Vehicle Safety Communications: Protocols, Security, and Privacy

By Tao Zhang and Luca Delgrossi

Provides an up-to-date, in-depth look at the current research, design, and implementation of cooperative vehicle safety communication protocols and technology

Improving traffic safety has been a top concern for transportation agencies around the world and the focus of heavy research and development efforts sponsored by both governments and private industries. Cooperative vehicle systems—which use sensors and wireless technologies to reduce traffic accidents—can play a major role in making the world's roads safer.

Vehicle Safety Communications: Protocols, Security, and Privacy describes fundamental issues in cooperative vehicle safety and recent advances in technologies for enabling cooperative vehicle safety. It gives an overview of traditional vehicle safety issues, the evolution of vehicle safety technologies, and the need for cooperative systems where vehicles work together to reduce the number of crashes or mitigate damage when crashes become unavoidable.

Authored by two top industry professionals, the book:

• Summarizes the history and current status of 5.9 GHz Dedicated Short Range Communications (DSRC) technology and standardization, discussing key issues in applying DSRC to support cooperative vehicle safety
• Features an in-depth overview of on-board equipment (OBE) and roadside equipment (RSE) by describing sample designs to illustrate the key issues and potential solutions
• Takes on security and privacy protection requirements and challenges, including how to design privacy-preserving digital certificate management systems and how to evict misbehaving vehicles
• Includes coverage of vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I) communications like intersection collision avoidance applications and vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) communications like extended electronic brake lights and intersection movement assist

Vehicle Safety Communications is ideal for anyone working in the areas of—or studying—cooperative vehicle safety and vehicle communications.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Wiley
• Release date: Sep 4, 2012
• ISBN: 9781118452196

Tao Zhang

Tao Zhang is a Senior Hardware Engineer at Argo AI, where he is working on the hardware development for Argo AI’s autonomous driving technologies. Prior to Argo AI, Tao was with Google. He was a hardware engineer at Google Fiber, designing next generation tunable optical transceivers, and a researcher at Google AI, working on the edge-TPU product development and doing research on machine learning hardware. Tao has experience on both transistor-level and board-level circuit/hardware designs. Before joining Google, he spent 10 years at several companies and institutions, including VIA technologies, LSI corporation and CERN, working on Integrated Circuit Design and Verification. His research interests are high-speed circuit design and machine learning hardwares.

Book preview

1

TRAFFIC SAFETY

1.1 TRAFFIC SAFETY FACTS

Six million crashes involving over 10 million motor vehicles occur on average every year in the United States. In 2009, an estimated 5,505,000 motor vehicle crashes occurred, leading to 33,808 fatalities and 2,217,000 injured people, averaging 93 deaths every day or one every 16 minutes [NHTS11]. Vehicular accidents are the leading cause of death for people between the ages of 3 and 34 in the United States [NHTS09]. These figures account only for police-reported crashes and therefore the actual number of motor vehicle crashes is likely even higher.

A significant percentage of accidents occur at road intersections. In 2007, there were an estimated 2,392,061 intersection crashes, accounting for 39.7% of all crashes in the United States [FHWA09]. Of these accidents, 8061 were fatal and 1,711,000 caused injuries. It has been estimated that, on average, 250,000 accidents every year involve vehicles running a red light and colliding with another vehicle crossing the intersection from a lateral direction [NHTS07].

A recent study estimates the costs of crashes for metropolitan areas of different sizes and populations in the United States [Kitt10]. According to this study, the average annual costs of crashes per person in small, large, and very large metropolitan areas are $1946, $1579, and $1392, respectively. In addition to lost lives, motor vehicle crashes place a heavy economic burden on the society, including increased costs of medical care, disability, insurance, and property damage. In 2000, the annual economic cost to society due to motor vehicle crashes was estimated at around $230 billion in the United States, roughly equivalent to 2.3% of the country’s gross domestic product (GDP) in the same year [NHTS02].

Motor vehicle crashes significantly affect traffic mobility as well. The U.S. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) estimated that approximately 25% of traffic slowdowns are related to crashes and other traffic incidents. The estimated average annual costs of traffic congestion per person in small, large, and very large metropolitan areas in the United States are $214, $407, and $575, respectively [Kitt10].

