1 From user needs to applications: the Safespot approach based on road accident data analysis 6th European congress on ITS, Aalborg 2007 1/15SAFESPOTSAFESPOT

1/15 1From user needs to applications: the Safespot approach based on road accident data analysis6th European congress on ITS, Aalborg 2007

SAFESPOTSAFESPOTSAFESPOTSAFESPOT

Fabien Bonnefoi, Francesco Bellotti, Tobias Schendzielorz

1*.Cofiroute, France, 6 à 10 rue Troyon 92316 Sèvres, tel: +33 1 41 14 71 52, [email protected]. Dept of Electronics and Biophysical Engineering, University of Genoa, Italy

3. Dept. of Traffic Engineering and Control, Technische Universität München, Germany

« FROM USER NEEDS TO APPLICATIONS: THE SAFESPOTAPPROACH BASED ON ROAD ACCIDENT DATA ANALYSIS »


The SAFESPOT IP

Project of the European Commission Information Society and media

• Cooperative system /Communication V2V and V2I• 8 Sps and 51 partners from all domains…

« By combining data from vehicle and road-side sensors, the SAFESPOT applications will allow an extension of the time in which a potential accident is detected(…). »


COSSIB and WP2

• SP5 – COSSIB Cooperative system Infrastructure based

• Applicative Sub Project

• COFIROUTE = SP5 leader + WP2 leader

• Planning: Five main steps (WP)WP2 User need and requirement analysisWP3 Specifications and SimulationWP4 Development and prototypeWP5/6 Field Test/Evaluation

Cofiroute

PEEK

ANAS

Centro Ricerche Fiat

Conseil Général Côtes d’Armor

Daimler Chrysler

DIBE

LCPC

Lacroix Trafic

Mizar

München University

Renault

SIEMENS

Sodit

TNO


COSSIB


Objective and Method

WP5.2 Objective:

« Define clearly the needs and requirements of infrastructure-based safety systems within the context of the overall SAFESPOT project.»

WP5.2 Method:


Data Analysis

1st analysis: European data (Complete but coarse grain)

– Eurostat– Database CARE – EACS– Project SAFETY NET Rankers PENDANT

Type of results:

Indicators VsClassification

Accidents Injury Death Risk level 1 Mortality index2

1st Urban – 75% 70% 55% 0.57 – 1.10 18.7%

2nd Rural – 20% 20% 35% 0.43 4,6%

3rd Motorway – 5% 10% 10% 0.06 1.4%

Urban Rural Motorway1 (death per million vehicles/km)2 (percentage of lethal accidents in the total number of accidents)


Data analysis by areas

0,00

0,05

0,10

0,15

0,20

0,25

0,30

0,35

0,40

singular vulnurableroad user

head-tail frontal aside

motorway

ruraal

city

Type of Accident# with bodily

injury# fatal

accidents% with bodily

injury% fatal

accidents

Accident caused by turning into a road 60960 212 27% 15%

Accident between vehicles moving along in carriageway

46698 103 21% 7%

Accident caused by turning off the road 35474 128 16% 9%

Other accident 26710 190 12% 13%

Driving accident 25507 366 11% 25%

Accident caused by crossing the road 19511 422 9% 29%

Accident involving stationary vehicles 8454 18 4% 1%

•Detailed data from countries / regions or cities (related to partners and test sites)

•Specific papers, ex: road departure or Intersection

Sources (examples):- Italy and the city of Turin- French motorways and rural roads of the Brittany province- Urban areas in Germany, and from the Netherlands.

Causes of accidents Urban Roads %

Driving in distracted or erratic fashion 30 649 20

Vehicle not respecting safety distance 22 703 15

Exceeding speed limit 21 780 14

Making an irregular manoeuvre 14 011 9

Failure to give priority 13 594 9

Failure to stop at stop sign 13 140 9

Failure to give priority to vehicle from right 13 593 9

Turning in an irregular way 7 186 5

Overtaking in irregular way 4 984 3

Proceeding in wrong direction 4 924 3

Pedestrian run over on zebra crossing 5 004 3

Avoiding another vehicle 2 228 1

Vehicle stopped without any stop sign shown 144 0

Avoiding an animal 332 0

Insufficient headlights 55 0

TOTAL accidents due to driving behaviour 154 327 100

Urban Area25%

Rural Roads63%

Motorways12%

Urban roads TOTAL

Accid. Deaths Injured Accid.

