Search Results

The Reverse Braking Assist (RBA) feature is designed to automatically activate full braking in a backing vehicle. When this feature activates, a backing vehicle is suddenly stopped or may slide to a stop. During this process, an understanding of the driver's behavior may be useful in the design of an appropriate human-machine-interface (HMI) for the RBA. Several experimental studies were done to examine driver behavior in response to an unexpected and automatic braking event while backing [1]. Two of these studies are reported in this paper. A 7-passenger Crossover Utility Vehicle was fitted with a rear-view camera, a center-stack mounted LCD screen, and ancillary recording devices. In the first study, an object was suddenly placed in the path of a backing vehicle. The backing vehicle came to a sudden and complete stop. The visual image of the backing path on the LCD prominently showed that an obstacle was present in the backing path of the vehicle.

This study investigated the effects of three navigation system human-machine interfaces (HMIs) on driver eye-glance behavior, navigational errors, and subjective assessments. Thirty-six drivers drove an unfamiliar 3-segment route in downtown Detroit. HMIs were 2D or 3D (level-of-detail) electronic map display + standard voice prompts, or 3D map-display augmented by photorealistic images + landmark-enhanced voice prompts. Participants drove the same three route segments in order but were assigned a different HMI condition/segment in a 3-period/3-treatment crossover experimental design. Results indicate that drivers’ visual attention using the advanced navigation systems HMIs were within US Department of Transportation recommended visual distraction limits. More turns missed in the first route segment, regardless of HMI, were attributable to greater route complexity and a late-onset voice prompt. Participant’s ratings of HMIs were influenced by the context in which that HMI was used.

This paper investigates the effects on response time of a forward collision event in a repeated-measures design. Repeated-measures designs are often used in forward collision warning (FCW) testing despite concerns that the first exposure creates expectancy effects that may dilute or bias future outcomes. For this evaluation, 32 participants were divided into groups of 8 for an AA, BB, AB, BA design (A= No Warning; B=FCW alert). They drove in a high-fidelity simulator with a visual distraction task. After driving 15 min in a nighttime rural highway environment, a forward collision threat arose during the distraction task (Period 1). A second drive was then run and the forward collision threat was repeated again after ∼10 min (Period 2). The response times from these consecutive events were analyzed.