saving ehicle safety technologylives

S a v i n gL i v e s

t hr o u g h a d v a n c e d v e h i c l e

s a f et y

t ec h n o l o

g y

IntelligentVehicle

InitiativeFinal Report

September 2005

U.S. Department of Transportation400 7th Street, S.W. (HOIT)

Washington, DC 20590Toll-Free “Help Line” 866-367-7487

www.its.dot.gov

EDL Document No.: 14153

Publication No.: FHWA-JPO-05-057

HOIT/11-05 (2M)

1

IVI PROGRAMOVERVIEWIntroduced in 1997 and authorized in the 1998Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century(TEA-21), the Intelligent Vehicle Initiative (IVI) hasbeen a revolutionary part of the U.S. DOT’s IntelligentTransportation Systems (ITS) Program. As the initia-tive draws to a close this year, this Final Report pro-vides an overview of the accomplishments over the lifeof the Program. This report presents the history of IVIand its successes, as well as how this initiative evolvedover time. References are provided at the end of thedocument for those seeking detailed technicalreports on the specific projects and topics discussed.

More than 6.3 million police-reportedmotor vehicle crashes occurred in the

United States in 2003.

Each year, over six million crashes occur on U.S. high-ways. They kill more than 42,000 people, injure approx-imately three million others, and cost more than $230billion per year. Driver error is the leading cause ofhighway crashes. The IVI Program was launched tohelp reduce the number and severity of these crashes.

Through innovation and technology, the IVI Programhas focused on accelerating the development andcommercialization of vehicle-based and infrastructure-cooperative driver assistance products that warn driversof dangerous situations, recommend actions, and evenassume partial control of vehicles to avoid collisions.

The accomplishments of the IVI Program are intrinsi-cally tied to the significant efforts made by each of theProgram’s public, private, and academic participants.Beside Federal transportation and safety agencies, themotor vehicle industry has been a key IVI partner,

because ultimately it will be industry that develops anddeploys IVI safety systems in standard vehicle productlines. Original equipment manufacturers (OEM), auto-motive suppliers, and private fleet operators have allactively participated in the IVI Program as well. Publicsector partners, including state and local governmentagencies, public fleet operators, universities, and asso-ciations also were critical partners in the developmentand deployment of IVI services.

Private Sector Partners

3M Corporation

AssistWareTechnology, Inc.

BMW of NorthAmerica, LLC

DaimlerChrysler Researchand Technology NorthAmerican, Inc.

Delphi Delco ElectronicsSystems

Ford Motor Company

Freightliner Corporation

General MotorsCorporation

Gillig Corporation

Mack Trucks, Inc.

McKenzie TankLines, Inc.

Navigation TechnologiesCorporation

Navistar InternationalTransportation Corporation

Nissan Technical CenterNorth America, Inc.

Praxair, Inc.

Raytheon

Toyota Technical CenterUSA, Inc.

TRW

US Xpress Leasing, Inc.

Visteon Corporation

Volkswagen ofAmerica, Inc.

Volvo Trucks NorthAmerica, Inc.

X-Meritor-Webco

Public Sector Partners

Ann Arbor TransportationAuthority, Michigan

California Department ofTransportation

City of Hutchinson,Minnesota

McLeod County, Minnesota

Minnesota State Patrol

Minnesota Department ofTransportation

Pennsylvania Departmentof Transportation

Port Authority of AlleganyCounty

San Mateo County Transit

Virginia Department ofTransportation

University Partners

California PATH

Carnegie Mellon University

Johns Hopkins AppliedPhysics Laboratory

University of Iowa

University of MichiganTransportation ResearchInstitute

University of Minnesota

Virgnia Tech TransportationInsitute

Association Partners

American TruckingAssociation

Intelligent TransportationSociety of American(ITS America)

TEAMING PARTNERS

SR1_B&W_IVI Brochure.qxp 10/14/2005 9:14 AM Page 1

OBJECTIVESOver the years, U.S. DOT’s vehicle-based safetyresearch programs have focused primarily on crashmitigation techniques. The IVI Program was uniquein that it focused on crash prevention and includedresearch on the implications of in-vehicle technologieson driver behavior.

The IVI mission was to prevent highway crashes andthe fatalities and injuries they cause. The IVI objectiveswere developed in support of this overall mission.Objectives of the Program were to prevent driver dis-traction and to facilitate accelerated development anddeployment of crash avoidance systems.