Deaths

Injured

Fine 135.670 1.779 179.754 172.471 4.067 4.566

Rain 18.406 235 26.213 26.327 663 810

Fog 757 14 1.081 1.402 56 89

Snow 511 7 758 917 18 30

Hail 54 1 77 115 5 1

Wind 186 5 250 304 12 13

Other 14.309 269 19.412 23.017 804 792

Total 169.893 2.310 227.545 224.553 5.625 6.301

0,0%

5,0%

10,0%

15,0%

20,0%

25,0%

turning, U-turn,

reserving

priority,precedence

distance speed use of theroad

improperbehaviuortow ards

pedestrians

drivingf itness

overtaking driving sideby side

stationaryvehicles,

safetymeasures

driving past load, numberof

passengers

failure toobservelighting

regulations

othermistakesmade by

driver

accidents with bodiliy injury accidents with fatalities


Safety related scenarios

NB: Factors not always considered as main cause (cf Excessive Speed vs Priority)

Name Speed and dangerous driving

Type Wrong speed, dangerous driving 42%

Aggravating factor Speed

Location Highway

Extension 1

Type excessive speed 19%

Extension 2

Type overtaking 12%

Extension 3

Type wrong speed with traffic condition 5,9%

Extension 4

Type wrong speed with weather condition 3,4%

Extension 4

Type insufficient safety distance 1,7%

•General scenarios: 8•Special black spot scenarios: 5•By areas (total): 15


24 use cases classified by categoriesExample:

Use cases

Frequency of occurrence

Failure to observe the traffic control by policemen or traffic lights is the reason for 2.0% of accidents with injured people and 0.8% with fatalities in the urban area in Germany.

Primary Actor SAFESPOT equipped Vehicles and RSU. Secondary Actor(s) Road-side sensors and acoustic warning devices Scenario Description Step Action 1 Additionally to the infrastructure-based sensing

technologies all vehicles shall transmit their location, speed, acceleration and turning intention (indicator on/off) to the RSU when they approach the intersection.

2 A RSU procedure (model) reconstructs and forecasts the trajectories of the vehicles and other road-user (like pedestrians) real-time, based on XFCD, road-side sensing and the traffic light control status.

3 In the case of an imminent red light violation (short distance to stop line + high speed) appropriate warnings are generated by a decision and reasoning procedure, which takes into account the available actors, remaining reaction time of the road users, and other given criteria.

4 Warning information is sent out to all drivers concerned.

Pedestrians and bikers are warned by means of acoustic devices.

5 Red light violator: The vehicle’s ADAS presents the warning and ask

the driver to break. The vehicle’s ADAS presents the info and interacts

with the driver properly to avoid the threatening accident.

6 All incident data are recorded in a local or central database for further use.

Extensions Step Action 1a Road-side sensing is used in order to improve the

localisation accuracy of the vehicles (e.g. Laser).

User Needs

Drivers, pedestrians and bikers want to be informed or warned in case of red light violation.

The drivers like to have recommendations how to behave best in such cases.

Pedestrian and cyclists wants to be warned by means of road-side installed warning devices (e.g. acoustically or flash light) early if dangerous situations occurs that might concern him.

Road operators want to reduce the number of accidents (esp. fatalities) in urban areas significantly.

The driver wants to be warned by means of ADAS early if a dangerous situation occurs that might concern him.

Corresponding requirements

SP5_RQ01, up to SP5_RQ11, SP5_RQ13 up to SP5_RQ21, SP5_RQ24, SP5 RQ32

Related UCs SP5_UC22, SP5_UC55 Open issues The timing is crucial here. It is not clear yet whether there is

enough time in case of detection to generate and perform appropriate warnings. Also doubtful whether there remains enough reaction time for other drivers.

Legal issues are not clarified until now. What if the warning from the red light violator provokes other accidents?

Comments If the infrastructure transmits the status of the traffic lights to all vehicles the violating vehicle can be warned early according to its speed approaching the crossing.