1.1.1 Fatalities

Based on historical data published by the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and FHWA, motor vehicle accidents have been responsible for over 3,300,000 fatalities in the United States alone since 1899 [NHTS10]. As the automobile came into greater use, the fatalities increased sharply each year from 1899 to 1931. After remaining stable for a few decades, the annual death rate rose again until peaking at 53,543 in 1969 (Figure 1.1). Since then, the annual number of fatalities has held fairly steady, or even decreased somewhat, due to significant advances in automotive safety measures. With an increasingly mobile society, reducing traffic fatality has become a more difficult task to achieve.

Figure 1.1. Total annual fatalities in the United States

web_c01f001

The number of fatalities alone does not paint a complete picture of automotive safety. Since 1899, market penetration of automobiles has continued to increase significantly and the annual number of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) has exploded from 100 million in 1900 to over 3 trillion by 2007, according to FHWA statistics [FHWA07]. The number of fatalities per VMT has actually decreased. In 1921, the United States saw 24 fatalities per 100 million VMT, which were more than 21 times the record low 1.13 deaths per 100 million VMT in 2009.

Broader adoption of effective automotive safety systems, along with improved safety legislation and increased driver education efforts, has powered the reduction of fatalities and injuries despite the growing number of vehicles on the road and the distances traveled. As people continue to travel more, innovations become increasingly crucial to minimize traffic fatality (Figure 1.2).

Figure 1.2. Annual fatality rate per 100 million VMT in the United States

web_c01f002

1.1.2 Leading Causes of Crashes

According to NHTSA, the three most common causes of vehicle crashes are: control loss without prior vehicle action, lead vehicle stopped, and road edge departure without prior vehicle maneuver. In 2004, crashes under these circumstances accounted for an estimated 1 million lost functional years and $40 billion in direct economic costs in the United States [NHTS07].

Understanding the events that lead up to a motor vehicle crash is crucial to prevent future crashes. In 2008, the U.S. Congress authorized NHTSA to conduct a National Motor Vehicle Crash Causation Survey [NHTS08]. A representative sample of crashes from 2005 to 2007 was investigated. During the data collection process, the research team was granted timely permissions by local law enforcement and emergency responders to be on the crash scenes. Arriving on the scene before the crash was cleared by law enforcement gave the researchers access to relatively undisturbed information pertaining to the crashes and factors which led to these crashes. It allowed the researchers to discuss the circumstances of the crash with the drivers, passengers, and witnesses while the event was still fresh in their minds. The researchers were able to immediately and accurately reconcile the physical evidence with witness descriptions. Using this and other data, the researchers were able to assess the critical events that preceded the crash, the reasons for this event, and other factors that may have played contributing roles.

Ninety-five percent (95%) of the time, driver error was the critical reason for an accident. Driver errors can be classified into several categories: recognition, decision, performance, nonperformance, and other or unknown driver errors:

Recognition errors accounted for 40.6% of all accidents due to driver error. Inadequate surveillance and driver distraction played a significant role in reorganization errors, accounting for 20.3% and 10.7% of driver error accidents, respectively.

Decision errors accounted for 34% of all driver error accidents. The causes for decision errors were more numerous and varied than for recognition errors. Fast speeds were the most significant, being identified as a critical reason for 13.3% of crashes due to driver error.

Performance errors constituted for 10.3% of all driver error crashes. The primary causes of performance errors are overcompensation and poor directional control. Noticeably, fatigued drivers were twice as likely as nonfatigued drivers to make performance errors.

Miscellaneous nonperformance errors accounted for 7.1% of all driver error crashes. These included sleeping or having medical emergencies such as heart attacks while driving.

Unknown driver errors accounted for the remaining 7.9% of all driver error crashes.

To prevent vehicle crashes, it is also important to understand prominent precrash events. The study has found that 36.2% of all accidents occurred while a vehicle was turning at or crossing an intersection. Traveling off the edge of the road is the second most frequent precrash event, accounting for 22.2% of all crashes. Traveling over the lane line constituted the critical precrash event for 10.8% of all collisions. A stopped vehicle served as the critical precrash event in 12.2% of all cases. Prevention and mitigation of these common causes of accidents therefore take top priority in safety research.

