Rear-end crashes are a major roadway safety problem, and the potential of crash countermeasures to address this has long been recognized. High-frequency or severe-consequence scenarios are focused on the general lead-vehicle-not-moving (LVNM) case and specific crash scenarios. Operating scenarios are identified, and frequencies are assessed. From these, a small number of prevalent LVNM crash scenarios are identified as the focus for subsequent model development and crash counter-measure efforts. These scenarios suggest nominal atmospheric, roadway, lighting, vehicle, and driver conditions in designing cost-effective safety features to avoid LVNM rear-end crashes. From this, emergent models for cognitive car following are developed, based on fusing current knowledge. This will serve as a foundation for further model development efforts as well as for future human-factors experiments.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
McGeheeD. V., DingusT. A., and HorowitzA. D.. The Potential Value of a Front-to-Rear-End Collision Warning System Based on Factors of Driver Behavior, Visual Perception and Brake Reaction Time. Proc., Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 36th Annual Meeting, Atlanta, Ga., 1992, pp. 1003–1005.
2.
NajimW. G., WiacekC. J., and BurgettA. L.. Identification of Precrash Scenarios for Estimating the Safety Benefits of Rear-End Collision Avoidance Systems. Proc., 5th World Congress on Intelligent Transport Systems, Seoul, Korea, Oct. 12–16, 1998.
3.
HorowitzA. D, and DingusT. A.. Warning System Design: A Key Human Factors Issue in an In-Vehicle Front-to-Rear-End Collision Warning System. Proc., Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 36th Annual Meeting, Atlanta, Ga., 1992, pp. 1011–1013.
4.
Rear-End Crashes: Problem Size Assessment and Statistical Description. Technical Report DOT-HS-807-994. NHTSA, U.S. Department of Transportation, May1993.
5.
WiacekC. J., and NajmW. G.. Driver/Vehicle Characteristics in Rear-End Precrash Scenarios Based on the General Estimates System (GES). SAE International Congress and Exposition, Detroit, Mich., March1–4, 1999.
6.
Dynamically-Distinct Precrash Scenarios of Major Crash Types. Project Memorandum DOT-VNTSC-HS621-PM-96-17. NHTSA, U.S. Department of Transportation, June1996.
7.
Assessment of IVHS Countermeasures for Collision Avoidance: Rear-End Crashes. Technical Report DOT-HS-807-995. NHTSA, U.S. Department of Transportation, May1993.
8.
Synthesis Report: Examination of Target Vehicular Crashes and Potential ITS Countermeasures. Technical Report DOT-HS-808-263. NHTSA, U.S. Department of Transportation, June1995.
9.
DingusT. A., JahnsS. K., HorowitzA. D., and KniplingR.. Human Factors Design Issues for Crash Avoidance Systems. In Human Factors in Intelligent Transportation Systems (BarfieldW. and DingusT. A., eds.), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, N.J., 1998, pp. 55–93.
10.
FujitaY., AzukawaK., and SatoM.. Radar Brake System. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Advanced Vehicle Control, Tokyo, 1994, pp. 390–395.
11.
SeilerP., SongB., and HedrickJ. K.. Development of a Collision Avoidance System. SAE International Congress and Exposition, Detroit, Mich., Feb.1998.
12.
TsaoH.-S., and HallR. W.. A Probabilistic Model for AVCS Longitudinal Collision/Safety Analysis. IVHS Journal, Vol. 1, No. 3, 1994, pp. 261–274.
13.
KourjanskiM., and MisenerJ.. Human Driver Modeling: A Micro-simulation Approach. Proc., 8th Annual Meeting of the Intelligent Transportation Society of America, Detroit, Mich., May 1998.
14.
National Accident Sampling System General Estimates System. Database. National Center for Statistics and Analysis, NHTSA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1997. (See also http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/ncsa/nass_ges.html.)
15.
ChanC., and TanH.-S.. Automated Steering Control in Vehicle-Following Collisions. Proc., Ninth Annual Meeting of ITS America, Washington, D.C., April 1999.
16.
KniplingR. R., WangJ.-S., and YinH.-M.. Rear-End Crashes: Problem Size Assessment and Statistical Description. Technical Report DOT-HS-807-994. Office of Crash Avoidance Research, National Center for Statistics and Analysis, NHTSA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1993.
17.
AyresT., DonelsonA., BrownS., BjelajacV., and Van SelowW.. On-Board Truck Computers and Accident Risk. Safety Engineering and Risk Analysis, Vol. 6, 1996, pp. 1–6.
