Encouraging the purchase of safer vehicles - Part A

Encouraging the purchase of safer vehicles - Part A
ENCOURAGING THE PURCHASE OF SAFER
VEHICLES - PART A
BENEFITS AND COSTS OF VEHICLE SAFETY
FEATURES
Prepared by
Michael Paine
Vehicle Design and Research Pty Limited
for
DEPARTMENT FOR PLANNING AND INFRASTRUCTURE
WESTERN AUSTRALIA
December 2002
REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE
Report No.
Report Date
Pages
G227A
December 2002
139
Title and Subtitle
Encouraging the Purchase of Safer Vehicles – Benefits and Costs of Safety
Features
Authors
Michael Paine
Performing Organisation
Vehicle Design and Research Pty Limited
10 Lanai Place, Beacon Hill NSW Australia 2100
Sponsoring Organisation
Department for Planning and Infrastructure, Government of Western Australia
Vehicle Safety Branch, 21 Murray Rd South, Welshpool WA 6106
This was a project under the Road Safety Council Research Program (RSCRP)
administered by the Research Advisory Group (RAG). The project was managed
by Trevor McDonald of the Vehicle Safety Branch, Department for Planning and
Infrastructure.
Abstract
Road safety research shows that there could be substantial benefits arising from
encouraging the purchase of safer vehicles. Fleet and private vehicle buyers
need to be targeted in such strategies. To assist in the development of effective
strategies an analysis was undertaken of the potential benefits and costs of more
than 60 safety features that are available or under development.
The analysis identified priority safety features that provide cost-effective
reductions in serious injuries and fatalities.
Keywords
PASSENGER VEHICLE, OCCUPANT, INJURIES, AIRBAG,
CRASHWORTHINESS
Disclaimer
The views expressed in this report are those of the author and do not necessarily
represent the views or policy of the West Australian Government or its
departments.
CONTENTS
Executive Summary .............................................................................................. 2
Features that are readily available ................................................................. 2
Features that are available on some vehicles but are not common ............... 2
Features that are rarely available in Australia ................................................ 3
Introduction ........................................................................................................... 4
Sources of data ..................................................................................................... 4
Methodology for estimating benefits and costs ..................................................... 4
List of safety features......................................................................................... 6
Cost of safety features ....................................................................................... 6
Cost of road crashes.......................................................................................... 6
Crashes potentially influenced by safety features .............................................. 7
Effectiveness of safety features ......................................................................... 8
Accounting for "Exposure"..................................................................................... 8
Results of Benefit/Cost Analysis ........................................................................... 9
Effectiveness in reducing serious crash outcomes ............................................. 18
Discussion .......................................................................................................... 18
Priority safety features .................................................................................... 19
Features that are readily available .............................................................. 19
Features that are available on some vehicles but are not common ............ 19
Features that are rarely available in Australia ............................................. 19
Conclusions ........................................................................................................ 20
References ......................................................................................................... 20
Appendix A - Annotated Bibliography ......................................................................
Appendix B - Summary of Safety Features .............................................................
Appendix C - Details of Benefit/Cost Analyses........................................................
Appendix D - Derivation of cost estimates...............................................................
Page 1
Executive Summary
There is a wide range of safety features and products available for motor vehicles
that can assist in avoiding accidents or making them less severe. Some of these
features are only available on luxury vehicles and these vehicles tend to do well
in crashworthiness ratings based on real world crashes. The Swedish insurance
organisation Folksam has estimated that at least 30% of fatal and serious injuries
could be avoided if the average crashworthiness of the fleet was raised to that of
the best vehicles currently available.
There would be benefits in Australia arising from making some of these safety
features more widely available (that is, encouraging vehicle manufacturers to
make them available as standard or optional equipment) and encouraging vehicle
purchasers to buy vehicles with these features.
A comprehensive range of vehicle safety features has been evaluated. Road
safety research literature has been analysed to determine, where possible, the
likely influence of these safety features on road accidents. Economic analysis
methodology (as used by the Roads and Traffic Authority of NSW for evaluating
items such as proposed roadworks) has been applied to each safety feature to
derive an estimate of long term benefits and costs. The resulting benefit/cost
ratios contained some surprises - features commonly regarded as cost effective
did not rank high in the list. Further analysis suggested that adjusting for
exposure (such as higher than average occupancy of certain seats) results in
more favourable ranking of these features.
It is recommended that new vehicle purchasers, particularly purchasers of fleets,
be encouraged to place a higher priority on safety in the selection process.
Greater awareness of safety features that have a significant influence on serious
crashes would go some way towards this goal.
Priority safety features are listed below. These either have favourable benefit cost
ratios, when compared with a driver airbag or are effective at reducing serious
crashes. To arrive at benefit cost ratios above average exposure has been
assumed in some cases. This is likely with fleet vehicles. With some features it is
sometimes difficult to establish whether a particular vehicle has them as standard
or optional equipment.
Features that are readily available
•
driver airbag (fortunately most models now have a driver airbag as standard)
•
side airbag for driver and front passenger
•
ABS brakes
•
a cargo barrier in wagons and vans
•
a front passenger airbag
Features that are available on some vehicles but are not common
•
headlights “on” alarm or automatic headlights or daytime running lights
•
seat belt load limiters for front seats
Page 2
•
side airbags for the rear outboard seats
•
speed alarm (set by driver)
•
seat belt pretensioner for front seats
•
anti-submarining seat design
•
hazard lights activate in a severe crash
Features that are rarely available in Australia
•
top speed limiter (set at 120km/h)
•
seat belt interlock (smart alarm)
•
high transmittance glazing
•
knee bolster/padding
•
laminated or shatter-proof glazing for all windows
Page 3
Introduction
There is a wide range of safety features and products available for motor vehicles
that can assist in avoiding accidents or making them less severe. Some of these
features are only available on luxury vehicles and these vehicles tend to do well
in crashworthiness ratings based on real world crashes. The Swedish insurance
organisation Folksam has estimated that at least 30% of fatal and serious injuries
could be avoided if the average crashworthiness of the fleet was raised to that of
the best vehicles currently available.
There would be benefits in Australia arising from making some of these safety
features more widely available (that is, encouraging vehicle manufacturers to
make them available as standard or optional equipment) and encouraging vehicle
purchasers to buy vehicles with these features.
In addition, there is now considerable information about the relative safety of
vehicle models available from the New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) and
the Used Car Safety Rating (UCSR) program.
An information package that focuses on safety issues will assist in influencing the
purchase of safer new vehicles, particularly fleets. To assist in the preparation of
such a package an analysis has been conducted of safety features that are
available or are under development. A substantial literature search has been
conducted in order to establish, where possible, the likely benefits and costs of
these features. The results of the analysis are set out in this report.
This was a project was conducted under the Road Safety Council Research
Program (RSCRP) administered by the Research Advisory Group (RAG). The
project was managed the Department for Planning and Infrastructure.
Sources of data
Proceedings of conferences associated with vehicle safety and other sources
were reviewed for items concerning benefit/cost analyses in general and specific
information about the costs and effectiveness of safety features. Results of the
literature search are set out in Appendix A. More than 300 documents were
covered although not all were subsequently used in the benefit cost analyses
Glass’s Guide to Australian vehicle models (Glass’s Guide 2001) was used for
information about safety features on vehicles and the cost and resale value of
some safety features.
Methodology for estimating benefits and costs
In general, information about the benefits and costs of safety features are
sketchy and inconsistent. Various methodologies have been applied in an
attempt to analyse some safety features but often the methodology is not
universally applicable to vehicle safety features.