1.1.3 Current Trends

Figure 1.3 shows traffic safety statistics in the United States between 1988 and 2008, including the number of registered vehicles, VMT, injuries, and fatalities. In this chart, each value is expressed as relative to the correspondent value for year 1990. Fatalities and injuries, although declined in recent years, have remained at high levels and the declines have been slow. This raises a concern that we are reaching the point where existing vehicle safety systems are not going to sustain the same rates of reduction in fatalities and injuries as they have in the past. The continuous rise in the number of vehicles on the road and in VMT calls for continuing innovations in vehicle traffic safety technologies.

Figure 1.3. Traffic safety statistics in the United States (1988–2008)

c01f003

1.2 EUROPEAN UNION

Countries in the European Union have been following a similar trend of increasing automotive safety as shown in Figure 1.4.

Figure 1.4. Annual fatalities in Germany, United Kingdom, and France (2000–2008)

c01f004

Germany has seen a significant long-term decline in fatalities, with a 79% reduction from 21,332 fatalities in 1970 to only 4477 fatalities in 2008. In addition, the annual number of crashes that caused injuries decreased from 414,362 to 320,614 in the same time period, an improvement of 23%. Remarkably, these declines in fatalities and injuries have been accomplished while the number of vehicles on the road nearly tripled [IRTA10]. These improvements were made possible by a combination of advances in safety technology, a highly developed road infrastructure, an advanced legal framework, and a highly sophisticated penalty point system. Stringent laws concerning intoxicated driving, speeding, and seat belt usage have all contributed to the long-term reductions in accidents and fatalities as well.

Traffic fatalities have also declined significantly in the United Kingdom. Between 1970 and 2008, the annual number of fatalities declined by 66% and the annual number of injury crashes declined by 35%, while the average distance traveled increased by 10% [IRTA10]. These percentages represent a decline from 7771 fatalities in 1970 to 2645 fatalities in 2008 and from 272,765 injury crashes in 1970 to 176,723 in 2008. The United Kingdom’s traffic fatality rate is currently the lowest in the European Union, with 4.3 fatalities per 100,000 people [IRTA10]. As with Germany, the United Kingdom’s improved traffic safety has largely been achieved through advances in safety technology, investments in road infrastructures, and enforcement efforts designed to curb excessive speeding and intoxicated driving. The United Kingdom has likewise placed a significant emphasis on educational programs to raise awareness of high-risk driving behaviors and the sanctions imposed for such behaviors.

France has also seen a significant long-term decline in the overall traffic fatality rate. Between 1970 and 2008, the number of fatalities decreased by 74% (from 16,445 in 1970 to 4275 in 2008) and the number of injury crashes by 68% (from 235,109 in 1970 to 74,487 in 2008) while the number of vehicles on the road tripled. The numbers are even more impressive when you consider the decline in fatalities per billion vehicle-kilometers, which fell from 90.36 in 1970 to a mere 8.1 in 2008, for a total improvement of 91% over that time period [IRTA10]. Further improvements continue to be made. Since 2002, France has implemented a focused road safety policy which includes effective measures regarding speed management, intoxicated driving, seat belt use, and strengthening of the demerit point system, all of which continue to impact traffic safety positively.

As in the United States, the reductions in traffic fatalities and injuries in the European Union countries have slowed down over the recent years (Figure 1.4), which suggests similar diminishing returns achievable through traditional vehicle safety technologies and calls for new thinking and innovation in vehicle safety technologies.

1.3 JAPAN

During the 1960s, the rapid increase in automobile traffic outpaced road constructions in Japan. The resulting increase in motor vehicle accidents became a public concern, prompting the government to take measures to reduce vehicular crashes. In 1970, following enactment of the Traffic Safety Policies Law, the Central Committee on Traffic Safety Measures was established and the first Fundamental Safety Program was formulated. Since 1971, the Central Committee on Traffic Safety Measures has continued to produce 5-year Fundamental Traffic Safety Programs which set forth the fundamental principles and goals for comprehensive and long-term measures for the safety of land, maritime, and air transport based on the Traffic Safety Policies Law.

A cornerstone of Japan’s efforts to improve traffic safety has been a significant investment in road infrastructure enhancement. Safer roads have been achieved through improvements in expressways, bypasses, beltways, intersections, road lighting, road signs, and traffic signals. Safety measures were also enacted for pedestrians, including installation of sidewalks, development of shared pedestrian and bicycle paths, and addition of pedestrian overpasses and underpasses. As a result, pedestrian fatalities have decreased sharply, from 2794 in 1996 to 1943 in 2007, an improvement of approximately 31% [IATS08].

