Search Results

Event data recorders (EDRs) must survive regulatory frontal and side compliance crash tests if installed within a car or light truck built on or after September 1, 2012. Although previous research has shown that EDR data are surviving these tests, little is known about whether EDRs are capable of surviving collisions of higher delta-v, or crashes involving vehicle fire or immersion. The goal of this study was to determine the survivability of light vehicle EDRs in real world fire, immersion, and high change in velocity (delta-v) cases. The specific objective was to identify the frequency of these extreme events and to determine the EDR data download outcome when subject to damage caused by these events. This study was performed using three crash databases: the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), the National Automotive Sampling System / Crashworthiness Data System (NASS/CDS), and the National Motor Vehicle Crash Causation Survey (NMVCCS).

Forward Collision Warning (FCW) and Lane Departure Warning (LDW) systems are two active safety systems that have recently been added to the U.S. New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) evaluation. Vehicles that pass confirmation tests may advertise the presence of FCW and LDW alongside the vehicle's star safety rating derived from crash tests. This paper predicts the number of crashes and injured drivers that could be prevented if all vehicles in the U.S. fleet were equipped with production FCW and/or LDW systems. Models of each system were developed using the test track data collected for 16 FCW and 10 LDW systems by the NCAP confirmation tests. These models were used in existing fleetwide benefits models developed for FCW and LDW. The 16 FCW systems evaluated could have potentially prevented between 9% and 53% of all rear-end collisions and prevented between 19% and 60% of injured (MAIS2+) drivers. Earlier warning times prevented more warnings and injuries.

Event data recorder (EDR) data are currently only required to survive the crash tests specified by Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 208 and FMVSS 214. Although these crash tests are severe, motor vehicles are also exposed to more severe crashes, fire, and submersion. Little is known about whether current EDR data are capable of surviving these events. The objective of this study was to determine the limits of survivability for EDR data for realistic car crash conditions involving heat, submersion, and static crush. Thirty-one (31) EDRs were assessed in this study: 4 in the pilot tests and 27 in the production tests. The production tests were conducted on model year (MY) 2011-2012 EDRs enclosed in plastic, metal, or a combination of both materials. Each enclosure type was exposed to 9 tests. The high temperature tests were divided into 3 oven testing conditions: 100°C, 150°C, and 200°C.

This study evaluates the accuracy of 41 Event Data Recorders (EDR) extracted from model year 2012 General Motors, Chrysler, Ford, Honda, Mazda, Toyota, and Volvo vehicles subjected to New Car Assessment Program 56 kph full-frontal barrier crash tests. The approach was to evaluate (1) the vehicle longitudinal change in velocity or delta-V (ΔV) as measured by EDRs in comparison with the high-precision accelerometers mounted onboard test vehicles and (2) the accuracy of pre-crash speed, seatbelt buckle status, and frontal airbag deployment status. On average the absolute error for pre-crash speed between the EDR and reference instrumentation was only 0.58 kph, or 1.0% of the nominal impact speed. In all cases in which the EDRs recorded the seatbelt buckle status of the driver or right front passenger, the modules correctly reported that the occupants were buckled. EDRs reported airbag deployment correctly in all of the tests.

This study evaluated the accuracy of 75 Event Data Recorders (EDRs) extracted from model year 2010-2012 Chrysler, Ford, General Motors, Honda, Mazda, and Toyota vehicles subjected to side-impact moving deformable barrier crash tests. The test report and vehicle-mounted accelerometers provided reference values to assess the EDR reported change in lateral velocity (delta-v), seatbelt buckle status, and airbag deployment status. Our results show that EDRs underreported the reference lateral delta-v in the vast majority of cases, mimicking the errors and conclusions found in some longitudinal EDR accuracy studies. For maximum lateral delta-v, the average arithmetic error was −3.59 kph (−13.8%) and the average absolute error was 4.05 kph (15.9%). All EDR reports that recorded a seatbelt buckle status data element correctly recorded the buckle status at both the driver and right front passenger locations.