18.
HatterickG. R., and BathurstJ. R.. Accident Avoidance Skill Training and Performance Testing. Final Report DOT-HS-801852. URS/Matrix Company, Falls Church, Va., 1976.
19.
YooH., HunterD., and GreenP.. Automotive Collision Warning Effectiveness: A Simulator Comparison of Text Versus Icons. Technical Report UMTRI-96-29. University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute, Ann Arbor, 1996.
20.
AdamsL.Review of the Literature on Obstacle Avoidance Maneuvers: Braking Versus Steering. Technical Report UMTRI-94-19. University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute, Ann Arbor, 1994.
21.
Task C3(1) Interim Report. National Automated Highway System Consortium, Washington, D.C., March1998.
22.
LloydM., WitherowK., PierowiczJ., GawronV., and BittnerA.. Using Driver Primary Control Input to Determine the Timing of Alerts and Warnings. Presented at Future Transportation Technology Conference, San Diego, Calif., 1997.
23.
OlsonP., and SivakM.. Perception-Response Time to Unexpected Roadway Hazards. Human Factors, Vol. 28, 1986, pp. 91–96.
24.
SivakM., and FlannaganM.. Fast-Rise Brake Lamp as a Collision-Prevention Device. Ergonomics, Vol. 36, No. 4, 1993, pp. 391–395.
25.
CardS. K., MoranT. P., and NewellA.. The Model Human Processor: An Engineering Model of Human Performance. In Handbook of Perception and Human Performance; Volume II—Cognitive Processes and Performance (BoffK., KaufmanL., and ThomasJ., eds.), Wiley-Interscience, New York, 1986, Ch. 45.
26.
RussoJ. E.Adaptation of Cognitive Processes to the Eye-Movement System. In Eye Movements and the Higher Psychological Functions (SendersJ. W., FisherD. F., and MontyR. A., eds.), Erlbaum, Hillsdale, N.J., 1978.
27.
BusswellG. T.Fundamental Reading Habits: A Study of Their Development. Educational Monographs (supplement), Vol. 21, 1922.
28.
GodboleD. N., SenguptaR., MisenerJ., KourjanskaiaN., and MichaelJ.. Benefit Evaluation of Crash Avoidance Systems. Presented at the 77th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1998.
29.
BlackwellH. R., and McCreadyD. W.. Foveal Detection Thresholds for Various Durations of Target Presentation. Proc., 31st Biannual Meeting, Armed Forces-NRC Vision Committee, Wright Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Nov.1952, pp. 249–257.
30.
GerhartG. R., BednarzE. L., MeitzlerT. J., SohnE., and KarlsenR. E.. Target Acquisition Methodology for Visual and Infrared Imaging Sensors. Optical Engineering, Vol. 35, No. 10, 1996, pp. 3026–3036.
31.
Quantitative Description of Obscuration Factors for Electro-Optical and Millimeter Wave Systems. DOD-HDBK-178(ER). U.S. Department of Defense, July1986.
32.
FarberE., and MatleC.. PCDETECT: A Revised Version of the Detect Seeing Distance Model. Presented at 68th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1989.
33.
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation of Materiel for Extreme Climatic Conditions. Regulation No. 70-38. U.S. Army, Aug.1979.
34.
HoffmannE. R., and MortimerR. G.. Scaling of Relative Velocity Between Vehicles. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 28, No. 4, 1996, pp. 415–421.
35.
OhtaH.Individual Differences in Driving Distance Headway. In Vision in Vehicles: IV (GaleA. G., ed.), Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 1993, pp. 91–100.
36.
HoffmannE. R., and MortimerR. G.. Drivers’ Estimates of Time to Collision. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 26, No. 4, 1994, pp. 511–520.
37.
SchiffW., and DetwilerM. L.. Information Used in Judging Impending Collision. Perception, Vol. 8, 1979, pp. 647–658.
38.
McLeodR. W., and RossH. E.. Optic Flow and Cognitive Factors in Time-to-Collision Estimates. Perception, Vol. 12, 1983, pp. 417–423.
39.
Van der HorstR.Time-to-Collision as a Cure for Decision-Making in Braking. In Vision in Vehicles: III (GaleA. G., ed.), Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 1991.
40.
FancherP. S., and BaraketZ.. Evolving Model for Studying Driver-Vehicle System Performance in Longitudinal Control of Headway. In Transportation Research Record 1631, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1998, pp. 13–19.