IVI Objectives– Prevent driver distraction

– Facilitate accelerated deploymentof crash avoidance systems

PREVENT DRIVER DISTRACTIONThe highway environment is increasingly complexboth inside and outside of the vehicle. In addition todealing with highly congested roadways, more driv-ers use in-vehicle devices, most notably cellularphones. In-vehicle devices can be distracting becausethey can require drivers to engage manually, cogni-tively, or both in nondriving tasks for unsafe periodsof time. Moreover, nondriving tasks, such as theringing of a cellular phone, can interrupt drivers atunsafe periods of time.

Although distraction cannot be prevented entirely,work under the IVI Program significantly increasedthe understanding of why and when distraction islikely to occur. Numerous tools were developed tohelp minimize the consequences of distracted driving.

No one solution can solve theproblem of driver distraction.

A significant portion of IVI studies consisted of eval-uating the influence of in-vehicle information and com-munication systems on driver performance, includingcellular telephones, in-vehicle computers, route guid-ance, and adaptive cruise control.

IVI ApproachInvestigating driver distraction requires a compre-hensive and programmatic effort. The IntelligentVehicle Initiative used a myriad of tools to define thedriver distraction problem and find solutions. Methodsincluded expert working groups, public forums,focus groups, laboratory experiments, naturalisticdriving studies on-the-road, and analyses of crash,injury, and fatality statistics.

Studies were conducted that examined the relation-ship between distraction and crashes or near-misses;research into practical ways of measuring distractionand driver workload; simulator studies assessing theeffects of in-vehicle usage on distraction and safety;research into the willingness of drivers to engage inrisky behavior; and the development of guidelines tooptimize the interface of in-vehicle devices. Andbecause problems associated with driver distractioncut across all vehicle types, the IVI research focusedon both light and heavy vehicles. To compare resultsacross different studies, the IVI also involved stan-dardizing methods for objectively measuring driverdistraction, workload, and performance.

Research Results: Summary ofFindings and AccomplishmentsThe accomplishments from the following key IVIactivities have helped minimize the consequences ofdistracted driving.

Driver Distraction Working Group and InternetForum. Early in the IVI Program, the NationalHighway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)sponsored a series of working meetings and an Internetforum to improve understanding of driver distractionand workload. The meetings, referred to as DriverDistraction Expert Working Group Meetings, were held

2

In summary, the research approachincluded:• Improving the understanding of the nature and extent of

the driver distraction safety problem;

• Developing tools and methods that can measure and pre-dict the potential for in-vehicle technologies to be distracting;

• Developing human factors guidelines to aid in equipmentdesign; and

• Developing integrated approaches to reduce the distrac-tion caused by in-vehicle devices.


3

in Washington, D.C. Attendees consisted of experts indriver behavior, experimental design, automotivesafety, and traffic engineering. The Internet forum,called the Driver Distraction Internet Forum, providedthe means for the public to access research papers, askand receive answers to questions, and share experiencesregarding the use of in-vehicle devices. The findingsfrom this activity were used to shape related researchconducted over the course of the IVI Program.

Workload Measures. Driver workload encompassesall activities being performed by a driver, includingthe necessary tasks to operate the vehicle plus otheractivities such as speaking on a cellular phone.Measuring driver workload is an important compo-nent to evaluating an in-vehicle information system,or IVIS. One IVI project, referred to as IVIS DEMAnD,produced a software package that measures work-load; its purpose is to assist human factors designersand engineers in evaluating the demands placed onthe driver’s cognitive resource pool by in-vehicledevices. IVIS DEMAnD uses a behavioral model toevaluate the attention demand required to operate agiven IVIS. The research used an extensive literaturereview, information from practitioners, and four on-road studies to determine the behavioral model andthe software tool components.

Heavy Vehicle Workload. As driving tasks and work-load in heavy vehicles vary considerably from thetypical passenger car, the IVI included a separate

analysis of heavy vehicle driver workload. The objec-tive for this area was to determine if and how per-forming a secondary task alters the performance of aprimary task. The results suggested that the chaoticnature of crashes precluded the possibility of devel-oping and validating a quantitative model to predictcrashes as a function of workload measures. Furtherinvestigations involved tracking where the driver islooking and for how long. Such visual measures werefound to be especially sensitive and robust to evalu-ating driving conditions and requested tasks.