In 1998 Vehicle Design and Research carried out some related investigations for
the Roads and Traffic Authority of NSW (Paine and Gibbs,1998). The RTA's
Economic Analysis Manual (RTA 1998) was used as a basis for that work.
However, the Manual was primarily intended for assessment of roadworks and it
Page 4
was not directly applicable to vehicle safety features. It was therefore adapted for
the 1998 project in consultation with the RTA's economic analysis personnel. In
essence, the methodology involved converting the annual cost of road crashes to
an annual dollar risk per vehicle. The benefits of applying a safety feature to a
particular vehicle could then be estimated, based on the types of crashes that the
safety feature was likely to influence, and the effectiveness of the feature in such
crashes (the percent that are likely to be saved).
A significant advantage of this approach is that it is independent of the proportion
of the fleet fitted with the safety feature.
Briefly, the steps involved were:
1. Identify each safety feature. Estimate the initial cost of the feature, the
possible effect on resale value (giving a net installation cost) and the annual
cost of the feature (maintenance or amortised replacement)
2. Identify the group(s) of vehicles to which the safety feature is applicable (in
this project the analysis was confined to passenger cars but it applies equally
to other vehicles such as trucks, buses and motorcycles)
3. Calculate the annual crash risk, in terms of road crash dollars, for fatal,
serious injury, minor injury and non-injury crashes for a single vehicle.
4. Determine the types of crashes potentially influenced by the safety feature.
For example, driver airbags are generally only of benefit in a frontal crash.
5. Estimate the proportion of the influenced crashes that are likely to be saved
by use of the safety feature. This step usually has the greatest uncertainty.
6. Calculate the crash savings, based on steps 3, 4 and 5.
7. Calculate the net annual savings by subtracting the annual (maintenance)
cost from the estimated crash savings
8. Determine appropriate financial values to use in the benefit/c cost analysis
(7% discount rate and 10 year evaluation period)
9. Calculate the benefit/cost ratio by applying the Present Value formula to the
net annual savings and dividing by the net installation cost.
B/C = PV(annual crash savings - annual maintenance, 7% for 10 years)
(Initial cost - extra resale value)
Further details about the application of each of these steps to the current
project are set out below.
Page 5
List of safety features
A list of safety features that was provided in the project brief was combined with
the results of a literature review to produce a list of possible safety features for
analysis. The features were categorised into crash factors to aid analysis and to
ensure that all aspects of the crash sequence were covered. These factors were:
Table 1
FACTOR
DRIVER’S CONTROL OF VEHICLE
HANDLING AND BRAKING
HAZARD RECOGNITION BY DRIVER
HAZARD RECOGNITION BY OTHERS
OTHER AVOIDANCE FACTORS
OCCUPANT RESTRAINT
VEHICLE INTEGRITY
HAZARD TO OTHER ROAD USERS
HAZARD TO OCCUPANTS
POST-CRASH FACTORS (RESCUE)
Appendix B contains details about each of the safety features included in the
analysis.
Cost of safety features
The cost of each safety feature was estimated from the limited information in the
literature review, from Glass's Guide and by extrapolation of the cost of similar
devices. Details are set out in Appendix D.
In a few cases resale value was available from Glass's Guide. Where available,
the 1998 resale value of an option was used to calculate a net cost after three
years since many fleets look at disposing of vehicles after about 3 years [Craigen
1992].
There is considerable uncertainty about the cost of safety features, particularly
since the cost can vary greatly between models of vehicle. The values used are a
best guess for popular vehicles. It has been assumed that each safety feature is
reasonably popular and therefore there is an opportunity to spread development
costs over a large market. Features will usually be more expensive if they are
only supplied in small numbers. Other than this possibility, the benefit/cost
methodology is not greatly influenced by the proportion of the fleet having a
particular feature.
Cost of road crashes
The RTA Economic Analysis Manual uses generalised crash costs - namely a
generic cost of each fatal, serious injury, minor injury and non-injury crash. In
most cases no attempt is made to identify the costs for particular types of
Page 6
crashes, although some information is available for crashes involving heavy
trucks.
The RTA Manual gives costs per crash. For a safety feature analysis it is
necessary to convert this to a cost per car involved. The following table shows the
derivation of these costs.
Table 2
ESTIMATION OF CRASH COSTS PER VEHICLE
(Based on NSW crash statistics for 1999)
Cars on register:
Crash
Type
Fatal
2,661,000.00
Car
Cars in
Ratio
Cost per
Cost per
Rate per
Cost per
crashes
crashe
Car/Crash
crash#
car invol.
10K cars
car reg.
402
528
0.76 $937,000 $713,398
1.98
$141.55
Hosp Inj*
3,825
5,750
0.67 $175,000 $116,413
21.61
$251.55
Other inj*
13,413
20,386
0.66
$27,000
$17,765
76.61
$136.10
Non-Injury
31,226
52,875
0.59
$12,200
$7,205
198.70
$143.16
298.91
$672.36
* Estimated from 17238 total with 22% being hospital admissions
# Based on RTA Economic Analysis Manual, 1999, Table 8
This analysis indicates that the "average" car represents an crash risk valued at
$672 per year. This is the maximum amount that could be saved if all crashes
were eliminated. This is somewhat less than the typical amount that vehicle
owners pay in insurance premiums to cover personal injury and property losses.
Furthermore it does not take into account the traumatic effects that a fatal or
serious crash can have on business, family and friends.
Crashes potentially influenced by safety features
Only crashes that clearly had potential to be influenced by a particular safety
feature were included in the analysis. For example, driver airbags are generally
only beneficial in a frontal crash, which comprise about 60% of all crashes. Other
factors for which reasonable crash information was available included severity
(fatal, injury of property) day/night time, wet weather, road user movement ,
speed, alcohol and fatigue.
In some cases factors were combined. For example, side airbags for outboard
rear seating positions could be expected to have an influence mainly on side
impact crashes (20% of all crashes) where there was a rear seat occupant (13%
– see next section). The estimated proportion of crashes influenced was
therefore 20% x 13% = 3%.
Appendix C sets out the basis for estimating crashes influenced by each safety
feature. Cases involving high uncertainty are indicated in that appendix.
Page 7
Effectiveness of safety features
An estimate was made of the proportion of influenced crashes that were likely to
be saved by a particular safety feature. For example, the literature suggests that
front passenger airbags are about 20% effective at reducing fatal and serious
injuries. This was applied to frontal crashes with front seat passengers (estimated
12% of all crashes) giving an estimated fatal crash saving of 12% x 20% = 2.4%.
Appendix C includes estimates of the effectiveness of each safety feature and,
where applicable, includes the literature references that were used to derive the
estimate. As indicated in that appendix, there was uncertainty about the
effectiveness of some of the safety features. In these cases the assumptions
made in deriving an estimate of effectiveness are stated in the appendix.
Accounting for "Exposure"
The method of calculating benefit/cost treats all vehicles as equal. New vehicles,
particularly fleet vehicles, typically travel at least twice the annual kilometres of
the "average" vehicle. Their exposure to the risk of serious accidents is therefore
at least twice the average and the benefit/cost ratio could be expected to be at
least twice that of the average vehicle. For this reason the values used in the
graphs have been normalised so that they are expressed relative to that of a
driver airbag. In this way consumers can compare various safety features with the
priority they assign to a driver airbag. It turns out that the actual benefit/cost ratio
for a driver airbag (for an "average" Australian vehicle) is 0.8 - that is, the benefits
are slightly less than the costs. Therefore normalisation of this value to 1 has only
a small effect.
