Independent Research
- 'Accident Prevention Systems for Lorries', Final Report from the Dutch Ministry of Transport
- 'Forward Collision Accidents', an Insurance Company Perspective, AXA Winterthur
- 'Roads to the Future: The Assisted Driver’, Report from the Dutch Ministry of Transport
- 'Benefit-Cost Analyses of Onboard Safety Systems', Report from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
The Dutch Ministry of Transport has recently released the TNO Final Report, which contains the findings of a large-scale field operational test of active driver assistance systems, so called accident prevention systems (APS), for lorries.
This large-scale study involved more than 2,400 lorries supplied by 123 companies and lasted 8 months. During this time a total of around 77 million kilometers of driving behavior were measured during normal daily driving on Dutch motorways.
"A forward collision warning system will have a high potential in preventing rear end accidents."
"Most often the cause of such accidents is inattention."
"Most drivers are positive or neutral about making AWS obligatory." (pp. 26, Sec. 6.3.1)
"In the second measurement, more drivers indicate that AWS simplifies the task of driving in comparison with the first measurement. In that measurement, they also recommend the system more empathically within their own environment." (pp. 26, Sec. 6.3.1)
"In the second measurement, drivers indicate that they maintain a greater following distance when using HMW" (pp. 27)
"Most of them always have AWS switched on, irrespective of the type of road or prevailing weather conditions." (pp. 27)
"In general, we can state that users do not enjoy being corrected, but do view the system as an asset." (pp. 27, Sec. 6.3.2)
"LDW and HMW in their own car?
The majority of
participants in the pilot would –
depending on the price – like to have LDW
and HMW installed in their own cars. They refer to an average
price of €500 (with exceptions ranging from
€250 until €5,000)."
(pp. 28)
"The majority of participants in the pilot are satisfied with AWS. They find the system easy to use and believe that driving with both LDW and HMW is conducive to road safety. This is due to the fact that drivers’ adapt their driving behavior (in a positive sense) in order to minimise the number of warnings. Participants also maintain their distance better, use their indicators more often and maintain their direction on the road more effectively. Furthermore, they also find the task of driving to be less demanding overall. Bear in mind though that this is their opinion. " (pp. 28)
Objective studies:
"The LDW system issues a warning every time the vehicle crosses a line (desired or undesired) that does not go hand in hand with the use of direction indicators. LDW therefore encourages the use of indicators. 10. Direction indicators are used more often and more effectively." (pp. 46)
"In addition to more effective use of direction indicators, it is likely that drivers will maintain a greater distance from line markings due to the LDW system. This is reflected in both SDLP and the average position of the vehicle in relation to the middle of the lane. " (pp. 46)
"Table 8.7 displays the result of this analysis. We can conclude from the table, for example, that ACC can prevent a maximum of 48.8% of accidents on through-roads (on road sections). For LDW, this is 4.6%. Together, ACC and LDW reduce the number of accidents on through- roads by a maximum of 53.4%. This is 6.7% of the total number of accidents on road sections and 3.4% of the total number of accidents (road sections and intersections combined). " (pp. 51)
"On the basis of changes in the use of direction indicators (increase of roughly 20%, depending on the road type) and the number of unintentional line crossings (also 20% approximately), we discover an effectiveness of 20% for LDW. " (pp. 95)
Stay In Touch
- Email:
- enquiry@c2sec.com.sg
- Phone:
- 92302010