Japan’s traffic fatalities have reduced significantly since the adoption of the first Fundamental Traffic Safety Program. Between 1970 and 2008, the annual number of fatalities decreased by 72% even though the number of injury crashes increased by 7% [IRTA10]. The annual number of fatalities in proportion to distance traveled decreased over that same time span by a remarkable 91% [IATS08]. The declining fatality rate has been sustained in recent years, despite a threefold increase in the numbers of vehicles and VMT. The fatality rate continues to decline as advancements continue to be made in automotive safety, decreasing by approximately 42% between 2000 and 2008 [IRTA10]. This is particularly remarkable and difficult to sustain due to the very high population density in Japan.

1.4 DEVELOPING COUNTRIES

While developed countries have been benefiting from declining traffic fatality rates, this has not been the case in many developing countries such as China and India. Developing countries currently account for 90% of the disability-adjusted life years lost to traffic injuries and deaths worldwide. This problem continues to escalate especially in Asia. It is projected that by 2020, vehicular deaths will increase by 80% in developing countries [KoCr03]. This includes fatality rate increases of almost 92% in China and 147% in India. Injuries due to vehicular crashes are the root cause of a significant portion of medical care sought in developing countries, accounting for up to one-third of the acute patient cases in many hospitals and between 30% and 86% of trauma admissions [OdGZ97]. Besides the toll on human lives, the economic cost of vehicular crashes in developing countries has been estimated at around US$65 billion, a heavy burden on the economy and a financial drain on national health-care systems [PSSM04].

A significant reason that developing countries have not experienced the same reduction in fatality rates as developed nations is that their road infrastructures are unable to keep pace with the sharp increases in the number of vehicles on the roads. This results in unsafe driving conditions and massive traffic congestions. Poor traffic conditions contribute to the prevalent fatalities of vulnerable road users such as pedestrians, bicyclists, and people using carts, rickshaws, mopeds, and scooters. This is in contrast to developed countries, where drivers and passengers are the primary victims [PSSM04]. Vehicles in developing countries are also significantly more likely to be involved in fatal crashes, 200-fold more likely in some cases, than in more developed countries [AATJ10].

Therefore, developing innovative automotive safety technologies is of utmost importance for the world as a whole, not merely for developed countries.

To reduce fatalities and injuries despite the rising number of vehicles and VMT, we must continue to discover new ways to prevent motor vehicle crashes and mitigate their damages.

REFERENCES

[AATJ10] G. Jacobs, A. Aeron-Thomas, and A. Astrop: Estimating Global Road Fatalities, Department for International Development (DFID), ISSN 0968-4107, Transport Research Laboratory, Report 445, 2000.

[FHWA07] Federal Highway Administration: Highway Statistics 2007: Public Road Mileage, Lane Miles, and VMT 1900-2007, Table VMT-421, 2011.

[FHWA09] Federal Highway Administration: The National Intersection Problem, FHWA-SA-10-005, 2009.

[IATS08] International Association of Traffic and Safety Sciences: Statistics 2007: Road Accidents Japan, Traffic Bureau, National Police Agency, 2008.

[IRTA10] International Traffic Safety Data and Analysis Group (IRTAD): Annual Report 2009, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) International Transport Forum (ITF), 2010.

[Kitt10] M. J. Kittelson: The Economic Impact of Traffic Crashes, Georgia Institute of Technology, 2010.

[KoCr03] E. Kopits and M. Cropper: Traffic Fatalities and Economic Growth, World Bank Development Research Group, Infrastructure and Environment, Policy Research Working Paper 3035, 2003.

[NHTS02] National Highway Traffic Safety Administration: The Economic Impact of Motor Vehicle Crashes, 2000, DOT HS 809 446, 2002.

[NHTS07] National Highway Traffic Safety Administration: Pre-Crash Scenario Typology for Crash Avoidance Research, DOT HS 810 767, 2007.

[NHTS08] National Highway Traffic Safety Administration: Motor Vehicle Traffic Crashes as a Leading Cause of Death in the United States, DOT HS 810 936, 2008.