Safety features that apply to particular non-driver seating positions have the
potential to be much more cost effective in cases where the occupancy is higher
than average. Average occupancy was based on (unpublished) RTA NSW
surveys and accident statistics:
Table 3 - Assumed Average Occupancy
Seating Position
Occupancy
Driver
100%
Front passenger
20%
Rear outboard (L or R)
13%
Centre rear
1%
For example, due mainly to the low average occupancy, a front passenger airbag
has a benefit/cost ratio of only 0.2. However, if this seating position is occupied
most of the time in a particular vehicle then the benefit/cost ratio reaches 1 (this
is better than that of a driver airbag - although passenger airbags are slightly less
effective than driver airbags, the net cost of passenger airbags is typically lower).
Another example is cargo barriers. For the "average" station wagon or van it is
assumed that significant cargo is only carried 5% of the time. For commercial
vehicles this figure could be 100%, suggesting a benefit cost ratio twenty times
the "average" value of 0.47. In other words for such cases the benefits exceed
Page 8
the costs by 9 to 1. A more conservative value has been used in the analysis
based on a "high use" rate of 20% and giving a benefit/cost ratio of 1.9.
In order to give an indication of the range of benefits arising from above-average
levels of exposure, the calculations include a "high use" (HI USE) component.
Results of Benefit/Cost Analysis
Appendix C contains details of the analysis for each safety feature. The following
table shows the list sorted by estimated benefit/cost ratio.
Note that the first item, a top speed limiter, shows a very high benefit/cost ratio.
This is partly because it has been assumed that top speed limiting can be very
easily built into modern engine management chips for little or no cost.
For the "average" vehicle only 13 of the evaluated features showed a benefit/cost
ratio greater than one - indicating that benefits exceed costs. Several items that
were assumed to provide good road safety benefits did not score particularly well.
Examples are ABS brakes, driver airbag, side airbags and passenger airbags.
This was mainly due to the high installation costs of these devices and the low
average occupancy of some seats.
Table 4 - Summary of Estimated Benefit/Cost Ratios
DESCRIPTION
TOP SPEED LIMITER (SET AT 120km/h)
COST
(NET)
MAINT.
BENEFIT/
COST
(HI-USE)
PAGE
APP C
$1.00
$0.00
67.22
C6
HEADLIGHTS ON WARNING/AUTO
$50.00
$20.00
7.79
C15
DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS
$50.00
$2.00
7.67
C15
SEAT BELT INTERLOCK
$50.00
$0.00
3.19
C29
SEAT BELT LOAD LIMITERS, FRONT
$20.00
$0.00
1.95
C30
SPEED ALARM
$50.00
$0.00
1.92
C5
HIGH TRANSMITTANCE GLAZING
$50.00
$0.00
1.40
C12
KNEE BOLSTER/PADDING
$100.00
$0.00
1.36
C20
LAMINATED OR SHATTER-PROOF GLAZING
FOR ALL W INDOW S
$100.00
$0.00
1.12
C17
$40.00
$0.00
1.12
C33
$100.00
$0.00
1.12
C31
ANTI-SUBMARING SEAT DESIGN
$40.00
$0.00
1.12
C33
HAZARD LIGHT ACTIVATE IN SEVERE CRASH
$50.00
$0.00
1.11
C39
HELMETS/HEAD BANDS FOR OCCUPANTS
$30.00
$10.00
0.90
C19
SEAT BELT BUCKLE MOUNTED ON SEAT (F)
$50.00
$0.00
0.89
C27
PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY VEHICLE FRONT
$500.00
$0.00
0.85
C22
ABS BRAKES
$400.00
$0.00
0.83
C7
SIDE AIRBAG - FRONT SEAT, THORAX
$400.00
$0.00
0.81
C37
DRIVER AIRBAG
$600.00
$0.00
0.79
C24
SEAT BELT WEBBING GRABBERS, FRONT
SEAT BELT PRETENSIONER, FRONT
Page 9
DESCRIPTION
COST
(NET)
MAINT.
BENEFIT/
COST
(HI-USE)
PAGE
APP C
CONSPICUOUS BODY COLOUR
$100.00
$0.00
0.70
C14
LOAD RESTRAINT DEVICES (TETHERS)
$100.00
$0.00
0.67(2.68)
C20
INTELLIGENT SPEED ADAPTION
$800.00
$0.00
0.60
C3
IMPROVED FOOT PROTECTION
$100.00
$0.00
0.55
C16
SPEED SENSITIVE INTERMITTENT WIPERS
$100.00
$0.00
0.51
C14
WIPERS AUTOMATIC
$100.00
$0.00
0.51
C7
ADJUSTABLE HEAD RESTRAINT
$100.00
$0.00
0.50
C26
HEAD PROTECTION PADDING
$200.00
$0.00
0.49
C18
CARGO BARRIER
$300.00
$0.00
0.47(1.89)
C16
EXTERNAL MIRRORS ELECTRICALLY ADJ
$200.00
$0.00
0.47
C13
BONNET AIRBAG FOR PEDESTRIAN PROT.
$500.00
$0.00
0.45
C21
SMART AIRBAG SYSTEM
$500.00
$0.00
0.39
C23
CRASH RECORDER
$500.00
$0.00
0.38
C37
MOBILE PHONE AVAILABLE IN EVENT OF
ACCIDENT
$200.00
$0.00
0.38
C40
$20.00
$0.00
0.37(1.85)
C31
ALCOHOL/DRUG INTERLOCK
$200.00
$0.00
0.36
C1
SEAT BELT D-RING HEIGHT ADJUSTABLE
$100.00
$0.00
0.33
C29
MAYDAY DISTRESS CALL IN SEVERE CRASH
$500.00
$0.00
0.30
C39
CRUISE CONTROL
$150.00
$0.00
0.27
C2
ENGINE IMMOBILISER
$300.00
$0.00
0.25
C38
AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION
$200.00
$0.00
0.24
C2
ADJUSTABLE LUMBAR SUPPORT
$50.00
$0.00
0.24
C5
ADJUSTABLE STEERING COLUMN
$100.00
$0.00
0.24
C6
ADJUSTABLE DRIVERS SEAT (MULTI­
FUNCTION)
$200.00
$0.00
0.24
C4
COOLED/HEATED DRIVERS SEAT
$200.00
$0.00
0.24
C4
SIDE AIRBAG - FRONT, HEAD-PROTECTING
(CURTAIN)
$400.00
$0.00
0.20
C34
HEADWAY RADAR FOR CLOSING SPEEDS
$800.00
$0.00
0.20
C8
FRONT PASSENGER AIRBAG
$400.00
$0.00
0.19(0.97)
C25
FUEL AND ENGINE CUT-OFF (SEVERE CRASH)
$100.00
$0.00
0.19
C38
SEAT BELT, CENTRE REAR 3-POINT
$100.00
$0.00
0.19(1.86)
C28
$80.00
$0.00
0.18(0.70)
C27
$300.00
$0.00
0.16
C9
$40.00
$0.00
0.15(0.74)
C32
SEAT BELT LOAD LIMITERS, REAR
HEAD REST. FOR REAR OUTBOARD SEATS
POWER STEERING
SEAT BELT WEBBING GRABBERS, REAR
Page 10
DESCRIPTION
COST
(NET)
MAINT.
