Conflicten op fietspaden - fase 1

Het wordt steeds drukker op fietspaden. Ruim driekwart van de ziekenhuisopnamen betreft fietsers die niet direct gerelateerd kunnen worden aan een botsing met gemotoriseerd verkeer. Enkelvoudige fietsongevallen, fiets-fiets en fiets-snorfiets ongevallen op fietspaden vormen een aanzienlijk deel van de fietsletselongevallen. Daarbij speelt een andere weggebruiker vaak een rol als direct of indirect betrokkene, óf als afleidend óf als een bijdragend element zoals ook bleek bij een eerdere studie naar de pre-crash fase van echte ongevallen. ---- Om te kijken naar de mogelijkheden ter verhoging van de fietsverkeersveiligheid op fietspaden verricht TNO in opdracht van het Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Milieu onderzoek naar het gedrag van (snor)fietsers door gedragsobservaties met video. Onderlinge conflicten en fietsgedrag op fietspaden worden in beeld gebracht en nader geanalyseerd, onder andere met behulp van de conflictobservatiemethode DOCTOR (Dutch Objective Conflict Technique for Operation and Research). ---- Dit rapport doet verslag van een verkennende fase (fase 1) op twee onderzoek-locaties, één in Amsterdam en één in Eindhoven. Bij gebleken geschiktheid van de gekozen aanpak en methodiek wordt fase 2 gestart met een omvang van vijf tot tien locaties. ---- De DOCTOR conflict observatiemethode vanaf video blijkt goed toepasbaar voor conflicten tussen kruisende verkeersdeelnemers en conflicten met tegenliggers op het fietspad. Conflictsituaties tussen fietsers in eenzelfde richting (een belangrijk aandeel in letselongevallen op fietspaden) vereisen een aanvullende meer algemene systematische observatie van specifiek gedrag. ---- Voor het vervolgonderzoek (fase 2) wordt aanbevolen extra aandacht te besteden aan interacties tussen gebruikers van het fietspad in dezelfde richting en onderliggende processen door ons specifiek te richten op de interactie tussen verschillende groepen fietsers op recreatieve fietspaden (duinpad) en op de invloed van de infrastructuur (vooral breedte en berminrichting) op het gedrag van en de interactie tussen verschillende fietsersgroepen op drukke stedelijke fietspaden

Editorial for special issue : ‘Improving cyclist safety through scientific research'.

Worldwide the popularity of cycling is booming due to its many positive impacts on health, environment and accessibility. Unfortunately, in most traffic systems cyclists are exposed to high levels of road risks. In 2014, more than 2000 cyclist deaths were recorded in the EU alone. Many more were seriously injured, but their actual numbers or reliable estimates of it are not available. Today, even in a cycling friendly country like the Netherlands - frequently serving as a model for cycle promotion elsewhere - about a third of all road fatalities and more than half of all serious road injuries are cyclists. Whereas in the last decades huge safety gains have been achieved for car occupants, up to now protection of cyclists has been far less successful. Yet, policies to protect cyclists are scarce. Research fundamental for the development of such policies is still in its infancy and hampered by many limitations, such as incomplete data on bicycle crashes, lack of funding and focus, as well as shortcomings in methods suitable for research on bicycle safety. From 30.302 papers on traffic safety indexed in Science Direct for the years 2012—2016, only 7.8% dealt with the safety of cycling. On a more positive note, the growing numbers of participants in the International Conference on Cycling safety (ICSC) indicates that the tables are about to turn. In its fourth edition in 2015 in Hannover, the ICSC welcomed 114 participants from 24 countries and about 50 papers were presented. Based on a selection of these papers, this special issue ‘Improving cyclist safety through scientific research’ provides a platform for recent developments in cycling research. Conference papers not included in this special issue are available from the conference website http://www.icsc.eu. The 17 peer-reviewed papers in this special issue cover a wide range of topics, demonstrating the many disciplines active in cycle safety, such as psychologists and sociologists, mechanical and civil engineers, as well as policy makers. This special issue serves as a showcase of the variety of methodologies aimed at designing effective countermeasures, such as accidentology and in-depth crash investigation, injury mechanisms, field experiments, surveys, and safety performance measures. (Author/publisher

Towards a characterization of safe driving behavior for automated vehicles based on models of "typical" human driving behavior