A simulator study and a field study on workload cre-ated by in-cab text messaging and cellular phone usageby heavy truck drivers found that text message readingcan negatively impact lane-keeping behavior. Visualscanning was reduced almost 50 percent on averagewhen drivers were engaged in a dialogue. The knowl-edge developed under these projects is a critical partof the basis for understanding acceptable levels ofdriver workload.

CAMP Driver Metrics Workload. The U.S. DOT part-nered with the Crash Avoidance Metrics Partnership(CAMP) to better understand driver workload whenengaging in nondriving-related tasks such as tuningthe radio or using a cell phone. Private sector part-ners participating in this partnership were GM, Ford,Nissan, and Toyota. Workload was investigated inthree venues: laboratory, test track, and on-the-road.The main objective for the automotive industry wasto provide an approach for measuring workload earlyin the development process. Findings indicate thatworkload is a multidimensional problem and requiresdifferent approaches for visual-manual tasks versusauditory-vocal (cognitive) tasks.

Crash-Type Distribution


FACILITATE ACCELERATED DEPLOYMENT

OF CRASH AVOIDANCE SYSTEMSThe second fundamental objective of the IVI Programfocused on facilitating the accelerated developmentand deployment of crash avoidance systems. Thistheme encompassed the bulk of the work performedunder the IVI Program.

IVI ApproachThe fundamental approach to this portion of the IVIProgram encompassed a four-step process. Each stepbuilt upon the results of the previous one. This method-ology proved effective in accomplishing the overallgoal of accelerating the deployment of crash avoid-ance systems. The work steps included:

1. Defining the safety problem;

2. Developing performance guidelines, specifica-tions, and standards;

3. Testing and evaluating promising technologies,applications, and configurations; and

4. Researching and evaluating benefits.

Defining the Safety Problem. Definition of the safetyproblem is necessary to understand the potential ofadvanced technologies to mitigate the consequencesof vehicle collisions. The IVI research examined crashdata to determine the causes of motor vehicle crashes.Various types of crashes were carefully studied to helpdetermine what types of crash avoidance systems couldbe effectively deployed.

The study of crash data analysis provided the basis fordescribing the driving environment in which specificcrash types occur and in establishing the functionalrequirements for appropriate collision warning sys-tems. The IVI Program addressed crashes related torear-end, road departure, lane change, intersection, andvehicle stability.

Developing Performance Guidelines, Specifications,and Standards. The development of performanceguidelines, specifications, and standards facilitate theaccelerated deployment of crash avoidance systems.The definition of these requirements is based on thesafety problem definition and has set the stage for futureproduct development and deployment opportunities.

Evaluating Safety System Effectiveness. Researchconducted under this area involved the testing andevaluation of promising technologies, applications, andconfigurations of safety systems.

Evaluating Benefits. The research and developmentprojects conducted under IVI were aimed at creatinga scientific knowledge base that could lead to the devel-opment of products aimed at the reduction of colli-sions, fatalities, collision severity, and injuries. Initialwork to estimate safety benefits was based on real-world crash databases combined with analytical andsimulation methods. Later benefits work made use ofexperimental work on the track or in driving simula-tors. The most sophisticated efforts to estimate safetybenefits were the conduct of field operational tests usingprototype systems.

Imminent Crash ResearchThe IVI Program addressed the feasibility of providingdrivers with imminent crash warning advice to avoidseveral different crash types, including rear-end, roaddeparture, lane change, and intersection collisions, andstability control for heavy vehicles. The following para-graphs summarize some of the major projects whichconcluded the research undertaken within each of thesecrash types. A complete discussion of the individualprojects that covered the four IVI approach steps dis-cussed above can be found in the key references andat the Internet web sites listed at the conclusion ofthis report.

• Rear-End Collisions – The most predominant crashtype is a rear-end collision, as they account forapproximately 28 percent of crashes annually. Thestudy of this crash type was a high priority andresearch was initiated at the very beginning of the

4

The greatest opportunity to improvesafety exists in three driving conditionsNormal Conditions–In-vehicle communications systems that drivers can operatewithout distraction.

Degraded Conditions–Driver warning systems related to reduced visibility or driverfatigue.