BENEFIT/
COST
(HI-USE)
PAGE
APP C
SEAT BELT PRETENSIONERS, REAR
$100.00
$0.00
0.15(0.74)
C32
HEAD RESTRAINTS FOR ALL REAR SEATS
$120.00
$0.00
0.14(0.70)
C26
SIDE AIRBAG, REAR, THORAX
$400.00
$0.00
0.12(0.61)
C36
INFLATABLE SEAT BELT
$200.00
$0.00
0.11
C30
INDEPENDENT REAR SUSPENSION
$300.00
$0.00
0.09
C8
AUTO DIMMING REAR VIEW MIRROR
$200.00
$0.00
0.06
C12
CHILD SEAT INTEGRATED
$500.00
$0.00
0.06(0.28)
C25
HARNESS SEAT BELT FOR ADULTS (4/6PT)
$400.00
$0.00
0.04
C28
SIDE AIRBAG, REAR, HEAD-PROTECTING
$400.00
$0.00
0.04(0.20)
C35
$1,500.00
$0.00
0.03
C3
TRACTION CONTROL
$700.00
$0.00
0.02
C9
RUN FLAT TYRES
$400.00
$0.00
0.01
C10
ANTI FOGGING (HEATED) EXT MIRRORS
$200.00
$0.00
0.01
C13
TYRE PRESSURE MONITORING
$400.00
$0.00
0.00
C10
DRIVING LIGHTS
$100.00
$5.00
0.00
C11
FOG LAMPS
$100.00
$5.00
0.00
C11
$1,200.00
$40.00
0.00
C1
NAVIGATION SYSTEM (GPS)
AIR CONDITIONING/CLIMATE CONTROL
These results are illustrated in the following graphs.
Page 11
Figure 1. Highest Benefit/Cost (B/C) Ratios
Page 12
Figure 2. B/C higher than driver airbag
Page 13
Figure 3. B/C similar to driver airbag
Page 14
Figure 4. B/C Moderately less than driver airbag
Page 15
Figure 5. B/C substantially less than driver airbag
Page 16
Figure 6. Lowest B/Cs
Page 17
Effectiveness in reducing serious crash outcomes
Safety features may also be evaluated by considering how they might reduce the
number of serious or fatal crashes. This involves two parameters that are
documented in Appendix C - the proportion of all serious and fatal crashes that
are likely to be influenced by the safety features and the proportion of influenced
crashes that are likely to be saved by the particular safety feature. For a driver
airbag this works out at 15% (60% of crashes and 25% effectiveness in these
crashes). The effectiveness of other safety features that are commonly available
as optional equipment are shown in Figure 7. Also shown are the net costs of
these items, based on typical initial cost less the extra resale value after 3 years.
Figure 7. Relative effectiveness in serious crashes
Discussion
Using strict economic analysis techniques and assuming average usage, the
benefit/cost ratios of some common safety features are relatively poor. Only 13
(out of 69 evaluated) features exceed unity (benefits exceed costs). Even a driver
airbag, which in NCAP tests typically reduce the risk of serious head injury by
half, only achieves a B/C of 0.8.
This suggests there are traps in simply using the economic analysis methods.
These calculations are for an "average" vehicle. Business vehicles typically travel
higher annual kilometres and their "breakeven" point would be a B/C of no more
than 0.5. A further 13 safety features have a B/C of 0.5 or more.
Page 18
Some features are more worthwhile under different usage, such as higher
occupancy of non-driver seats. A further 9 safety features exceed a B/C of 0.5 if
high usage is assumed.
When faced with a decision on whether to purchase optional safety features, it
may be more appropriate to simply consider the effectiveness of the feature in
reducing serious/fatal injuries, as set out in figure 7.
The analysis did not take into account non-safety benefits. For example, air
conditioners and mobile phones would likely be purchased for non-safety
reasons. Also it is important that fleet purchasers recognise the trauma and
disruption that a serious or fatal road accident can have on an organisation ­
these non-tangible effects are not taken into account in the benefit/cost
calculations.
Priority safety features
Priority safety features are listed below. These either have favourable benefit cost
ratios, when compared with a driver airbag or are effective at reducing serious
crashes. In some cases above average exposure has been assumed, as might
be expected with fleet vehicles. With some features it is sometimes difficult to
establish whether a particular vehicle has them as standard or optional
equipment.
Features that are readily available
•
driver airbag (fortunately most models now have a driver airbag as standard)
•
side airbag for driver and front passenger
•
ABS brakes
•
a cargo barrier in wagons and vans
•
a front passenger airbag
Features that are available on some vehicles but are not common
•
headlights “on” alarm or automatic headlights or daytime running lights
•
seat belt load limiters for front seats
•
side airbags for the rear outboard seats
•
speed alarm (set by driver)
•
seat belt pretensioner for front seats
•
anti-submarining seat design
•
hazard lights activate in a severe crash
Features that are rarely available in Australia
•
top speed limiter (set at 120km/h)
•
seat belt interlock (smart alarm)
•
high transmittance glazing
Page 19
•
knee bolster/padding
•
laminated or shatter-proof glazing for all windows
It may take pressure from fleet and government purchases to introduce the latter
safety features since there would be little consumer awareness (or interest) in
them.
Conclusions
A comprehensive range of vehicle safety features has been evaluated. Road
safety research literature has been analysed to determine, where possible, the
likely influence of these safety features on road accidents. Economic analysis
methodology (as used by the RTA of NSW for evaluating items such as proposed
roadworks) has been applied to each safety feature to derive an estimate of long
term benefits and costs. The resulting benefit/cost ratios contained some
surprises - features commonly regarded as cost effective did not rank high in the
list. Further analysis suggested that adjusting for exposure (such as higher
occupancy of certain seats) results in more favourable ranking of these features.
It is recommended that new vehicle purchasers, particularly fleets, be
encouraged to place a higher priority on safety in the selection process. Greater
awareness of safety features that have a significant influence on serious crashes
would go some way towards this goal.
References
References for safety features are set out in Appendix A (bibliography). This
section covers additional references in the main report.
Craigen R. (1992) 'Optimising the fleet experience', Wheels 92 Conference,
Institution of Engineers Australia, Sydney November 1992.
Glass’Guide Pty Ltd (2001) Autocomplete – Guide to Australian Vehicle Models,
October 2001.
Haworth N., Tingvell C. and Kowadlo N. (2000) Review of best practice road
safety initiatives in the corporate and/or business environment, Monash
University Accident Research Unit, Report 166, March 2000.
Paine M and Gibbs S., (1998) Directions in Road User Protection, prepared for
Roads and Traffic Authority of NSW (unpublished).
RTA (1998) Economic Analysis Manual, Roads and Traffic Authority of NSW
Page 20
Appendix A - Annotated Bibliography
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
CATEGORY
K01
K
Crashworthiness and compatibility
Crashworthness research at the NHMRC Road Accident Research Unit
Anderson R and McLean J
1998
Proceedings of the Developments in Safer Motor Vehicles Seminar
Development of free-flight headform tests
and legform tests to evaluate the injury potential of vehicle
fronts. Bullbar tests using the free-flight headform impacting
at 40km/h. Three positions on the vehicle were impacted. The
steel bullbar produced peak deceleration between 593g and 1069g.
The aluminium bullbar produced peak decelerations between 319g
and 472g. An innovative plastic protection device produced peak
decelerations between 168g and 307g and the standard vehicle
(Toyota Prado) ranged from 148g to 325g. Other work reported
included reconstruction of fatal pedestrian accidents and the
effect of padding the upper interior of vehicles (see separate
paper by McLean).
