Search Results

The rapid innovation underway with vehicle brake safety systems leads to extensive evaluation and testing by system developers and regulatory agencies. The ability to evaluate complex heavy truck braking systems is potentially more rapid and economical through hardware-in-the-loop (HiL) simulation which employs the actual electronics and vehicle hardware. Though the initial HiL system development is time consuming and expensive, tests conducted on the completed system do not require track time, fuel, vehicle maintenance, or technician labor for driving or truck configuration changes. Truck and trailer configuration and loading as well as test scenarios can be rapidly adjusted within the vehicle dynamics simulation software to evaluate the performance of automated safety interventions (such as ESC) over a wide range of conditions.

Testing vision-based advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS) in a Camera-in-the-Loop (CiL) bench setup, where external visual inputs are used to stimulate the system, provides an opportunity to experiment with a wide variety of test scenarios, different types of vehicle actors, vulnerable road users, and weather conditions that may be difficult to replicate in the real world. In addition, once the CiL bench is setup and operating, experiments can be performed in less time when compared to track testing alternatives. In order to better quantify normal operating zones, track testing results were used to identify behavior corridors via a statistical methodology. After determining normal operational variability via track testing of baseline stationary surrogate vehicle and pedestrian scenarios, these operating zones were applied to screen-based testing in a CiL test setup to determine particularly challenging scenarios which might benefit from replication in a track testing environment.

In order to validate the operation of advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS), tests must be performed that assess the performance of the system in response to different scenarios. Some of these systems are designed for crash-imminent situations, and safely testing them requires large stretches of controlled pavement, expensive surrogate targets, and a fully functional vehicle. As a possible more-manageable alternative to testing the full vehicle in these situations, this study sought to explore whether these systems could be isolated, and tests could be performed on a bench via a hardware-in-the-loop methodology. For camera systems, these benches are called Camera-in-the-Loop (CiL) systems and involve presenting visual stimuli to the device via an external input.

This paper describes the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's (NHTSA) efforts to determine how different outrigger designs can affect J-Turn and Road Edge Recovery test maneuver outcome. Data were collected during tests performed with three different outrigger designs (made from aluminum, carbon fiber, and titanium) having different physical properties (geometry and weight). Four sport utility vehicles were tested: a 2001 Chevrolet Blazer, 2001 Toyota 4Runner, 2001 Ford Escape, and a 1999 Mercedes ML320. The 4Runner and ML320 were each equipped with electronic stability control, however the systems were disabled for the tests performed in this study. A detailed description of the testing performed and the results obtained are discussed. From the results, a comparison of how the three outrigger designs affected the test results is provided.