Automated driving is expected to play a central role in future mobility systems by enabling, among other benefits, mobility-as-a-service schemes and better road utilization. To this end, automated vehicles must not only be functionally safe. They should also be perceived as driving safely by other traffic participants and have a positive impact on traffic safety. However, to the best of our knowledge, there is no consensus yet on what "driving safely'' means. This article proposes a new characterization of safe driving behavior for automated vehicles based on models of "typical" human driving behavior. Such behavior (specially from attentive, experienced drivers) is known to lead to interactions of mid to low severity (i.e., low collision risk). Automated vehicles displaying similar behavior would interact with other traffic participants in a recognizable, predictable, and safe way. As a first step towards this characterization, machine-learning-based models (autoencoders) were developed from longitudinal, naturalistic driving data (from NGSIM). Autoencoders are relatively inexpensive computationally and can monitor whether a vehicle behaves "typically'" or not based on anomaly detection principles. Our initial results show that the proposed approach can readily separate typical (safe) from anomalous (unsafe) driving behavior in the considered data set

Towards a characterization of safe driving behavior for automated vehicles based on models of "typical" human driving behavior

Item does not contain fulltextAutomated driving is expected to play a central role in future mobility systems by enabling, among other benefits, mobility-as-a-service schemes and better road utilization. To this end, automated vehicles must not only be functionally safe. They should also be perceived as driving safely by other traffic participants and have a positive impact on traffic safety. However, to the best of our knowledge, there is no consensus yet on what "driving safely'' means. This article proposes a new characterization of safe driving behavior for automated vehicles based on models of "typical" human driving behavior. Such behavior (specially from attentive, experienced drivers) is known to lead to interactions of mid to low severity (i.e., low collision risk). Automated vehicles displaying similar behavior would interact with other traffic participants in a recognizable, predictable, and safe way. As a first step towards this characterization, machine-learning-based models (autoencoders) were developed from longitudinal, naturalistic driving data (from NGSIM). Autoencoders are relatively inexpensive computationally and can monitor whether a vehicle behaves "typically'" or not based on anomaly detection principles. Our initial results show that the proposed approach can readily separate typical (safe) from anomalous (unsafe) driving behavior in the considered data set.The 23rd IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (IEEE ITSC 2020) (September 20-23, 2020

A Real-Life Based Evaluation Method of Deployable Vulnerable Road User Protection Systems

Objective: The aim of this study was to develop a real-life-based evaluation method, incorporating vulnerable road user (VRU) full-body loading to a vehicle with a deployable protection system in relevant test setups, and use this method to evaluate a prototype pedestrian and cyclist protection system. Methods: Based on accident data from severe crashes, the most common scenarios were selected and developed into 5 test setups, 2 for pedestrians and 3 for bicyclists. The Polar II pedestrian anthropomorphic test device was used, either standing or on a standard bicycle. These test setups could then be used to evaluate real-life performance of a prototype protection system, regarding both positioning and protection, for vulnerable road users. The protection system consisted of an active hood and a windshield airbag and was mounted on a large passenger car with a conventional hood-type front end. Injury evaluation criteria were selected for head, neck, and chest loading derived from occupant frontal and side impact test methods. Results: The protection system managed to be fully deployed, obtaining the intended position in time—that is, before VRU body contact—in all test setups, and head protection potential was not negatively influenced by the preceding thoracic impact. Head loading resulted in head injury criterion (HIC) values ranging up to 4400 for the standard car, and all HIC values were below 650 with the protection system. The risk of severe (Abbreviated Injury Scale [AIS] 3+) head injury decreased from 85% to 100% in 3 test setups (mainly to the windscreen frame), to less than a 20% risk in all setups. In general, there were larger differences between structures impacted than between the pedestrian and cyclist setup. Neck loading was maintained at an acceptable level or was slightly decreased by the protection system, and chest loading was decreased from high values in 2 test setups in which the cyclist was impacted laterally with chest impact mainly to the hood area. Conclusions: A test method was developed to evaluate a more real-life-based test condition, as a complement to current component test methods. Being real-life based, including full-body loading, it is suggested as a complementary test method to the more simplified legal and rating component tests. Together these test methods will provide a more thorough evaluation of a protection system. The evaluated protection system performed well regarding both positioning and protection, indicating a capability to obtain the intended position in time with the potential to prevent the most common severe upper-body injuries of a pedestrian or cyclist in typical real-life accidents, without introducing negative side effects

Holland: VRU paradise goes for the next safety level

In Europe there has been a large focus on increasing pedestrian safety by requiring protection capability of cars, both using regulations and consumer tests, however none of this involved the safety of bicyclists in car crashes. The increasing use of bicycles in many major cities leads to the expectation that the number of cyclist fatalities will increase in the coming years, unless proper actions are taken