K02
Advanced designs for side impact and rollover protection
Bloch B
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
Advanced design features considered include: foam-filled tubular member
strengthened doors with full perimeter overlap and multiple
latches, stronger, wrap-around seats with taller head restraints
and integral seat belts, seat belt pre-tensioners that activate
in side and rollover impacts, padded interior surfaces, side
airbags and improved side window glazing. Upgrading of several
FMVSS are recommended. The objectives of occupant protection are
to: (a) encourage deflection of the striking vehicle away from
the struck vehicle, (b) minimse intrusion into the occupant's
survival space, (c) reduce the velocity differential between the
struck vehicle and the occupant kinematic movements and (d)
restrain and cushion the occupant's head and torso, or allow
contact with energy absorbing materials to maximise distribution
of contact forces.
K03
In-depth analysis of offset frontal crash tests external aggressivity
Bloch J and Chevalier M
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
Examines the potential for assessing aggressivity based on the deformatio
the deformable barrier used in the EEVC offset crash test. It
was found that the barrier very often bottomed out and therefore
a change to the barrier characteristics may be needed to
successfully proceed with this concept.
K04
The importance of matching restraint systems to the accident severity
Brambilla L
1996
29th International Symposium on Automotive Technology and Automation
Mercedes Benz approach to restraint system design. Optimum
performance requires a smart system. For example, the same
airbag trigger threshold is not appropriate in all circumstances
and the seat belt tension could be carefully adjusted to
optimise protection. Seat belt force limiters need to work in
conjunction with pre-tensioners. The next generation of
restraint systems will also adjust according to the occupant's
characteristics (size, weight, sex and age). The demands on the
restraint system increase as the vehicle gets smaller and there
is less space for energy absorption. There is the potential to
increase injury in lower severity crashes in order to cope with
the demands of high severity crashes unless crash and occupant
parameters are taken into account in the design and operation of
the restraint system.
A1
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
K05
Compatibility - the aggressivness of cars in real world car to car crashes
Byard N, Fails A and Langdon M
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
Injuries to occupants in opposing vehicles are compared in order to
assess aggressiveness. Structural features which contribute to injury
outcomes are also assessed.
K06
The Development and Estimation of Aggressivity Ratings for Australian
Cameron M H, Newstead S V and Le C M
1998
Passenger Vehicles Based on Crashes During 1987 to 1995
Methodology for comparing "aggressivity" by studying the
outcome of two vehicle collisions. Analysis of NSW and Victorian
crash data and assigned of aggressivity ratings to popular
vehicle models (in a similar manner to Used Car Safety Ratings)
K07
The effectiveness of ADRs aimed at occupant protection.
Cameron M
1987
Seminar on Structural Crashworthiness & Property Damage Accidents.
This paper summarises various reports by
Cameron and others. It provides further cost/benefit information
about air bag systems. It was concluded that drivers-side air
bags had a potential to save $20.84 per car per annum due to
reduced injuries. It was noted that the cost of installation of
air bags was falling rapidly. Also the point was made that, in a
country with high seat belt usage rates, other countermeasures
such as seat belt pre-tensioners might be an effective
alternative to air bags.
K08
Ejection and the effect of ADR 2 for Door latches and Hinges.
Cameron M
1980
FORS CR 15 September 1980.
This study found a decreased risk of occupant ejection (for both belted
and unbelted occupants) for recent model vehicles in the
study. These vehicles had improved door latch and hinge
design, compared with older vehicles. The most recent
vehicles studied were subject to ADR 2. Another conclusion
was that ejection doubles the risk of severe/fatal
injury compared with being retained in the car under the
same crash circumstances. The effectiveness of ADR 2 in rollover crashes was inconclusive.
K09
Side impacts and the effect of ADR 29 for side door strength.
Cameron M
1980
FORS CR 14 April 1980.
The study concluded
that there was no statistically significant evidence that
ADR 29 reduces the risk of injury to front outboard seat
occupants seated on the impact side in side impacts. However,
the study was considered to be inconclusive for several reasons.
One of the issues was that all types of side impact were studied
whereas the ADR could only be expected to be effective in
certain types of side impact where loads are concentrated of the
door.
A2
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
K10
Frontal impacts and the effect of ADRs 10A and 10B for steering columns
Cameron M
1979
FORS CR 7 July 1979.
This study
concluded that ADR 10 is effective in reducing the severity
of injury to some types of drivers who strike the
steering assembly in frontal impacts, particularly those on
rural roads. Possible increases in injuries in certain
cases - particularly with small cars were also reported.
K11
Investigation of the effect of bull-bars on vehicle-pedestrian collision
Chiam H & Tomas J
1980
dynamics.
K12
Car crash theory and tests of airbag bumper systems
Clark C and Young W
1995
Issues in Automotive Safety Technology', SAE
Evaluation of the potential
for decreasing crash severity by mounting a large airbag on
outside of a car. Tests of a prototype system on an Oldsmobile
sedan indicated that the airbag absorbed 19% of the crash energy
and reduced the equivalent barrier impact speed from 48.5km/h to
43.5km/h during a front impact. The device was ineffective in a
simulated side impact due to the deformation of the car
structure. Potential problems include reliable detection of an
imminent crash; rapid airbag inflation; airbag storage (and
cost of minor collisions?) and controlled deflation of the airbag
(to dissipate the crash energy).
K13
3001 The final odyssey
Clarke AC
1997
Book (science fiction)
At the end of this
science fiction novel the author gives background on some of the
science concepts raised in the novel: "An 'inertia less drive',
which would act exactly like a controllable gravity field, had
never been discussed seriously outside the pages of science
fiction until very recently. But in 1994 three American
physicists did exactly this, developing some ideas of the great
Russian physicist Andrei Sakharov. 'Inertia as a Zero-Point
Field Lorentz Force' by B. Haisch, A. Rueda & H. E. Puthoff
(Physics Review A, February 1994) may one day be regarded as a
landmark paper...if [the] theory can be proved, it opens up the
prospect - however remote - of anti-gravity, 'space drives' and
the even more fantastic possibility of controlling inertia...The
good news is that traffic accidents would be virtually
impossible; automobiles - and passengers - could collide
harmlessly at any speed."
K14
Side impact protection opportunities
Dalmotas D, Withnall C and Gibson T
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
3 vehicle models were evaluated for side impact
protection. In one case the vehicle was modified to provide
enhanced side impact protection in the form of additional
padding. It was found that "substantial improvements in side
impact protection can be achieved, at minimal added cost and
with little encroachment of interior space, through the use of
innovative padding schemes".
A3
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
K15
Automotive load protection
Glew J
1998
Proceedings of the Developments in Safer Motor Vehicles Seminar
Review of the development of cargo barrier
standards. Loads generated in various types of crashes.
K16
Activities of the New Car Assessment Program in the United States
Hackney J, Kahane C and Chan R
1996
Proceedings of 15th ESV
Delta-Vs in real world crashes (median at about
60km/h for fatalities to restrained drivers in frontal crashes 198894). Probability of severe head and chest injury. NCAP
results and trends. See also 'The New Car Assessment Program ­
Historical review and effect', Occupant Containment and Methods
of Assessing Occupant Protection in the Crash Environment, SAE
SP-1045, Warrendale, February 1994.
K17
Effects of car and seat on the loading of occupant's neck in rear impacts
Haland Y, Lindh F, Fredriksson R and Svensson
1996
29th International Symposium on Automotive Technology and Automation,
Mechanism of neck injury in low
speed rear crashes. It is proposed that the upper end of the
cervical spine can be forced into an S-shape when the body and
head move by different amounts. The speed and degree to which
this happens is related to the risk of neck injury (whiplash).
