28th October 20162016 Global NCAP Annual Meeting

Takahiro Omori of NASVA(National Agency for Automotive Safety and Victims’

Aid)　

JNCAP UPDATE

Features to be addressed for vehicle safety in Japan• After long year decrease, fatalities caused by vehicle crashes

increased to 4117 in 2015. MLIT is aiming to reduce fatalities by about 270 in 5 years.

• Pedestrian and bicyclist are about half of all.

• Elderly people, more than 65 years old, are more than half.

• Elderly people, more than 65 years old, caused more than 25 % of fatal crashes.

• About 70% of pedestrian fatal crashes occur in the night time.

MLIT plans to enhance regulation, NCAP and everything.

Outline of JNCAP

NASVAMLIT

- Procurement of test vehicles- Implementation of tests- Public Relations - Making proposals of new tests- Communication with stakeholders

DesignationImplementation/communication

JNCAP Steering Committee Meeting - Determination of test procedures - Determination of test models - Confirmation of test results

Complicated technical issues are discussed at Working Groups and Task Forces which are organized by NASVA.

Cooperation with JARI

JNCAP is MLIT’s project.

Outline of JNCAP

4

Secretariats of JNCAP as of 10/1/2016MLIT Director: Hidenobu Kubota Yuki Ebihara Satoru InoueNASVA A member of the board of directors: Takahiro Ikari Director: Takahiro Omori Manager:Haruo Otani Shouhei Hashimoto Kenichi Endo Shingo Nomoto Kohei Ukai Takumi Yagi Yoko KishinoJASIC Director of WashingtonD.C. office Kenji Sato

5

　 JNCAP items

Preventive Safety Assessment

6

2016 JNCAP Road Map

Collision Safety

2016 JNCAP Road Map on Collision Safety

*1 Small overlap, pole, fuel leakage by rear collision, rear passenger neck injury, etc.

Passenger Protection

Point Upper limit Lower limit choice totalChest Accel. 3ms 4 373m/ s2 588m/ s2

Chest Defrection 4 22mm 50mmDriver Steering wheel lower displacement -1 90mm 110mm

Point Upper limit Lower limit totalChest Defrection 4 22mm 42mmChest Accel. 3ms

Steering wheel lower displacement -1 90mm 110mmSecondly impact with steering wheel -1 without with

lowestvalue

Evaluation item

Evaluation item

If a3ms≧ 588m/ s2 ⇒ 0pointDriver

Frontal collision test 　（ FRB ， ODB ）

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

from 1995 （ FRB ）　　　　　　　　　 2000 （ ODB ）

Study Small change

Small ｃ hange on chest evaluation　 1) Belt pass

2) Evaluation of HY-III 　 AM50

2015

2016

AM50 AF05

～～

Deflection

Deflection

11

• Change of full frontal crash test coordinating with UN R137 from 2018.

• Change of side crash test in accordance with the change of real passenger vehicles’ dimensions and development of dummy from 2018.

• Introducing fitment evaluation of AACN and ACN from 2018

Things under discussion for passenger collision safety evaluation

Changes of passenger collision safety 　evaluation

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

・ Full frontal collision - coordinating with UN R137 ・ Evaluation of small female occupant Hybrid III AF05? ・ Threshold considering elderly people・ Side collision 　・ Change of moving barrier in accordance with the change of real passenger vehicles’ dimensions →AE-MDB? ・ Evaluation dummy Front: WorldSID? Used in UN pole side-impact regulation Rear: SID II-s? Problems of chest deflection measurement ・ Threshold considering elderly people

Change?Study Study

13

Weight of vehicles for MDB• From 2000 to 2013, average curb weight of JNCAP tested vehicles is 1215kg.• Considering average number of passengers ”1.5” and average weight of

people “55kg”, average weight of a vehicle weight is about 1300kg. (1215kg + 55kg×1.5people ＝ 1297kg) • The weight of AE-MDB is 1300kg.