Imminent Crash Conditions–• Rear-End • Intersection• Road Departure • Stability Control• Lane Change


IVI Program. Several studies examined the crashcharacteristics associated with rear-end collisions.These studies defined the causal factors and crashscenarios for rear-end collisions that could be usedto define further work in identifying mitigationconcepts. A series of studies were then undertakento expand the scientific knowledge base related tosensor systems, warning algorithms, and driver-vehicle interfaces.

The study of rear-end collision avoidance within theIVI Program concluded with a field operational test(FOT) to evaluate the feasibility of collision warningsystems. The project consisted of a five-year jointresearch program between the U.S. DOT and GeneralMotors Corporation for an Automotive CollisionAvoidance System (ACAS) FOT which was initiatedin June of 1999. The ACAS FOT built on previousresearch to create prototype crash warning systems.The project assessed the performance of rear-endcollision warning systems in combination with adap-tive cruise control (ACC) systems in operationalenvironments. The conduct of a FOT employingstate-of-the-art rear-end collision warning systemsand ACC systems has provided the basis for docu-menting system performance, effectiveness, poten-tial safety benefits, and user acceptance. The ACASintegrated the rear-end collision warning systemand adaptive cruise control. The rear-end collisionwarning system detects, assesses, and alerts the driverof a potential hazard in the forward region of thevehicle. The ACC provides automatic brake andthrottle actuation in order to maintain speed andlongitudinal headway control. The ACAS FOT wascompleted in 2004.

An evaluation of the results of the FOT indicated that,ACAS, as an integrated system of rear-end collisionwarning and ACC functions, has the potential to pre-vent about 10 percent of all rear-end crashes. ACASalso reduced the exposure to severe near crashesduring the FOT by 10 to 20 percent. The evaluationalso examined user acceptance of the two systems.The evaluation indicated that driver acceptancefindings suggest interest and fairly positive regardof the rear-end collision avoidance system by FOTparticipants as a group. Its acceptance, an indicatorof purchase likelihood, was estimated at 27 percent.In general, drivers viewed ACC positively despiteexpressing concerns about its ungainly accelerationand braking. The purchase likelihood of ACC wasestimated at 44 percent. To assist with deploymentand acceptance, the evaluation indicates that addi-tional research must be conducted to reduce false andnuisance alerts and to enhance the timing of crashimminent alerts. The evaluation also discusses les-sons learned from the FOT and contains suggestionsfor future work and FOTs.

A FOT involving commercial vehicles also was con-ducted to evaluate the viability of rear-end collisionwarning systems. Volvo Trucks North America, Inc.and U.S. Xpress, Inc. partnered with U.S. DOT to con-duct an FOT of a rear-end collision warning systemthat includes adaptive cruise control and advancedbraking. The equipped tractors were used withvarious trailers from the U.S. Xpress fleet.

The Transit Forward Collision Warning (FCW) proj-ect ended in 2002 with the development of a FCWsystem and driver vehicle interface. This work wasthen merged with a side collision warning develop-ment project to create an integrated system. Thiswarning system integration for transit vehicles isfurther discussed in the lane-change section.

• Road Departure Collisions – The road departurecollision category is dominated by the single-vehiclecrash – where the vehicle leaves the road first andnot because of a collision with another vehicle. Roaddeparture crashes typically are caused by driverinattention, fatigue, or excessive speed, particularlywhen maneuvering in complex road geometry(curves, ramps, etc.). In fact, one in five crashes isreported as a single-vehicle roadway departure.NHTSA estimates that road departure warning sys-tems could apply to about 458,000 of the 1.2 millioncrashes each year.

Systems to avoid road departure collisions will warnthe driver when his or her vehicle is likely to deviatefrom the lane of travel. These systems track the laneor road edge and warn drivers when they are likelyto drift off the road or when they are traveling toofast for an upcoming curve. Future capabilities mayintegrate an ACC function to adjust vehicle speedfor the shape of the road.

A FOT is presently being performed by a partnershipamong the University of Michigan TransportationResearch Institute (UMTRI); Visteon, and AssistwareTechnologies. The Volpe National TransportationSystems Center (Volpe) is the independent evaluatorfor the field test. The purpose of this field test is todevelop a driver warning system to indicate when

5

A spectrum of vehicle types wereconsidered during IVI researchLight VehiclesPassenger vehicles, light trucks, vans, and SUVs.