Two small cars which, from Swedish insurance claims, demonstrate
a low and high risk of whiplash were analysed, along with
prototype seat designs. The horizontal distance between the head
and the head restraint was found to be important but an
over-rigid seat (as in one of the prototypes) can defeat a good
head restraint position.
K18
Characteristics of fatal single vehicle crashes
Haworth N, Vulcan P, Bowland L and Pronk N
1997
MUARC Reports 120 and 121
Investigation of 127 single-vehicle
crashes occurring within a 200km radius of Melbourne. 75% of
crashes involved an impact with a tree or pole or both (similar
for urban and rural). Half the tree impacts and one third of the
pole impacts were on the offside of the road. For drivers aged
60 or more a pre-existing medical condition was the most likely
cause of death (e.g. 7 out of 10 coroners briefs indicated the
cause of death was heart disease). 20% of the case vehicles were
manufactured prior to 1978 compared to 9% in a control group:
risk factor = 2.3 [note these vehicles make up just 4% of the
NSW fleet and a smaller percentage of annual VKT]. In 13% of
crashes the fatally injured occupant was not wearing a seat belt
compared with 2% of controls: risk factor = 8.4. In 36% of
crashes the driver was driving someone else's car, compared to
7% of controls : risk factor = 4.5 [familiarity issue,
standardisation of controls].
K19
Passenger car roof crush strength requirements
Henderson M and Paine M
1995
FORS CR 176
Extensive literature review, analysis of rollover
crashes in the FORS fatality file, analysis of the kinetics of
rollover crashes and the forces on occupants, recommendations
for improvements in vehicle design. FMVSS216 found to be
deficient - lateral deformation of the roof may be more
important than "roof crush" in some crashes. See extract
on WWW
at http://www1.tpgi.com.au/users/mpaine/rollover.html.
A4
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
K20
Dispelling the misconceptions about side impact protection
Hobbs C
1995
Advances in Occupant Protection Technologies for
Conventional methods to improve side impact protection, such as
strengthening the structure and adding padding are not
necessarily correct. Guidelines developed by TRL include:
maintain a vertical intrusion profile for the lower part of the
door; interaction between door and sill can affect the profile;
base of b-pillar can affect the profile; minimise the stiffness
and mass of the door components which might contact the
occupant; avoid variations in the vertical stiffnes of the
system since these can results in load concentrations; a "high
door velocity with bounce" (?) can improve the dynamics of the
occupant; the optimum stiffness of padding for the chest should
be low - padding for the pelvis can be stiffer.
K21
Compatibility of cars in frontal and side impact
Hobbs C, Wiliams D and Coleman D
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
Results of TRL research are presented. Car
to car crash tests, including side impacts are evaluated. A comparison
is made between the EEVC and NHTSA side impact tests. "It is still too
early to draw firm conclusions about
compatibility".
K22
NHTSA's vehicle aggressivity and compatibility research program
Hollowell W and Gabler H
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
An update on NHTSA's research program.
"Design modifications which minimise injuries in one vehicle may
actually accentuate injury levels in the collision partner"
."...improved vehicle compatibility will result in
correspondingly large reductions in crash related injuries".
(see also the paper of the same title in the Proceedings of the
15th ESV - a very wide range of "aggressivity" is observed
within vehicles of the same class - notable that, in the large
car class, the Volvos had the best rating (around 15) and the
Mercedes Marquis had the highest (around 60)).
K23
Improvement of crash compatibility between cars
Faerber E
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
In-depth crash studies are used to identify the most important problems
related to compatibility. Experimental car to car impacts are
used to replicate some real-world crashes and computer
simulations are used to determine the effects of varying
stiffness and mass of the subject vehicles.
K24
Vehicle Occupant Protection: Four-wheel-drives, utilities and vans
Fildes B, Kent S, Lane J, Lenard J and Vulcan P
1996
FORS CR 150
Literature review, mass data analysis and
crashed vehicle study (144 cases - too small for meaningfull
analysis). Almost half of 4WD crashes were rollovers. Mean
delta-V was 35.5km/h (compared with 45.4 for passenger cars).
Minor upper limb injuries were the most common injury. Leg
injuries were also common. Countermeasures developed for
passenger cars should also be effective for these vehicles.
A5
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
K25
Side impact regulation benefits for Australia
Fildes B, Dyte D, Carr D, Seyer K and Digges K
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
Harm analysis of the
benefits of introducing either FMVSS 214 or ECE 95 in Australia.
It was estimated that adoption of either standard would save
about $150 per vehicle. The Australian motor industry advised
that the average cost of compliance was $100 per vehicle
therefore the side impact standard were considered to be
(marginally) cost effective. See also FORS CR 154 Side Impact
Regulation Benefits.
K26
Consumer crash test programs - harmonisation and injury reduction
Griffiths M
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
Comparison of Australian and US
NCAP programs. Differences between Australian and US vehicles.
Occupational health issues. Based on Driver Protection ratings
from analysis of real world crashes, it is estimated that if the
all car average was raised to that of the best performing
popular vehicles then there would be 46% reduction in the
likelihood of serious injury in all crashes.
K27
United Kingdom - New Car Assessment Program'
Hobbs C A
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
Description of the
development of the NCAP program in Europe. The EEVC decided on
offset frontal, side impact and pedestrian impact tests.
K28
Experimental program of automotive safety assessment in Japan
Horigome N and Naito M
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
Description of the
development of the NCAP program in Japan. OSA decided on the
56km/h full frontal crash test. Steering wheel and dash movement
were assessed as indicators of structural performance.
K29
Evaluation of frontal crash tests against a deformable barrier
Klanner W, van West F and Felsch B
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
Modifications to existing offset crash test
procedures are considered in order to assess compatibility and
aggressivity of the test vehicle.
K30
Applying Computer Aided Engineering to Improve Vehicle Safety
Loo M and Brandini M
1998
Proceedings of the Developments in Safer Motor Vehicles Seminar
Use of advanced computing techniques in the design
of passenger cars. Integration of vehicle structural models with
occupant restraints models. Simulation of regulatory and
consumer crash tests.
A6
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
K31
The Validation of the EEVC Frontal Impact Test Procedure
Lowne R W
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
Development of the offset crash test as used by IIHS, Euro-NCAP
and ANCAP. Effects of vehicle type, vehicle size and impact
speed. Repeatability of crash tests. Good repeatability was
found, particularly for upper body parameters (variations in
footwell deformation and dummy foot position may account for
some variation in lower leg injuries).
K32
When it comes to the crunch: the mechanics of car collisions
Murray NW
1994
World Scientific.
A thorough review of the
physics of car crashes, with comments on crashworthiness in
various types of collisions. Accident statistics relevant to
vehicle factors are presented in an appendix.
K33
Automobile Safety Information
National Organisation for Automotive Safety
1998
OSA, Tokyo.
Comprehensive
layman's guide to safety features on vehicles and the results of
full-frontal crash tests of popular cars in Japan. Safety
features tabulated are: ABS brakes, Driver and passenger front
airbags, side airbags, adjustable seat belt anchors, seat belt
pre-tensioners, seat belts with child seat locking mechanisms
and integrated child seats (the latter are standard on Camry
Gracia, Chrysler Voyager SE, Volvo S/V70 and Volvo 940 and are
optional on a few others).
K34
Vehicle Crashworthiness Ratings by Year of Vehicle Manufacture
Newstead S, Cameron M & Le
1997
Monash University Accident Research Centre
Technical report accompanying the brochure
"User Car Safety Ratings".