Case Name Safe signalized intersection (red light violation) Case ID SP5_UC31_v1.0 Status Final Short description

The trajectories of the vehicles and other road-user (like pedestrians) shall be reconstructed and forecasted real-time through road-side procedures, based on XFCD, road-side sensing and the traffic light control status. In the case of an imminent red light violation (short distance to stop line + high speed) warnings shall be send out to the drivers concerned. As far as pedestrian and bikers are concerned, warnings could be realized by means of acoustic signals.

Purpose Imminent red light violation shall be detected as early as possible in order to warn all the road-users concerned. The goal is to decrease the number of accidents of this type significantly by employing such co-operative systems.

Rationale Red light violation of drivers (unintentional or not) at signalized intersections often provokes extreme dangerous situations and are a source of frequent fatal accidents.

Authors Paul Mathias - SIEMENS Driving environment Urban or Rural Intersection (no urban motorway) Vehicle probe type All vehicles shall transmit their location, speed, acceleration and

turning intention (indicator on/off) to the RSU when they approach the intersection.

Risk’s source The other drivers don’t expect a vehicle violating the red light. In most cases a red light violator remains outside the perception range of the other drivers.

Successful end condition

Warning the road users of the red light violators and suggesting the right behaviours.

Failed end condition The accuracy of the vehicle location is not good enough in urban areas.

Trigger Vehicle about to violate red light.

RSU


Use cases

• Detailed use cases

– Purpose– Rational– Risk sources– Successful end conditions– Failed end conditions– Trigger– Frequency of occurrence– Scenario description (step1,step2, etc.)– Extensions– Related User Needs– Related Requirements– Related use cases– Open issue– Comments


SP5 Applications

INITIAL LIST OF APPLICATIONS(Technical Annex)

FINAL LIST

OF APPLICATIONS

Speed alert and road departure prevention

Speed Alert – SpA

Smart signalling for safety enhancement

Road Departure Prevention – RDep

Safety margin for Assistance and emergency vehicles

Safety Margin for Assistance and Emergency Vehicles – SMAEV

Safe urban intersection Co-operative Intersection Collision Prevention System – CICPS

Hazard and incident warning Hazard and Incident Warning – H&IW


Potential Impact

• Based on the Safety related scenarios

•Gives Percentage of accidents or situations that are covered by each application

Road departure prevention

Scope: Accident causes: All causes where a road departure can be the main or an aggravating factor and where the application speed alert is not strongly relevant.

Related Use cases:

-Obstacles : SP5_UC16-Misjudgement : SP5_UC21-Rule violation: SP5_UC32-Critical environment conditions : SP5_UC41, SP5_UC42, SP5_UC45-Safety improving driver assistance :

Potential impact(The Road Departure application will impact on all the 3 main environments)

Urban area

Scenario : Driver’s lack of vigilance- leaving the carriageway: 20%

Supposing a 100% reliable system working on all the cars, then we could expect that the Road Departure application would cover around 20% of the German urban lethal accidents.

Rural area

The French data analysis on rural roads reports that between 30% and 40% of the accidents are of “Run-off road” type. These figures give an idea of the potential impact of a 100% reliable SAFESPOT system working on all the cars and in all the areas.

Motorway

Scenario : Driver’s lack of vigilance - Veer of the lane 25% A 100% reliable SAFESPOT system should be able to manage about 25% of road departure accidents in Italian and French motorways.


Application and use cases priority

Rule violation Use case Name

Related application

Safety Critical Scenario

UR

BA

N

RU

RA

L

MO

TO

RW

AY T

OT

AL

SP5_UC31

Safe signalized intersection (red light violation)

Safe urban intersection

Intersection black spot

6 5 11

SP5_UC32Prevention of Driver Excessive Speed

Speed alert / Road Departure

Rule violation / Road departure / Drowsiness /

8 9 17

SP5_UC33

Right of way (stop sign), not signalized roads

Safe urban intersection

Priority / Stop signs

8 7 2 17

SP5_UC34Ghost drivers (wrong way driving)

Speed alert, Hazard and incident warning

Wrong way driving

4 7(S)

11


Test sites and evaluation

Evaluation of-Level of detection on real condition-Driver response to the system

Numerous test site around Europe- cities- rural roads- motorways- bridge and tunnels


THE END

Thank you for your attention !

Questions ?

Documents

1 From user needs to applications: the Safespot approach based on road accident data analysis 6th European congress on ITS, Aalborg 2007 1/15SAFESPOTSAFESPOT