Commercial VehiclesHeavy trucks and interstate buses.

Transit VehiclesNonrail vehicles operated by transit agencies.

Specialty VehiclesEmergency response and highway maintenance vehicles.


the vehicle is about to drift off the road or that thevehicle is traveling too fast for an upcoming curve.These crash avoidance countermeasures will be fullyintegrated into field test vehicles so that the testvehicles have the look and feel of production cars,but are instrumented to collect data for system eval-uation. The field test and analysis is scheduled tobe completed in 2005.

• Lane Change and Merge Collisions – Collisionsduring lane changes and merges represent a majorproblem area, accounting for one in 25 of all crashes,with 90 percent caused by lane changes and 10 per-cent by merges. For transit bus collisions, these col-lisions represent more than half of all collisions.Primarily angle or sideswipe impacts, this problemrequires in-vehicle technology to help detect andwarn drivers of vehicles in adjacent lanes. Thesesystems monitor the lane position and relative speedof other vehicles beside and behind the vehicle,and advise drivers of the potential for collision. Itis estimated that these systems could help preventup to 192,000 of the approximately 200,000 lanechange/merge crashes each year.

In 1994-1997, TRW performed an extensive study todefine the problem area for lane change/merge,including proposed performance specifications. Thisstudy included an on-road test of an advanced lane-change warning system using passenger cars. Earlycommercially available systems were then evaluated,paying particular attention to human factors issues.Battelle investigated alternative displays (human fac-tors) for side collision warning systems in 1996.

Several field trials involving transit vehicles were con-ducted to determine the performance requirementsof lane-change systems operating in the transit envi-ronment. Evaluation of a large test fleet of side col-lision warning systems on transit buses in AlleghenyCounty, Pennsylvania (a.k.a. Pittsburgh) resultedin a side collision warning system specification (min-imum performance requirements). Performanceissues identified in the first phase of the test led toa more advanced system being developed anddeployed in a second phase of the test. Specifically,the second generation system has a shorter detectionrange in order to reduce the instance of false alarmsin congested conditions. Another transit field testused lane assist systems, which have sensors that“see” the road markings and warn bus drivers if theyare too near the lane boundary.

Another project merged the performance specifica-tions for a side collision system with the perform-ance specifications for a forward collision warningsystem for transit buses, based on field trials resultsin Pennsylvania and California. This specificationfor an integrated transit warning system is particu-larly valuable guidance for transit agencies that are

early deployers of these systems, due to particularlystrong benefits for the cost.

• Intersection Collisions – More than a quarter of thenation’s annual crashes occur at intersections whenone vehicle crosses the path of another or strikes itfront-to-side. Approximately 1.7 million crashesoccurred at intersections in 1998, causing more than6,700 fatalities.

Early in the IVI, Veridian Engineering developedseveral vehicle-based concepts to address the inter-section crash problem. This work provided someof the initial research and experimentation in usingadvanced technologies for intersection collisionavoidance work and provided a knowledge basefor future work.

The Infrastructure Consortium was created to con-duct research and development of infrastructure-only intersection collision avoidance systems.Members of the Consortium partnership includeMinnesota, Virginia, and California Departmentsof Transportation (DOT), California PATH, theUniversity of Minnesota, and the Virginia Polytechnicand State University. In order to demonstrate theconcepts being developed by the Consortium, anintersection testbed was designed and built at theFHWA’s Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center.This facility demonstrated three early intersectioncollision avoidance concepts in June 2003 during theNational IVI Meeting. The California team demon-strated a system which helps drivers judge whenthey should not make a permitted left turn at a sig-nalized intersection due to potentially hidden traf-fic. Minnesota demonstrated a system designed totell drivers trying to access major rural roads at a stopsign or unsignalized intersection when it is safe toenter the main roadway. Virginia’s system demon-strated two systems – one infrastructure only and theother a cooperative system – that alert drivers of animminent traffic signal violation.

Virginia Tech Transportation Institute (VTTI) createdand demonstrated a vehicle-based signal and stopsign violation countermeasure with technology-independent performance specifications in a testbed

6


vehicle. They also are developing objective teststo support a FOT of the system. The system isbeing designed to provide in-vehicle warnings if adriver is likely to violate a stop sign or red light atan intersection.

