. HLDI shares this mission by analyzing insurance data representing human and economic losses from crashes and other events related to vehicle ownership. Both organizations are wholly supported by auto insurers.

4 Member groups Acceptance Insurance The General Insurance PEMCO Insurance ACE Private Risk Services Georgia Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company Plymouth Rock Assurance Affirmative Insurance Goodville Mutual Casualty Company Progressive Corporation Alfa Alliance Insurance Corporation Grange Insurance The Responsive Auto Insurance Company Alfa Insurance Hallmark Insurance Company Rockingham Group Allstate Insurance Group Hanover Insurance Group Safe Auto Insurance American Family Mutual Insurance The Hartford Safeco Insurance American National Haulers Insurance Company, Inc. Samsung Fire & Marine Insurance Company Ameriprise Auto & Home Horace Mann Insurance Companies SECURA Insurance Amica Mutual Insurance Company ICW Group Sentry Insurance Auto Club Enterprises Imperial Fire & Casualty Insurance Company Shelter Insurance Auto Club Group Indiana Farmers Mutual Insurance Company Sompo Japan Insurance Company of America Auto-Owners Insurance Infinity Property & Casualty South Carolina Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company Aviva Insurance Kemper Preferred Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Company Bankers Insurance Group Kentucky Farm Bureau Insurance State Auto Insurance Companies Bituminous Insurance Companies Liberty Mutual Insurance Company State Farm California Casualty Group Louisiana Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company Tennessee Farmers Mutual Insurance Company Capital Insurance Group The Main Street America Group Texas Farm Bureau Insurance Companies Chubb & Son Mercury Insurance Group Tower Group Companies Colorado Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company MetLife Auto & Home The Travelers Companies Concord Group Insurance Companies Michigan Millers Mutual Insurance Company United Educators COUNTRY Financial MiddleOak USAA CSAA Insurance Group Mississippi Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Company Utica National Insurance Group CSE Insurance Group MMG Insurance Virginia Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Direct General Corporation Munich Re America West Bend Mutual Insurance Company Erie Insurance Group Mutual of Enumclaw Insurance Company Western National Insurance Esurance Nationwide Westfield Insurance Farm Bureau Financial Services New Jersey Manufacturers Insurance Group XL Group plc Farm Bureau Insurance of Michigan Nodak Mutual Insurance Company Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company of Idaho Norfolk & Dedham Group Farmers Insurance Group of Companies North Carolina Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company Farmers Mutual Hail Insurance Company of Iowa Northern Neck Insurance Company Farmers Mutual of Nebraska Ohio Mutual Insurance Group Florida Farm Bureau Insurance Companies Old American County Mutual Fire Insurance Funding associations Frankenmuth Insurance Old American Indemnity Company American Insurance Association Gainsco Insurance Oregon Mutual Insurance National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies GEICO Group Pekin Insurance Property Casualty Insurers Association of America

5 Crash Testing 101

6 IIHS crashworthiness tests Front moderate overlap, beginning 1995 Side impact, beginning 2003 Rear crash (whiplash mitigation), beginning 2004 Roof strength, beginning

7 Crash protection ratings by model year Improvements: Beginning in % 100% 80% 80% 60% 60% 40% 20% 0% Frontal poor marginal acceptable good % 20% 0% Side poor marginal acceptable good % 100% 80% 80% 60% 60% 40% 20% Rear poor marginal acceptable good 40% 20% Roof poor marginal acceptable good 0% %

8 50 th Anniversary

9 40 mph frontal offset crash test 1959 Chevrolet Bel Air and 2009 Chevrolet Malibu

10 1959 Chevrolet Bel Air and 2009 Chevrolet Malibu

11 Small overlap frontal

12 Definition of small overlap Majority of loading outside longitudinal structures frame rail largely undamaged

13 Overhead video small overlap test

14

15

16 Highway Loss Data Institute

17 HLDI data providers have 84% share of PPA 21st Century Insurance Liberty Mutual Insurance Company Alfa Alliance Insurance Corporation Allstate Insurance Group American Family Mutual Insurance American National Family of Companies Amica Mutual Insurance Company Auto Club Group Automobile Insurers Bureau of Massachusetts Chubb & Son COUNTRY Financial CSAA Insurance Group Erie Insurance Group Esurance Farm Bureau Financial Services Farmers Insurance Group of Companies Florida Farm Bureau Insurance Companies MetLife Auto and Home National General Nationwide New Jersey Manufacturers Insurance Group PEMCO Insurance Plymouth Rock Assurance Progressive Corporation Rockingham Group Safeco Insurance Companies SECURA Insurance Sentry Insurance State Farm Insurance Companies Tennessee Farmers Mutual Insurance Company The Travelers Companies USAA Foremost GEICO Corporation The Hartford Kemper Preferred Kentucky Farm Bureau Insurance