K35
New vehicle crashworthiness evaluations by the IIHS
O'Neill B, Lund A, Zuby D and Estep C
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
Description of IIHS offset crash test
procedures and evaluation methodology.
K36
Guidelines for crashworthiness ratings
Paine M
1998
Report for Australian New Car Assessment Program.
Procedures for assessing crash-tested vehicles and rating structural
performance, occupant restraint systems, injuries, head
restraint design and overall performance.
A7
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
K37
Crash simulation for crashworthiness design of passenger cars
Pries H, Sinnhuber R and Zobel R
1995
Automotive Passenger Safety,
Volkswagen's vehicle design procedures now include
sophisticated computer simulations of a variety of crashes. These
can be used to optimise energy absorption, passenger
compartment structure and restraint system performance (the
latter was not integrated
at the time the paper was prepared). An aim is "to optimise the
crash behaviour of cars to minimise the total of injury-related
costs in traffic [accidents]". The potential for computer
simulations to be used in place of (expensive) compliance test
is raised by the authors [they may be a case for higher
standards in the case of compliance established solely by
computer simulation
K38
Rollover crash study - vehicle design and occupant injuries
Rechnitzer G and Lane J
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
In-depth investigation of 43 rollover
crashes. Ejection and partial ejection were significant factors
in fatal rollovers. Broken side windows and roof lateral
deformation can contribute to partial ejection of seat-belted
occupants. Seat belts are only partially effective in rollovers
and some buckle design may allow unlatching during the rollover.
Lack of roof integrity, particularly with some 4WDs, is a
problem. Unpadded roof structures contribute to scalp
lacerations, skull fractures and brain injury. Spinal injuries
result from: loss of vertical occupant space (including lateral
roof deformation), impact with the ledge at the join between the
door and the roof (cantrail) and lack of interior padding.
Severe injuries only appeared to occur to occupants seated where
significant roof contact with the ground occurred - the severe
injuries cannot be ascribed to crash severity alone. Design
improvements recommended are: improved side window integrity,
increased roof pillar strength (particularly to resist side
sway), interior padding, modify the design of the roof cantrail,
improved seat belts and improved door integrity. See also MUARC
Report 65, December 1994.
K39
Review of in-depth crash research
Ryan G & Mclean A
1988
FORS CR 79
This report includes advice and
recommendations for establishing in-depth crash studies.
K40
An in-depth study of rural road crashes in South Australia.
Ryan G et al
1988
FORS CR 78
Contains detailed information about 80 crashes. Analysis does not
cover vehicle factors in detail but information could be derived from the
accident descriptions.
K41
Investigation of factors pertinent to offset-frontal impacts
Schneider L
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
130 offset frontal crashes were investigated in
Michigan. Intrusion of other measurements were made. Particular
emphasis was given to the factors which caused disabling
injuries to the ankles and feet.
A8
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
K42
Australian Design Rules - current and future developments
Seyer K
1998
Proceedings of the Developments in Safer Motor Vehicles Seminar
Development of ADRs 69 and 73 (frontal crash testing) and ADr72
(side impact), compatibility and pedestrian safety. Estimated
benefits of the offset crash test of ADR73 range from 15% to 23%
reduction in "frontal Harm", depending on airbag usage. Problems
with using the deformable barrier for higher speed (64km/h )
offset tests and tests of heavier vehicles, such as
four-wheel-drives, are raised. It is claimed that this can drive
manufacturers to produce stiffer and heavier vehicles (recent
ANCAP results tend to counter this claim). See also FORS CR 165
Benefits of a frontal offset regulation.
K43
Vehicle to Vehicle Compatibility in Real-world Accidents
Shearlaw A & Thomas P
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
Real world accidents are reviewed to determine how
structural differences contribute to injuries. The definition of
"compatibility" needs to consider geometric differences in the
lateral and vertical planes, as well as stiffness and mass.
K44
Optimisation of crash pulse through frontal structural design
Sparke L
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
The range of real life accidents and computer
simulations are used to produce a front structure which will
achieve an optimised crash pulse over the spectrum of collision
types. Measures which apparently reduce injury risk in some
situations may create an increased injury risk in other
situations.
K45
Development a frontal offset test procedure based on real-world crashes
Stucki S, Ragland C and Hollowell W
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
Analysis of NASS and FARS data and comparison with several types of
offset crash tests. "The population of interest for future
safety improvements is drivers in frontal collisions with airbag
restraints". "It appears that the oblique impact with over 50%
overlap produces the most severe responses...". A moving
deformable barrier is being evaluated.
K46
Bullbar design for airbag equipped vehicles
Sullivan J
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
Report on Ford's development work on its "Smartbar". Airbag deployment is
assessed. The design is intended to produce similar pedestrian
impact kinematics to the standard vehicle, while reducing the
risk of immobilisation in the event of a high-speed impact with
a large animal. Using MADYMO modelling it is claimed that
pedestrian HIC and chest deceleration are similar up to impact
speeds of 40km/h (details are not presented). In impact tests
with a 75kg kangaroo dummy at 100km/h the Smartbar prevented the
disabling damage to the vehicle which occurred with the standard
vehicle.
A9
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
K47
Current research in rollover and occupant protection
Summers S, Rains G and Wilkie D
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
NHTSA's research program. Countermeasures
include ejection resistant glazing, improved door latches,
advanced roof crush testing, dynamic testing of restraint
systems and interior padding.
K48
Modelling of a unique frontal car structure
Wittman W and Kriens R
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
A range of frontal crashes are
evaluated. Conventional frontal structures are found to be
deficient if not axially loaded. A new design, incorporating
cables to distribute the loads between both longitudinal members
is found to produce almost the same stiffness for all overlap
percentages and impact angles. (See also Wittman and Kriens 'A
cable supported frontal car structure for offset crash
situations' Proceedings of the 15th ESV)
K49
New perspectives on car crush behaviour in frontal crashes
Wood D and O'Riordain S
1996
29th International Symposium on Automotive Technology and Automation
Crush behaviour of eight cars is analysed and several
stages of crush are noted. A stiffer initial crush region can
delay the onset of occupant compartment intrusion [not if it is
caused by inertial effects] but care is needed to avoid
increasing injury in lower severity crashes.
K50
Compatibility requirements for cars in frontal and side impact
Wykes N, Edwards M and Hobbs C
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
Research on the extent to which
compatibility might influence injury outcome. Experimental crash
test research and accident analysis to examine the influence of
mass, stiffness, structural interaction and geometry. An aim is
to develop crash test requirements which assess compatibility.
K51
Improved vehicle frontal protection structure for pole collisions
Zivkovic G
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
Collisions which produce concentrated loads
on the vehicle are 3 times more likely to be fatal than other
types of collisions. Structural modifications to better deal
with this type of collision are discussed.
K52
Contribution of vehicle defects to crashes
Paine M
1994
Project report prepared for National Road Transport Commission
None of the published studies provide sufficient information to
determine the contribution of (different types of) defects to crashes.
It is evident that the (overall) contribution of defects to crashes is
small [more recent work suggest between 10% and 20% causal or
severity increasing]. Even though the potential savings might be small the
cost of programs to reduce the number of defective vehicles can also
be relatively small and the lack of good information about the
contribution of defects to crashes should not be taken as an indication
that roadworthiness programs are not cost-effective.
A10
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
K53
Research and development project summaries
NHTSA
1998
NHTSA web site
Descriptions of NHTSA's current research projects on crashworthiness.