• Vehicle Stability – This problem area focuses onenhancing vehicle stability on the road. Efforts werefocused on commercial vehicles, as their highercenters of gravity and coupling points make themmore prone to jackknife or rollover. Most incidentsof heavy vehicle instability are triggered either bybraking or rapid steering movements. Because heavyvehicle instability often results in rollover, this prob-lem is particularly serious in terms of its potentialto cause loss of life, injuries, property damage, andtraffic tie-ups.

The U.S. DOT entered into a cooperative agreementwith Freightliner and its partners to evaluate tech-nology aimed at preventing rollover crashes in heavytrucks as part of a FOT. The technology evaluatedwas the Roll Advisor and Control (RA&C) system.The RA&C is designed to assist commercial vehicledrivers, especially drivers of tanker trucks, in

avoiding rollover crashes. During the time of theFOT, Freightliner began offering the RA&C for sale.

The RA&C consists of two components. The first isthe Roll Stability Advisor (RSA). The RSA will notprevent any particular crash through direct interven-tion. Instead, it advises a driver, after a maneuveris finished, that the lateral forces on the vehicle werehigher than what might have been desirable. Thesecond component is the Roll Stability Control(RSC). This system takes partial, momentary con-trol of the vehicle if it deems that a serious rolloverthreat is developing.

The findings of the independent evaluator concludedthat there was a slight reduction in the overall risk-taking behavior by FOT drivers that can be attributedto the educational function of the RA&C. Using thedata from the FOT and data from U.S. DOT’s GeneralEstimates System and Fatality Analysis ReportingSystem, the following findings were reported:

– Under conditions similar to those observed in theFOT, the RA&C is expected to prevent 20 percentof rollover crashes and 33 percent of single vehicleroad departure crashes caused by excessive speedin a curve.

– For the national fleet of approximately 110,000tanker trucks, it is estimated that the RA&C willprevent 34 crashes, 21 injuries, and two to threefatalities per year.

– On the test track, the RSC consistently triggered asthe vehicle approached the limit of roll stability.In most of the test track experiments, the RSCprevented the outrigger (installed to prevent theexperimental truck from actually rolling over)from touching the pavement.

7


8

FUTURE DIRECTIONAlthough the IVI Program has come to a close, itprovides a strong base for further development ofsafety technologies. Research conducted under theIVI Program is now being used by industry to developand deploy crash avoidance systems. There is morework to be done, and examples of continuing researchare provided below.

INTEGRATED VEHICLE-BASED SAFETY

SYSTEMS (IVBSS)Preventing Collisions the Smart Way. The widespreaddeployment of advanced integrated driver assistancesystems has the potential to reduce rear-end, roaddeparture, and lane-change collisions by 48 percent.Integrated systems will provide better hazard infor-mation from multiple sensors, enabling coordinatedwarnings to reduce driver distraction. The IntegratedVehicle-Based Safety Systems (IVBSS) initiative aimsto equip all new vehicles with advanced driver assis-tance systems that would help drivers avoid the mostcommon types of deadly crashes.

This initiative, in partnership with the automotiveindustry, builds on completed and ongoing IntelligentVehicle Initiative (IVI) field operational tests as well asresults from naturalistic driving studies. It will involveprojects and studies that include private passengervehicles and freight-carrying trucks.

This initiative is the first attempt to fully integratethe individual solutions that address these three

types of crashes. This research will combine existingresearch results and state-of-the-art commercialproducts and product performance for all systemsrelated to this problem.

COOPERATIVE INTERSECTION COLLISION

AVOIDANCE SYSTEMS (CICAS)Saving Lives and Preventing Injuries. Each yearintersection-related crashes take a heavy toll on lives,productivity, and the economy. Intelligent intersectionsystems offer a significant opportunity to improvesafety by enhancing driver decision-making at inter-sections that will help drivers avoid crashes.

Intersection collision avoidance systems use bothvehicle- and infrastructure-based technologies to helpdrivers approaching an intersection understand thestate of activities within that intersection. Cooperativeintersection collision avoidance systems (CICAS) havethe potential to warn drivers about likely violations oftraffic control devices and to help them maneuverthrough cross traffic. Eventually, CICAS also mayinform other drivers (i.e., potential victims) aboutimpending violations as well as identify pedestriansand cyclists within an intersection.