[NHTS09] National Highway Traffic Safety Administration: Traffic Safety Facts 2008, DOT HS 811 170, 2009.

[NHTS10] National Highway Traffic Safety Administration: An Analysis of the Significant Decline in Motor Vehicle Crashes in 2008, DOT HS 811 346, 2010.

[NHTS11] National Highway Traffic Safety Administration: Traffic Safety Facts 2009, DOT HS 811 402, 2011.

[OdGZ97] W. Odero, P. Garner, and A. Zwi: Road Traffic Injuries in Developing Countries: A Comprehensive Review of Epidemiological Studies, Tropical Medicine and International Health, vol. 2, pp. 445–460, 1997.

[PSSM04] M. Peden, R. Scurfield, D. Sleet, D. Mohan, A. Hyder, E. Jarawan, and C. Mathers: World Report on Road Traffic Injury Prevention, World Health Organization, United Nations, Geneva, Switzerland, 2004.

2

AUTOMOTIVE SAFETY EVOLUTION

2.1 PASSIVE SAFETY

Passive safety features are built into vehicles to minimize driver and passenger harm during a crash. Groundbreaking passive safety features include seat belts and air bags. They have been playing a crucial role in reducing traffic fatalities and have become integral—and in many countries mandatory—features in modern vehicles. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reports that 322,409 lives have been saved in the United States between 1975 and 2008 through the use of child restraints, seat belts, air bags, and motorcycle helmets alone [NHTS09a].

2.1.1 Safety Cage and the Birth of Passive Safety

The introduction of the first safety cage, invented by Mercedes-Benz engineer Béla Barényi shortly after World War II, marked the birth of passive safety. This safety cage consisted of a strong central passenger cell flexibly connected to deformable crash cells at the front and rear, the precursor of the modern rigid passenger cell with front and rear crumple zones. The crash cells, and later the crumple zones, were specifically designed to deform in an accident, thus absorbing the kinetic energy of a collision.

In 1951, Mercedes-Benz was granted a patent on the design of a rigid passenger cell enclosed by crumple zones at the front and rear. This concept was first put to use on production vehicles in 1959 and has since become an industry-wide standard. Barényi’s groundbreaking work spurred a long list of innovations that led to a dramatic improvement of passenger safety.

2.1.2 Seat Belts

The first patent for an automotive seat belt was issued in 1885. The first three-point seat belt, however, was patented and developed to its modern form many years later, in 1951, by Volvo engineer Nils Bohlin. By1965, all 50 states in the United States had passed laws requiring seat belts in the front seats of automobiles. The first federal seat belt law took effect a few years later on January 1, 1968, and required that all vehicles (except buses) be fitted with seat belts in all designated seating positions. By 1975, most of the developed world had followed suit, with laws requiring automakers to include seat belts for every seat in a car.

Initially, seat belt usage was not compulsory. In 1984, New York became the first state to pass a law which required vehicle occupants to wear seat belts. Currently, in the United States, 30 states have primary laws (i.e., a police officer may stop and ticket a driver for not wearing a seat belt), 19 states have secondary laws (i.e., a police officer may only stop or cite a driver for seat belt violation if the driver committed another primary violation, such as speeding or running a red light), and only New Hampshire does not have a law requiring seat belt usage for adults.

Due to increased legislation and safety awareness, observed national seat belt usage rates in front seats has climbed from 14% in 1983 to 83% in 2008 [IRTA10]. This has contributed significantly to an overall decline in vehicular fatalities in the United States and throughout the developed world. According to NHTSA, seat belts were responsible for saving 255,115 lives from 1975 to 2008 [NHTS09a], making it the single most effective passive safety system ever conceived, when compared with others whose impact can be similarly quantified.

2.1.3 Air Bags

The air bag is another passive safety device responsible for saving thousands of lives every year. By inflating rapidly upon collision, the air bag acts as a restraint system, preventing occupants from striking interior objects. The first air bag was designed in the early 1950s. However, it was not until the 1970s that air bags began to be featured in passenger cars in the United States.

According to NHTSA, air bags have prevented the deaths of over 27,000 people from 1995 to 2008 [NHTS09a]. In terms of quantifiable effectiveness in reducing fatalities, only the seat belt surpasses the air bag in the number of lives saved. In conjunction with each other, it is estimated that air bags and seat belts reduce one’s fatality risk by as much as 61% [NHTS09b].