18 Other data suppliers

19 Size of HLDI passenger vehicle database Number of unique VINs in files, July 2016 model year number of vehicles ,319, ,613, ,940, ,362, ,099, ,204, ,212, ,798, ,675, ,374,598 total 116,603,327

20 Coverages reported to HLDI Private Passenger Auto Collision Comprehensive Personal injury protection (PIP) Medical payments (MedPay) Physical damage liability (PDL) Bodily injury liability (BI)

21 Collision coverage Covers damage to your vehicle if you are at fault Collision coverage or Collision coverage at fault not at fault/other property damage covered

22 Property damage liability coverage Covers damage you cause to other people s vehicles and property Property Damage Liability or Property Damage Liability at fault not at fault/other property damage covered

23 Comprehensive coverage Covers theft and damage from reasons other than crashes

24 Medical payment coverage Covers injuries to you and your passengers if you are at fault in states with traditional tort systems Medical Payment Bodily Injury Liability at-fault driver/passengers not at-fault driver/passengers injuries covered

25 Bodily injury liability coverage Covers injuries you cause to people in other vehicles in states with traditional tort systems Medical Payment Bodily Injury Liability at-fault driver/passengers not at-fault driver/passengers injuries covered

26 Personal injury protection coverage Covers injuries up to a specified amount, regardless of who is at fault, in states with no-fault systems Personal Injury Protection Personal Injury Protection at-fault driver/passengers not at-fault driver/passengers injuries covered

27 Crash avoidance systems

28

29

30 Electronic Stability Control: The first crash avoidance success

31 What is Electronic Stability Control (ESC)? ESC is an extension of ABS, which has speed sensors and independent braking for each wheel. Additional sensors monitor how well a vehicle is responding to a driver s input.

32 Effects on crash risk Percent change in crash rates for vehicles with standard ESC vs. optional or no ESC, updated May all crashes fatal injury all crashes multiple-vehicle single-vehicle

33 Relative overall collision losses Before and after standard ESC, April before after luxury cars sports cars SUVs

34 New vehicle series with electronic stability control By model year 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% standard optional not available

35 Registered vehicles with electronic stability control By calendar year 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% standard optional not available

36 Registered vehicles with available electronic stability control, actual and predicted By calendar year 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% predicted actual 0%

37 Forward collision warning

38

39 Changes in physical damage claim frequency with front crash prevention systems 20% low speed warning only warning with autobrake 10% 0% -10% -20% PDL -30% Volvo City Safety Honda Accord camera (with LDW) Honda Accord radar (with LDW + ACC) collision Mercedes Volvo Acura Mercedes Subaru (with LDW) Volvo (with LDW)

40 Changes in injury claim frequency with front crash prevention systems 80% 40% low speed warning only warning with autobrake 0% -40% -80% 30% 20% 10% 0% -10% -20% -30% Volvo City Safety Volvo City Safety Honda Accord Honda Accord (includes LDW) Touring Honda Accord camera (with LDW) Honda Accord radar (with LDW + ACC) bodily injury liability Mercedes Volvo Acura Mercedes Subaru Volvo (includes LDW) low speed warning only warning with autobrake MedPay PIP Mercedes Volvo Acura Mercedes Subaru Volvo (includes LDW)

41 Front crash prevention systems Change in collision claim severity $1,500 low speed warning only warning with autobrake $1,000 $500 $0 -$500 -$1,000 Volvo City Safety Honda Honda Accord Accord camera (with radar (with LDW) LDW & ACC) Mercedes Volvo Acura Mercedes Subaru (with LDW) Volvo (with LDW)

42 Honda Accord forward collision warning Camera vs. radar available on trims other than Touring change in collision claim severity -$145 standard on Touring trim change in collision claim severity $522

43 Front crash prevention systems Change in collision overall losses $150 low speed warning only warning with autobrake $100 $50 $0 -$50 -$100 Volvo City Safety Honda Honda Accord Accord camera (with radar (with LDW) LDW & ACC) Mercedes Volvo Acura Mercedes Subaru (with LDW) Volvo (with LDW)

44 Adaptive headlights

45

46 Adaptive headlights Change in claim frequency 12% 8% 4% 0% -4% -8% -12% -16% PDL collision -20% Acura Mazda Mercedes Volvo