Ave.1215kg

AE-MDB

150 500

60

JNCAP currentMDB

Euro NCAPAE-MDB ver 3.9

current MDB(UN R95)

AE-MDB

weight 950kg 1300kgrigidity １ 1.3dimension See below

350

550

300550

800

Domestic 113modelsH. Yonezawa et al., 2001, 17th ESV, Paper number 26

376504788

300

Benefit of WorldSID 50th male

ES2 WorldSID

THORAX ： DeflectionABDOMEN ： Force

THORAX ： DeflectionABDOMEN ：

Deflection

THORAX

ABDOMEN

変位計

変位計

荷重計

FR

FR FR

THORAX & ABDOMEN

FR

Enhanced bio-fidelity for side impact evaluation

Advanced Automatic Crash Notification system (AACN)

• Not only automatically making a call to an operator to send information (place, vehicle, etc.) of the crash for an ambulance when a vehicle crash occurs and airbags deploy, but also directly sending emergency medical services injury information of passengers estimated by crash information.

• Why JNCAP?

AACN and ACN

Operator

Place & vehicle

information

Automatically

call and sendCall

Emergency medical serveice

AmbulanceControl

At the same time

Send

crashinformation

Estimated injury

information

CrashRescue

Deployment of airbags

Sending medical vehicle with a doctor in proportion to injury

Call

Confirmation call

What JNCAP can do for AACN• Ambulance control centers and Emergency medical

services cannot fully support this system because practically only two auto makers are promoting fitment of AACN and ACN.

• The reason other auto makers do not promote is “Cost” and “Benefit”. They say that Infrastructure for this system is too limited and people cannot use it for now. This is a Chicken and Egg problem.

• Therefore, people expect JNCAP to run campaigns to have people buy vehicles with AACN or ACN by using persuasive leaflets (from 2016) and assessment results (from 2018)(for example, vehicles with AACN or ACN can acquire fitment points for passenger collision safety performance evaluation).

Pedestrian Protection

Pedestrian head protection perf. tests

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

from 2003 change

Ref: 1st&3rd JNCAP investigative commission in 2015

2015～ 2016 ≓ EuroNCAP)～（

Impact speed 35km/ h 40km/ h

Impact angle Adult 65° (1700mm WAD)： ＜ Child 50° (1000mm≦ WAD≦ 1700)： Child 20° (Blue line WAD 1000mm)： ＜ ＜

Image of area division

Area method [Area I,II,III*6*4] Grid method [100mm interval]

How to select evaluation impact point Authorities arbitrariness selection Random selection

Evaluation area 82.5mm from side standard line 50mm from side standard line

Evaluation threshold Linear scale [HIC: 650 2000]～ Step scale [HIC: 650～1700]

Number of test points [experience] 13 10+α

Area I Area II Area III Area I Area II Area IIISedan 65° 65° 65° 40° 40° 40°

Multipurpose 90° 60° 60° 40° 40° 40°Minivan 50° 25° 25° 45° 45° 45°

Hood Windshield

21

Pedestrian leg protection perf. tests

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

from 2011 Small change

Change of evaluation threshold

Current scale New scale

Level stage　　 4 stages (current) 　⇒ 5 stages (New) Pedestrian protection performance evaluation Head ： Leg 　 = 　 75 ： 25 (current) 　⇒　 80 ： 20 　 (New) 　The pedestrian protection performance are made to be offset and it uses it for the overall eveluation up to 2018.

offset （ overall evaluation)

Point Point

22

Other things under discussion or to be studied for pedestrian crash safety

• Active devices like airbags for pedestrian safety which are also called “deployable systems” in EuroNCAP protocol are to be fitted more on passenger vehicles because of its big effect especially on mitigation of impact on A-pillars covered by airbags.

Therefore, JNCAP prepares test procedures for these devices referring to EuroNCAP protocol in 2016.

- Verification of functioning - Verification of safety without functioning at lower speed

(only for covering area and excluding red points)

Air-bag for pedestrian safety

Over all evaluation of Collision Safety Performance

3-2. Overall Evaluation for Collision Safety Performance

Series1

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

36.4 33.3 13.1 10.7 6.2

Because of the fact that fatalities of “Pedestrian” and “Occupant” from road accidents hold most of all, “Overall Safety Performance evaluation” was introduced in 2011.