The CICAS initiative builds on research and opera-tional tests previously conducted under the U.S. DOT’sIntelligent Vehicle Initiative. It is being closely coor-dinated with the Vehicle Infrastructure Integration andthe Intelligent Vehicle-Based Safety Systems initiatives.The CICAS initiative working group is being formedfrom partnerships with automotive manufacturers,State and local departments of transportation, anduniversity research centers throughout America.

Through additional research, system integration activ-ities, and demonstrations, the CICAS initiative willproduce a system prototype that addresses both con-trol violations and gap acceptance crash problems. Theinitiative will culminate in a series of coordinated fieldoperational tests to help achieve a solid understandingof safety benefits and user acceptance.

CICAS consists of• Vehicle-based technologies and systems – sensors, proces-

sors, and driver interfaces within each vehicle;

• Infrastructure-based technologies and systems – roadsidesensors and processors to detect vehicles and identifyhazards and signal systems, messaging signs, and/or otherinterfaces to communicate various warnings to drivers; and

• Communications systems – dedicated short-range commu-nications (DSRC) to communicate warnings and databetween the infrastructure and equipped vehicles.The IVBSS initiative will

• Develop information on how best to communicate anintegrated warning to the driver;

• Develop objective tests and criteria for performance ofsystems that simultaneously address rear-end, road depar-ture, and lane-change crashes; and

• Develop and field test integrated vehicle-based safetysystems on the road with real drivers to understand thesafety benefits of integrated systems.


VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE

INTEGRATION (VII)Crash Prevention and Congestion Relief ThroughVehicle-to-Vehicle and Vehicle-to-Roadside Com-munication. About half of the deaths that occur eachyear on U.S. highways result from vehicles leavingthe road or traveling unsafely through intersections.Traffic delays continue to increase, wasting more thana 40-hour workweek for peak-time travelers. A sig-nificant reduction in these numbers could be achievedthrough coordinated development of a nationwidewireless communication infrastructure that wouldallow communication between vehicles and betweenthe vehicle and the roadside.

The VII vision is that every car manufactured in theUnited States would be equipped with a communica-tions device and a GPS unit so that data could beexchanged with a nationwide, instrumented roadwaysystem. Realization of this vision could mean a sig-nificant reduction in highway fatalities, while at thesame time offering dramatic improvements in trans-portation mobility.

The VII initiative will build on the availability ofadvanced vehicle safety systems developed under theIntelligent Vehicle Initiative (IVI) and on the resultsof related research and operational tests.

Secure data transmitted from the roadside to thevehicle could warn a driver that it is not safe to enteran intersection or that the vehicle is dangerously closeto running off the road. Vehicles serving as data collec-tors could anonymously transmit traffic and road con-dition information from every major road within thetransportation network, giving transportation agen-cies the information needed to take action to relievetraffic congestion.

Protection of privacy is paramount. The intent is thatgeneral data collected by the public sector would beanonymous and used only for safety purposes and forefficient management of transportation operations. It isexpected that this technology will facilitate a numberof uses that drivers may choose such as electronic tollcollection or telematics services for which some pri-vate information might be required. For those serv-ices, the intent is that the owner or driver would haveto “opt in” and give permission for that informationto be shared.

A VII consortium has been established to determinefeasibility of widespread deployment and to establishan implementation strategy. Current membershipincludes U.S. DOT, AASHTO, 10 State DOTs, and sev-eral light vehicle manufacturers.

9

The fundamental building blocks of theVII concept are coordinated deploy-ments of communication technologies• In all vehicles by the automotive industry; and• On all major U.S. roadways by the transportation

public sector.


10


11

Technical Reports can be found on the following U.S. Departmentof Transportation (U.S. DOT) web sites:• Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Joint Program Office:

http://www.its.dot.gov/welcome.htm• Intelligent Vehicle Initiative (IVI):

http://www.its.dot.gov/ivi/ivi.htm• IVI Human Factors: http://www.its.dot.gov/ivi/ivihf/reports.html• National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA):

http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/departments/nrd-12/pubs_rev.html• Federal Transit Administration (FTA): http://www.fta.dot.gov/• Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA):

http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/• Federal Highway Administration (FHWA):

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/The following are some of the key background reports availablefor download:Program Overview• 2000 IVI Business Plan: http://www.its.dot.gov/ivi/docs/BP701.pdf• IVI Problem Areas Description: Motor Vehicle Crashes –