47 Adaptive headlights Change in claim frequency 10% Bodily injury liability 0% -10% -20% 0% Acura Mazda Mercedes Volvo -10% -20% -30% -40% MedPay and PIP (1 st party injuries) MedPay PIP Acura Mazda Mercedes Volvo

48 Adaptive headlights Change in collision claim severity $1,000 $500 $0 -$500 -$1,000 Acura Mazda Mercedes Volvo

49 Adaptive headlights Change in collision overall losses $100 $50 $0 -$50 -$100 Acura Mazda Mercedes Volvo

50 Lane departure warning

51

52 Lane departure warning systems Change in claim frequency 40% 30% PDL collision 20% 10% 0% -10% -20% -30% Mercedes Buick (& Blindspot) Honda Accord camera (& FCW) Honda Accord radar (& FCW/ACC) Subaru (& FCW/AEB) Volvo (& FCW/AEB)

53 Lane departure warning systems Change in claim frequency 0% -20% -40% 120% 80% bodily injury liability Mercedes Buick Honda Accord camera (w/fcw) Honda Accord radar (w/fcw & ACC) Subaru (w/ FCW/AEB) MedPay PIP Volvo 40% 0% -40% Mercedes Buick (& Blindspot) Honda Accord camera (& FCW) Honda Accord radar (& FCW ACC) Subaru (& FCW AEB) Volvo (& FCW AEB)

54 What s next for vehicle safety?

55 Insurance claim frequency changes for various crash avoidance systems Pooled estimates across vehicle models percentage change Collision PDL BIL forward collision warning FCW with autobrake adaptive headlights lane departure warning rear camera side view assist (blind spot)

56 Calendar year features reach 95% of registered vehicles with and without hypothetical mandate 2050 without mandate hypothetical 2016 mandate front crash prevention lane departure warning adaptive headlights blind spot warning rear camera* rear parking sensors * rear camera mandate May 1, 2018

57 Twenty automakers have committed to make AEB a standard feature by September 2022 Represent > 99 percent of U.S. market

58 Predicted counts of registered vehicles equipped with front crash prevention With 2022 voluntary commitment 100% 80% 80% in % 40% 50% in % 0%

59 Front crash prevention testing and rating

60

61 IIHS front crash prevention system ratings Points awarded based on autobraking speed reduction 12 mph test 25 mph test speed reduction (mph) points speed reduction (mph) points less than 5 0 less than to to or more 2 10 to or more 3

62 Front crash prevention ratings vehicles without forward collision warning or autobrake; or vehicles equipped with a system that doesn t meet NHTSA or IIHS criteria vehicles earning 1 point for forward collision warning or 1 point in either 12 or 25 mph test vehicles with autobrake that achieve 2-4 points for forward collision warning and/or performance in autobraking tests vehicles with autobrake that achieve 5-6 points for forward collision warning and/or performance in autobraking tests

63

64 Front crash prevention ratings models (as of March 2016) Not qualified/not available Basic Advanced Superior 51

65 Effect of weather on AEB performance

66 February 17, 2015

67 Vehicles 2014 Infiniti Q Subaru Legacy 2014 Volvo S80 speed reduction sensors radar stereo camera radar, mono camera, LIDAR 12 mph 12 mph 12 mph 12 mph 25 mph 24 mph 25 mph 13 mph rating

68 All vehicles tested at 12 mph

69 2014 Infiniti Q50 tested at 25 mph

70 2015 Subaru Legacy tested at 25 mph

71 2014 Volvo S80 tested at 25 mph

72 Speed reductions (mph) no snow snow Infiniti Q50 Subaru Legacy Volvo S80 Infiniti Q50 Subaru Legacy Volvo S80 12 mph 25 mph

73 Warning times when traveling at 12 mph 2014 Infiniti Q50 Warning 33 ft. or 1.8 secs Subaru Legacy Warning 35 ft. or 1.9 secs Volvo S80 Warning 34 ft. or 1.9 secs.

74 Braking times when traveling at 12 mph 2014 Infiniti Q50 Brake 24 ft. or 1.3 secs Subaru Legacy Brake 18 ft. or 0.9 secs Volvo S80 Brake 13 ft. or 0.7 secs.

75 Warning times when traveling at 25 mph 2014 Infiniti Q50 Warning 78 ft. or 2.2 secs Subaru Legacy Warning 98 ft. or 2.7 secs Volvo S80 Warning 91 ft. or 2.5 secs.