Ratio of fatalities by road user type （ 2014 ）

Pedestrian Occupant

Cyclist Motorcyclist

【 Overall Evaluation of Collision Safety Performance 】 Performed on a five-level rating☆ （ full mark of ５ stars ）

《☆☆☆☆☆ Requirement 》Needs 170points and more, moreover well balanced earning

of each tests will be neededOverall Evaluation of Collision Safety Performance (208 points) with 5 star rating

100pt 100pt 8pt

Change of overall Collision Safety Performance Evaluation from 2018

• Mitigation effect will be evaluated by social cost coordinating with that of Preventive Safety Evaluation.

• Points will be distributed according to mitigation effect of accident victims excluding the effect of regulation.

• This idea will bring us more effective and efficient evaluation method. JNCAP will think about the evaluation method through research planned in 2016 and 2017 to fill blank area of the Road Map after 2018.

• This change also enables JNCAP to implement Comprehensive Evaluation of Preventive and Collision Safety Performance

This doesn’t mean JNCAP starts this comprehensive evaluation from 2018, because major devices for preventive safety are still in developing phase and not ready for performance competition.

Preventive Safety

2016 JNCAP Road Map on Preventive Safety

*2 AEB(car to bicycle, intersection), Wrong pedal stepping, Driver drowsiness detection etc.

Transition of the fitment number of advanced safety technology

LDWS is a system which detects deviation and alerts driver.

AEBS （ car to car ） LDWS

Device volume（ k unit ）

平成（年）

・ Many manufacturers are now putting new technologies on the market and production volume of vehicles with preventive safety technologies such as AEBS are rapidly increasing.・ Spreading of safer cars are anticipated.

（出典：国交省　 ASV 技術普及状況調査）

AEBS is the system which detects forward vehicle with camera or radar and alerts the driver

AEBS (car to car) and LDWS

AEBS

LDWS

Source: ASV technology survey of MLIT

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 30

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Addition1

・ Addition 1(from 2015); ○ Rear view monitor system　 Child body sized objects (poles) are 　 placed in rear area where accidents are more likely to be caused by relatives.

Addition2

・ Addition 2(from 2016) ; AEBS test for pedestrian Two Test Scenarios; CPN (Car to Pedestrian Nearside) CPNO (Car to Pedestrian Nearside Obstruction) +Evaluation of specific speed(Child, 25,75%lap, 8km/h walk,etc.)

Study

Preventive Safety Performance Assessment items

31

Brake performance tests

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

End

Dry road surface Wet road surface

from 1995

Brake performance at 100 km/h

The distance until stopping has shortened. The difference between "dry"and "wet" has become small. The brake performance seems to be evaluated in the AEBS test.　⇒　 Brake performance test is ended at 2015 to evaluate safety　　　 performance efficiently.

32

Overall evaluation of Preventive safety performance

Pedestrian day time

Rear view monitorCar to car

pts.pts. pts.

pts.

Full score

pts.

pts.

pts.

pts.

33

25

Tactics to increase vehicles with preventive safety devices

• Thresholds of preventive safety awards are not so hard to reach because major devices for preventive safety are still in developing phase and not ready for performance competition.

• Therefore, Aiming of evaluation of preventive safety performance for now is showing off vehicles with preventive safety devices. Auto makers can use the awards on TV CM and their brochures to show off fitment of preventive safety devices.

• With this tactics, vehicles with these devices are rapidly increasing.

• Introducing Lane Departure Prevention system (LDP) and Lane Keeping Assist system (LKA) evaluation

• Introducing AEB for pedestrian for night time

• Improvement of pedestrian target for AEB

Things under discussion for preventive safety evaluation

36

Lane Departure Prevention system (LDP) and Lane Keeping Assist system (LKA) evaluation

• Crash data for points are already used for LDW evaluation. Deference is functioning ratio.

• Approaching speed, steering condition, thresholds, etc. have to be determined for automatic control considering deference of LDP and LKA through crash data analisys.

• To review marker line.