Many modern air bags utilize sensors to gather information such as the weight and seating position of the occupant and whether seat belts are in use. In the event of a collision, this information can help determine the optimal force for air bag deployment. This adaptive force of deployment further increases the air bag’s effectiveness by reducing the likelihood of injury from the air bag itself.

Figure 2.1 shows passive safety systems in action. The passenger cell acts as a high-strength safety cage that protects the occupants in the event of an offset or collision. This protection is further enhanced by an integrated air bag and seat-belt system.

Figure 2.1. Passive safety systems.

Courtesy of Daimler AG

web_c02f001

2.2 ACTIVE SAFETY

While passive safety systems have proven to be invaluable assets in automotive safety, they seem to have reached their potentials. Over time it has become evident that further significant advances in vehicle safety could be achieved through electronic systems and active safety systems. Unlike passive safety systems that reduce harm during a collision, active safety systems aim to prevent vehicle crashes from occurring in the first place and to minimize the damage when collisions become unavoidable.

2.2.1 Antilock Braking System

The antilock braking system (ABS) prevents the wheels on a motor vehicle from ceasing to rotate during heavy braking, which helps the driver control steering by preventing a skid and allowing the wheels to maintain traction with the road surface. More specifically, ABS automatically changes the brake fluid pressure at each wheel to maintain optimal brake performance while not locking up the wheels. An electronic control unit (ECU) regulates the brake fluid pressure in response to changing road conditions or impending wheel lockup. This reduces the required stopping distance and improves driver’s control during emergency braking on wet and slippery roads.

A typical ABS includes four wheel speed sensors, hydraulic valves within the brake hydraulics system, and an ECU. The ECU monitors the rotation speed of each wheel at all times, looking for signs of an impending wheel lock, such as when a wheel rotates significantly slower than the others. When a potentially dangerous slowdown of rotation is detected, valves are actuated to reduce hydraulic pressure to the brake at the affected wheel, thus reducing the braking force on that wheel and causing it to turn faster. ABS also works in the reverse situation, in which a wheel may be rotating too fast. In this case, brake hydraulic pressure to that wheel is increased so that the braking force is reapplied and the wheel is slowed down.

ABS is a critical component of many other active safety systems in automobiles. For instance, electronic stability control (ESC) systems add steering and gyroscopic elements to ABS to assist the driver in steering maneuvers during dangerous braking situations.

2.2.2 Electronic Stability Control

ESC is a computerized technology that improves a vehicle’s stability by minimizing skids. When ESC detects loss of steering control, it automatically applies the brakes to individual wheels to help steer the vehicle where the driver intends to go, effectively utilizing ABS on individual wheels. ESC is a highly effective active safety system which could prevent one-third of all fatal accidents and reduce rollover risk by as much as 84%, according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) [IIHS06] and NHTSA [NHTS07]. It is such an important technology that NHTSA has mandated that all new vehicles in the United States be equipped with ESC by 2012 [NHTS07]. Also, the combined effects of ABS and ESC result in an estimated 30% reduction in fatal run-off-the-road crashes [NHTS09d].

Figure 2.2 illustrates an example of how ESC works. Without ESC on a curved road (left), the vehicle’s front wheels move outwards. When ESC is engaged (right), it supports the driver’s steering correction through brake intervention mainly at the inner rear wheel.

Figure 2.2. Electronic stability control.

Courtesy of Daimler AG

web_c02f002

Just as ABS forms the foundation of the ESC system, ESC provides a foundation for new advances in active safety systems. The computing technologies required for ESC facilitate the development of further active and passive safety systems in the car, which in turn creates opportunities to address additional causes of vehicular crashes.

2.2.3 Brake Assist

In 1992, research conducted by Mercedes-Benz using their driving simulator in Berlin, Germany, revealed that more than 90% of drivers fail to brake with sufficient force during emergency situations. This discovery stimulated the development of brake assist systems (BASs) to assist the driver during braking maneuvers.

Brake assist technology was initially developed to detect circumstances in which emergency braking is required by measuring the speed with which the brake pedal is pressed. When a panic braking condition is detected, BASs automatically boost braking power to mitigate the driver’s tendency to brake without enough force, thereby reducing the required stopping distance.

