Search Results

Forward Collision Warning (FCW) is a system intended to warn the driver in order to reduce the number of rear end collisions or reduce the severity of collisions. However, it has the potential to generate driver annoyances and unintended consequences due to high ineffectual (false or unnecessary) alarms with a corresponding reduction in the total system effectiveness. The ineffectual alarm rate is known to be closely associated with the “time to issue warning.” This results in a conflicting set of requirements. The earlier the time the warning is issued, the greater probability of reducing the severity of the impact or eliminating it. However, with an earlier warning time there is a greater chance of ineffectual warning, which could result in significant annoyance, frequent complaints and the driver's disengagement of the FCW. Disengaging the FCW eliminates its potential benefits.

One method of understanding the general mechanical response of a complex system such as a vehicle, a human surrogate, a bridge, a boat, a plane, etc., is to subject it to an input, such as an impact, and obtain the response time-histories. The responses can be accelerations, velocities, strains, etc. In general, when experiments of this type are run the responses are contaminated by sample-to-sample variation, test-to-test variability, random noise, instrumentation noise, and noise from unknown sources. One common method of addressing the noise in the system to obtain the underlying response is to run multiple tests on different samples that represent the same system and add them together obtaining an average. This functionally reduces the random noise. However, if the fundamental response of each sample is not the same, then it is not altogether clear what the average represents. It may not capture the underlying physics.