76 Braking times when traveling at 25 mph 2014 Infiniti Q50 Brake 59 ft. or 1.7 secs Subaru Legacy Brake 45 ft. or 1.3 secs Volvo S80 Brake 26 ft. or 0.7 secs.

77 Conclusions Systems offered by manufacturers use different technology Radar, camera, LIDAR, etc. Some systems have similarities These 3 vehicles had similar warning times Systems also have differences Brake activation times and brake levels vary Differences can lead to different performance in adverse weather

78 TOP SAFETY PICK

79 Requirements for 2016 TOP SAFETY PICK awards Good rating in moderate overlap front, small overlap front, side, roof strength and head restraint tests & Basic rating for front crash prevention meet TOP SAFETY PICK criteria & Advanced or Superior rating for front crash prevention

80

81

82 Advanced lighting testing and rating

83 Motivation for headlight evaluation program 16,768 annual crash deaths in dark/dawn/dusk light conditions (2013 FARS) HLDI analyses point to benefits for curve-adaptive headlights (2012 HLDI analyses of Mazda, Acura, Mercedes, Volvo claims) Human factors experiments have established link between detection performance and improved lighting FMVSS 108 produces wide range of on-road visibility Large variation in allowable intensity Performance is not measured when installed, so factors like lamp height and spread are not captured Aim is not regulated

84 Dynamic headlight test setup Vehicle approaches: 500 ft. radius left and right curves at 40 mph 800 ft. radius left and right curves at 50 mph Straightaway at 40 mph Record illuminance readings for: Visibility edges of road at 10 in. above ground Glare center of oncoming lane (3 ft. 7 in.) Light sensor array straightaway 500 ft. radius direction of travel 800 ft. radius

85 Lux on R edge of road Sample data: straightaway 3 different approaches for same vehicle Visibility metric: distance at which 5 lux illumination is reached Distance (m)

86 2016 Volvo S Mazda Infiniti Q Nissan Altima 2016 Subaru Legacy 2016 Subaru Legacy 2016 Nissan Maxima 2016 Acura TLX 2015 Cadillac ATS 2016 Lincoln MKZ 2016 Honda Accord 2015 Chrysler Mercedes CLA Subaru Outback 2016 Subaru Legacy 2016 Honda Accord 2016 Subaru Legacy 2016 Subaru Outback 2016 Mazda Mercedes C Infiniti Q Mercedes C Chevrolet Malibu 2016 Nissan Maxima 2015 Cadillac ATS 2016 Ford Fusion 2015 Chevrolet Malibu 2015 Chevrolet Malibu 2016 Volvo S Nissan Altima 2015 Chrysler Buick Verano 2016 Mercedes C Mercedes CLA250 5 lux distance (ft) LED HID HID HID LED LED HID LED Halogen HID HID Halogen Halogen LED Halogen Halogen Halogen LED LED LED HID Halogen Halogen Halogen Halogen Halogen Halogen Halogen Halogen Halogen Halogen Halogen LED HID Initial midsize car results: low beam 4 curve average 250 Curve-adaptive Non-adaptive

87 2016 Volvo S Mazda Infiniti Q Nissan Altima 2016 Subaru Legacy 2016 Subaru Legacy 2016 Nissan Maxima 2016 Acura TLX 2015 Cadillac ATS 2016 Lincoln MKZ 2016 Honda Accord 2015 Chrysler Mercedes CLA Subaru Outback 2016 Subaru Legacy 2016 Honda Accord 2016 Subaru Legacy 2016 Subaru Outback 2016 Mazda Mercedes C Infiniti Q Mercedes C Chevrolet Malibu 2016 Nissan Maxima 2015 Cadillac ATS 2016 Ford Fusion 2015 Chevrolet Malibu 2015 Chevrolet Malibu 2016 Volvo S Nissan Altima 2015 Chrysler Buick Verano 2016 Mercedes C Mercedes CLA250 5 lux distance (ft) Initial midsize car results: low beam straightaway 350 Left side of road Right side of road

88 Differences in headlight illumination Deer is 270 feet from front of car; approximate reach of Accord s 5 lux Honda Accord Mercedes C300

89 Translating test results to ratings Rating based on: Straightaway and curve visibility (weighting roughly 60/40) Low and high beams (weighting roughly 75/25) Acceptable glare Bonus given for automatic high beams ( high beam assist ) Results of all tests are combined into an overall demerit score with rating boundaries applied

90 Midsize car results

91 More information and links to our YouTube channel and Twitter feed at iihs.org Kay Wakeman Research Analyst iihs.org