Data Analyses And IVI Program Emphasis:http://www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov/\JPODOCS\REPTS_TE/9@101!.PDF

Crash Data Analysis and Benefits• Preliminary Assessment of Crash Avoidance Systems Benefits:

http://www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov//JPODOCS/REPTS_TE/3V01!.PDF• Analysis of Light Vehicle Crashes and Pre-Crash Scenarios

Based on the 2000 General Estimates System:http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-12/DOTHS809573.pdf

• Synthesis Report: Examination of Target Vehicular Crashesand Potential ITS Countermeasures:http://www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov/jpodocs/repts_te/1b@01!.pdf

• Rear-End Crashes: Problem Size Assessment And StatisticalDescription:http://www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov/\JPODOCS\REPTS_TE/44F01!.PDF

• The Role Of Driver Inattention In Crashes; New Statistics FromThe 1995 Crashworthiness Data System:http://www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov/\JPODOCS\REPTS_TE/LL01!.PDF

• Intelligent Vehicle Initiative (IVI) Needs Assessment:http://www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov/\JPODOCS\REPTS_TE/96301!.PDF

• Examination of Crash Contributing Factors Using NationalCrash Databases:http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-12/HS809664.pdf

• Analysis of Lane Change Crashes:http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-12/DOTHS809571.pdf

• Development of Test Scenarios for Off-Roadway CrashCountermeasures based on Crash Statistics:http://www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov//JPODOCS/REPTS_TE//13759.pdf

• Analysis of Crossing Path Crashes:http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-12/DOTHS809423.pdf

• Analysis of Fatal Crashes Due to Signal and Stop Sign Violations:http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/departments/nrd-12/809-779/index.html

Performance Specifications• Development of Performance Specifications for Collisions

Avoidance Systems for Lane Change Crashes:http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-12/Dev.OfPerf.Spec.CompleteBk.pdf

• Development and Validation of Functional Definitions andEvaluation Procedures for Collision Warning/Avoidance System:http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-12/acas/HS808964_Report-1999-08.pdf

• Run-Off-Road Collision Avoidance Using IVHSCountermeasures – Final Report:http://www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov/jpodocs/repts_te/@@m01!.pdf

• Intersection Collision Avoidance Using ITS Countermeasures:http://itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov/jpodocs/repts_te/@@l01!.PDF

• Vehicle-Based Countermeasures for Signal and Stop SignViolation:http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/departments/nrd-12/809-716/index.html

• Preliminary Human Factors for the Intelligent Vehicle Initiative(IVI): http://www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov/edldocs/7363/index.html

• Compendium of Human Factors Projects Supporting theIntelligent Vehicle Initiative:http://www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov/jpodocs/rept_mis/9@201!.PDF

• Third Annual Report of the Crash Avoidance Metrics Partnership:http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-12/CAMP3/pages/index.html

Field Operational Tests, On-Road Experiments,and Independent Evaluations• Evaluation of the Intelligent Cruise Control System Volume I –

Study Results:http://www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov//JPODOCS/REPTS_TE/94Z01!.PDF

• Automotive Collision Avoidance System Field OperationalTest Final Program Report:http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-12/acas/ACAS%20FOT%20Final%20Program%20Report%20DOT%20HS%20809%20886.pdf

• Evaluation of the Freightliner Intelligent Vehicle InitiativeField Operational Test:http://www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov/jpodocs/repts_te/13609_files/13871.html

• A Comprehensive Examination of Naturalistic Lane-Changes:http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/departments/nrd-12/LaneChange/index.html

• Interim Report on Road Departure Crash Warning Subsystems:http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-12/FINALINTER9-03.pdf

KEY REFERENCES


S a v i n gL i v e s

t hr o u g h a d v a n c e d v e h i c l e

s a f et y

t ec h n o l o

g y

IntelligentVehicle

InitiativeFinal Report

September 2005

U.S. Department of Transportation400 7th Street, S.W. (HOIT)

Washington, DC 20590Toll-Free “Help Line” 866-367-7487

www.its.dot.gov

EDL Document No.: 14153

Publication No.: FHWA-JPO-05-057

HOIT/11-05 (2M)

saving ehicle safety technologylives

Documents