In 1996, Mercedes-Benz became the first automotive manufacturer to introduce the BAS, making it standard equipment on all its models in 1998. Other manufacturers, including Volvo and BMW, soon followed suit. Volvo’s Collision Warning with Auto Brake (CWAB) uses radar signals and a camera sensor to detect when a collision is likely and precharges the brakes so that full braking is applied as soon as the driver activates the brakes. The system uses a flashing light and a warning sound to alert the driver, and applies the brakes automatically when a collision becomes unavoidable if the driver has not heeded the warning and activated the brakes himself.

BASs continue to evolve. Today’s vehicles often integrate collision avoidance systems with adaptive cruise control (ACC) systems to significantly reduce rear-end collisions.

2.3 ADVANCED DRIVER ASSISTANCE SYSTEMS

The majority of active safety systems use onboard sensors and actuators to assist the driver or take autonomous actions. Most advanced driver assistance systems provide visual and auditory warnings to the driver in the presence of potential hazards. Some systems can detect potential hazards and also actively avoid them. Furthermore, the combination of different advanced driver assistance systems can result in even more powerful solutions. For instance, ACC can work together with precrash features to create a comprehensive safety system for preventing collisions and mitigating the severity of unavoidable impacts.

Advanced driver assistance systems able to gather information about current road conditions can effectively mitigate the risk of distracted driving, which is becoming an increasingly common problem accounting for 16% of fatal crashes in 2008 and 2009 [NHTS09c] [NHTS10].

2.3.1 Adaptive Cruise Control

ACC, also known as stop-and-go cruise control and other manufacturer-specific names, enhances both comfort and safety. Like traditional cruise control, the ACC system maintains a speed set by the driver. However, ACC also uses forward-sensing radars (or laser scanners as a lower cost alternative) to detect the speed of the vehicle ahead and automatically adjust its speed to maintain a safe following distance. In the absence of obstacles or slower traffic ahead, ACC will operate like traditional cruise control, maintaining the speed set by the driver.

The driver may also specify a following distance. If the ACC system detects a slower-moving vehicle ahead, it will reduce throttle to maintain the following distance specified by the driver and return to the preset speed when the front vehicle either speeds up or moves to a different lane.

ACC systems are capable of slowing the vehicle all the way to a standstill and accelerating it back up to the preset desired speed if the traffic situation permits. Figure 2.3 shows distance keeping as displayed in the Mercedes-Benz S-Class instrument cluster.

Figure 2.3. Adaptive cruise control.

Courtesy of Daimler AG

web_c02f003

2.3.2 Blind Spot Assist

A variety of blind spot detection and assist systems have been implemented in production vehicles since 2005. Methods of detecting vehicles in blind spots evolved from side mirrors to sensor-based systems able to issue visual and audible warnings to the driver when the vehicle is about to enter an occupied lane. Some existing active blind spot assist systems cause the steering wheel or driver’s seat to vibrate when the vehicle is getting too close to another vehicle. Others even take limited steering control to help avoid steering into another car.

In 2009, Volvo introduced a Blind Spot Information System (BLIS), which uses two door-mounted cameras to detect vehicles in blind spots and then visually alert the driver when switching lanes. The Mercedes-Benz Active Blind Spot Assist system uses short-range radar sensors that monitor the areas to the sides and rear of the car on both the left and the right. When another car is in the blind spot zone, the system displays a red warning symbol in the correspondent side mirror. If the driver ignores the warning and activates the turn indicator, the red warning symbol starts to flash and the system emits a sound inside the vehicle. If the driver attempts to change lanes despite the warning, the system activates ESC to apply the brakes to individual wheels to gently pull the vehicle back into its intended lane of travel.

2.3.3 Attention Assist

Drowsiness is a significant cause in road accidents. Approximately 16.5% of fatal crashes involve a drowsy driver, according to the American Automobile Association Foundation [AAAF10]. A field of development in active safety systems is to reduce drowsiness-related accidents with drowsiness detection and attention assist technologies. Some driver alert systems, like those employed by Volvo, make use of cameras to monitor lane-drifting patterns. Other driver alert systems, like those introduced by Toyota, can detect if the driver is becoming sleepy by monitoring the eyelids. A visual or audible alert is then issued to the driver. Depending on the system, the warning may be repeated until drowsy driving behavior stops.