LDP and LKA evaluation

Test image

10.0m

0.50m

操舵エリア

目標軌跡

レーンマーカ接近速度

試験車速

0.75m

3.5m

39

AEB for pedestrian for night time

40

①Test scenariosCrossing with/without obstruction 　　 For night time, ・ Crashes with crossing pedestrian are major issues like daytime,　　 ・ Crossing cases from just behind other vehicles (blind spot) are 　　　　 about 20% of them.

駐停車/走行車両

の直前直後 23%

横断歩道外

横断 20%

斜め横断 5%

横断禁止 2%信号無視 7%

飛び出し3%

その他の

違反 7%

違反なし31%

人対車両／横断中，夜

社会損失額

2,541,231万円

Social loss

10K yen

Just behind vehicles 23%

Pedestrian’s violation, car to pedestrian, crossing, night time

Crossing outside crossing point 20%

Running into road 3%

Ignoring signal 7%

No violation 31%

横断中（飛び出し除く），夜間条件

遮蔽なし左から23.3%

遮蔽なし右から52.4%

遮蔽あり左から7.4%

遮蔽あり右から16.9%

社会損失額（夜）2,370,944万円

41

Crossing from far side　　“ Far side” cases are about 70% of crossing pedestrian to car crashes.

②Crossing direction

Far side, with obstruction 16.9%

Pedestrian’s walking situation (except running), car to pedestrian, crossing, night time

Far side, without obstruction 52.4%

Near side, with obstruction 7.4%

Near side, without obstruction 23.3%

Social loss

10K yen

42

③ ターゲット

社会損失額2, 541, 231万円

子供2. 2%

高齢者65. 2%

その他32. 5%

Pedestrian target is adult. Crashes with children are not many.

Pedestrian’s age, car to pedestrian, crossing, night time

Child (less than 13 years old) 2.2%

Elderly (over 65years old) 65.2%

Others

Social loss

10K. yen

45

④Luminous intensity

40m

max 20LuxLamp

40mLamp

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

件数

[件]

照度[Lx]

水平面照度Brighter condition

Darker condition

Level surface luminous intensity (Lx)

Microscopic investigation data

Num

ber o

f cra

shes

?

Difficult to determine luminous intensity and lighting condition In brighter condition, people don’t usually use driving beam. An idea of using Adaptive Driving Beams (ADB) only for darker condtion. Otherwise dipped beam.

車速条件 遮蔽なし 遮蔽あり10km/ h - -15km/ h - -20km/ h - -25km/ h - -30km/ h 3 135km/ h 5 240km/ h 7 245km/ h 9 250km/ h 9 255km/ h 7 160km/ h 4 1合計 44 11

横断中（飛び出し除外），夜間（薄暮含む）

071421283542495663707784

危険認知速度

社会

損失

額（億

円）

車速条件 遮蔽なし 遮蔽あり10km/ h 1 -15km/ h 1 -20km/ h 2 -25km/ h 2 130km/ h 2 135km/ h 3 140km/ h 3 145km/ h 2 150km/ h 2 -55km/ h 1 -60km/ h 1 -合計 20 5

横断中（飛び出し除外），昼間

071421283542495663707784

危険認知速度

社会

損失

額（億

円）

55

46

⑤Points

25 Points

Points

With Obstruction

Without Obstruction

Day time

Night time

With Obstruction

Without Obstruction

With Obstruction

Without Obstruction

47

Issures of target of AEB for pedestrian• Integration of leg moving target and stiff target Caused by posture and leg moving pace of the

target.• Adequate height target for Japanese people. →Difficult to be understood by people

• Cost of conducting tests caused by dummy durability, etc.

→limiting the number of tests.

Apprehension for over trusting for Preventive Safety technologies

• Considering possibility of misunderstanding of effect of advanced safety technologies, a guideline for publication is already made by Auto Fair Trade Counsil and used by auto makers.

Example: -Caution should be shown beside technology expanation using designated character points.

• JNCAP has to decide what has to be written with JNCAP marks to lessen over trusting of users.

Publication of Preventive Safety Evaluation

On December 1st, at JARI, JNCAP will publicize evaluation results of vehicles with AEB for pedestrian

for the first time. With this event, small demonstration of AEB for pedestrian will be held.

This is a good opportunity to have people know JNCAP because pedestrian crash is a big issue in Japan due to

the number of victims.