The Mercedes-Benz Attention Assist system, introduced in 2010, uses sensors to monitor steering patterns, braking, acceleration, weather, and road conditions to determine a driver’s alertness. If the system detects driver drowsiness or danger of the driver falling asleep at the wheel, it sounds warning chimes and flashes a coffee cup light icon.

2.3.4 Precrash Systems

Precrash systems are activated immediately before a crash to reduce the severity of the impact. They use onboard sensors to detect when a frontal or rear-end collision is unavoidable and whether brakes ought to be applied. When a crash is determined to be inevitable, precrash systems initiate measures to minimize occupant injury from the impending collision. Depending on the system, various actions may be taken, including precharging the brakes to maximize braking force as soon as the driver applies the brake, inflating seats for extra support, moving seats into an upright position, positioning head rests to minimize whiplash, rolling up the windows, and tensioning seat belts. All of these protective measures take place within less than 2 seconds immediately prior to the collision. Precrash systems of various types and capabilities are available from major automotive original equipment manufacturers (OEMs), and their deployments are expected to increase as their effectiveness continues to be demonstrated.

2.4 COOPERATIVE SAFETY

The many safety innovations introduced over the past 50 years mark the evolution from passive safety systems, which mitigate harmful effects during a crash, to active safety systems, which provide support during normal driving and immediately before a crash. These systems have made today’s vehicles significantly safer and have been a key factor in maintaining and even reducing the number and severity of motor vehicle crashes.

The different phases in which safety systems can be effective with respect to the moment of the collision are represented in Figure 2.4. Systems such as ABS, ESC, and BAS provide driver support in crash avoidance when potential danger has been recognized. Precrash systems take measures to reduce the effects of unavoidable collisions in the short but crucial stage just prior to an accident. Seat belts are instrumental during all types of crashes, but they are especially effective in minor to moderate crashes, in which they can prevent the driver and passengers from sustaining life-threatening injuries as a consequence of being ejected from the vehicle. The prompt deployment of air bags offers protection in moderate to severe crashes. Finally, remote assistance systems can aid in the rescue process after a crash has occurred.

Figure 2.4. Stages in safety system usage

web_c02f004

Most passive safety systems have become commodities and are expected to be in all vehicles. In contrast, active safety systems are still high-end features and key differentiators between automotive OEMs competing to provide top-of-the-line safety to a growing customer base.

Automotive grade autonomous sensors are revolutionizing vehicular safety. Their functions are expected to evolve from assisting the driver to executing specific driving maneuvers and taking partial or even full control of the vehicle. Yet, as with any technology, autonomous sensors present some limitations. The ranges of today’s sensors are comparable to the driver’s vision and cannot be easily extended without compromising their accuracy and reliability. Furthermore, their performance suffers under certain conditions such as inclement weather and abnormal reflective surfaces in surrounding vehicles and road obstructions.

Today, automotive engineers are exploring wireless communication technologies as a natural extension to sensors-based vehicle safety systems. Preliminary results demonstrated the effectiveness of vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) and vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I) communications to support active vehicle safety. Communications provide vehicles with high-quality data that would be hard to obtain through other means.

The ability to exchange real-time safety-critical information among vehicles defines a new paradigm in automotive safety, where vehicles cooperate with each other and with the surrounding environment. Cooperation enabled by vehicle communications promises the next leap in vehicle safety and the potential to one day make traffic accidents a rarity.

REFERENCES

[AAAF10] AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety: Asleep at the Wheel: The Prevalence and Impact of Drowsy Driving, 2010.

[IIHS06] Insurance Institute for Highway Safety: Electronic Stability Control Could Prevent Nearly One-Third of All Fatal Crashes and Reduce Rollover Risk by as Much as 80%, News Release, 2006.

[IRTA10] International Traffic Safety Data and Analysis Group (IRTAD): Annual Report 2009, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) International Transport Forum (ITF), 2010.

[NHTS07] National Highway Traffic Safety Administration: Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards: Electronic Stability Control Systems; Controls and Displays, RIN: 2127AJ77, 2007.

[NHTS09a] National Highway Traffic Safety Administration: Traffic Safety Facts 2008, DOT HS 811 162, 2009.

[NHTS09b] National Highway Traffic Safety Administration: "Fatalities in