Notable projects are: door latch integrity, improved glazing,
improved frontal protection, upgrade of rollover protection,
child safety, upgrade fuel system integrity, seat back strength,
injury mechanisms in children, neck injury, lower extremity injury,
upper extremity injury from airbags, out-of-position occupants,
vehicle agressivity and fleet compatibility, upgraded side crash
protection, pedestrian and bicyclist safety, motorcycle safety.
K54
Road safety strategy: current problems and future options
UK Dept of Environment, Transport and the Regi
1997
UK DETR
Outline of road safety problems in the UK. Description of current
activities. Future measure:
Pedestrians - 1038 fatalities (25% of all road fatalities), EU requirements
should reduce pedestrian fatalities by 10% by 2005 and 20% by 2010, if
implemented by 2002. Estimated $20-30 per car. This would effectively ba
(rigid metal) bullbars. Speed limit alarms in cars would help.
Bicyclist - 213 fatalities Claimed causality rate per km is 13 times that
of car occupants. Under-reporting is a problem. Could be a large increase
in cycling over next few years. Helmets main measure - increasing
wearing rate from 16% to 80% could save 24% of fatalities and serious
injuries. Improved vehicle braking and lighting, plus truck side guards could
reduce cyclist causalities by 10% by 2010. Bells and lights could be made
compulsory. Reflective clothing recommended.
Car occupants - 1749 fatalities (reductions are to car occupants casualties
by 2010). NCAP (15-20%, $40-$60 per car), front-under run guards on
trucks (6%, cost $200/truck), seat belt interlocks (8%, $4 per car), rear
impact protection (rear structure, seats and head restraint) (slight injuries
10%), smart restraints (4-8%?), fire protection (1%).
Motorcyclists - 445 fatalities. Improved helmets (20%), leg protection
(40%, $200), airbags (20%, $600), NCAP for motorcycles (25%),
daytime running lights (4%)
Trucks - 597 fatalities. Stronger cabs + seat belts used (47% of truck
occupant fatalities)
Buses and Coaches - 35 fatalities. No evaluated measures.
Estimated that vehicle defects contribute to 5% of all accidents.
Medical services - 17% of fatalities were judged to have been potentially
preventable by more timely medical treatment.
K55
Safety benefits of improvements in vehicle design since ANCAP
Hendrie D, Lyle G and Haley J
2001
Proceedings of 17th ESV
Injury cost database applied to ANCAP dummy injury measurements.
Significant safety benefits between 1992 and 1997. Expected injury costs
by 54%. Some models showed much greater improvement.
K56
A systems modelling method. for estimatiation of HARM
Kuchar A
2001
Proceedings of 17th ESV
Modelling injury risk for collisions between large and small vehicles. Predic
reduced stiffness of larger vehicle can reduce AIS3/4 injuries by 21%.
High severities unaffected.
K57
VEHICLE PROPERTIES AFFECTING AGGRESSIVITY
LES M
2001
ROAD SAFETY 2001, MUARC, MELBOURNE
A11
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
K58
DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS - A NORTH AMERICAN SUCCESS STORY
BERGKVIST P
2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17TH ESV
VEHICLE TO VEHICLE - 5% REDUCTION, PEDESTRIANS 9%. ALSO
RESULTS OF OTHER STUDIES.
K59
NHTSA'S RESEARCH PROGRAM FOR AGGRESSIVITY AND COMPATIBILITY
SUMMERS S
2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17TH ESV
K60
EEVC RESEARCH ON COMPATIBILITY
FAERBER E
2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17TH ESV
K61
DEVELOPMENT OF CRITERIA AND STANDARDS FOR COMPATIBILITY
ZOBEL R
2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17TH ESV
K62
TEST PROCEDURES TO EVALUATE COMPATIBILITY
MIZUNO K
2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17TH ESV
K63
ADVANCED ROOF DESIGN FOR ROLLOVER PROTECTION
FRIEDMAN D
2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17TH ESV
K64
COMPARISON OF EURO NCAP RESULTS WITH FOLKSAM RATINGS
LIE A, KULLGREN A AND TINGVALL C
2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17TH ESV
K65
COMPARISON OF EURO NCAP WITH INJURY CAUSATION IN ACCIDENTS
FAILS A AND MUTON R
2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17TH ESV
K66
AGGRESSIVITY VARIABLES AND THEIR SENSITIVITY IN RATINGS
LAINE V, ERNVALL T, CAMERON M AND NEW
2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17TH ESV
K67
HOW SON TO BRAKE AND HOW HARD TO BRAKE
WILSON B
2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17TH ESV
K68
DISTANCE BEHAVIOUR ON MOTORWAYS WITH REGARD TO ACTIVE SAFTEY
FILZEK B AND BREUER B
2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17TH ESV
ADAPTIVE CRUISE CONTROL
CATEGORY
L
Occupant restraint and injuries
A12
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
L01
Chest and abdominal injuries suffered by restrained occupants
Augensten J et al
1995
Advances in Occupant Protection Technologies for the mid-1990s
Comprehensive analysis of US crash data and
medical information targeting liver and spleen injuries. HARM
analysis. Correlation between use of the sash portion of a seat
belt without the lap portion and liver injury. Indicators of
potential for liver injury for the information of rescue
personnel.
L02
Injury patterns among airbag protected occupants
Augenstein J, Perdeck E, Williamson J, Stratton J
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
Investigation of 70
cases of seriously and fatally injured motor vehicle occupants
who were protected by airbags. Patterns of injury to the heart,
lungs and liver have been observed.
L03
Reduction of head rotational motions in side impacts - inflatable curtains
Bohman K, Haland Y and Aldman B
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
"Diffuse head injuries
are very common in side impacts". Investigations have shown that
they often originate from contact with the side window and are
believed to be caused by quick head rotational motions. A test
rig was developed to measure the accelerations on an Hybrid III
head during impacts with the side window with and without and
inflatable curtain. The curtain has the potential to
substantially reduce the risk of diffuse brain injuries (peak
angular acceleration was reduced by 60% or more).
L04
Effect of seat belts and head restraints on neck injury.
Cameron M
1981
FORS CR 19
L05
Effect of seat belts on minor and severe injuries...
Cameron M
1979
FORS CR 4
L06
Air bag deployments in Canada
Dalmotas D, Hurley J, German A and Digges K
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
409 crashes involving airbag deployments were
studied. Data were also compared with US NASS. Airbags were
found to substantially reduce the risk of serious head injury
but risk of injury in moderate severity collisions increased
particularly for the face and arms. Female drivers are at a
higher risk of sustaining injury. "A significant improvement in
the overall level of protection afforded by belted occupants by
airbags could be achieved by increasing the deployment
threshold". The authors suggest that frontal crash tests
(regulation and/or NCAP) should include 5th percentile dummies
with the seat set in the full forward position.
A13
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
L07
Aging process and safety enhancement of car occupants
Dejeammes M and Ramet M
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
Impact biomechanics in relation to the age
of the occupant. Addresses some of the research issues
associated with protection of aged occupants. Osteoporosis makes
bones more vulnerable to fracture. Rib fractures from belt loading
are more
likely over the age of 40. Chest deflection may be an important
parameter in crash tests. Abdominal injuries are more likely for
car occupants aged 70 or more.
L08
The prevention of head and neck injuries in motor vehicle crashes
Digges KH
1994
George Washington University,
Estimated benefits, in terms
of lives and serious injuries saved, are presented for a range
of occupant protection measures. The concept of HARM is
explained (a method of costing by the most severe injury) .
Based on NASS data (and remembering that many US vehicle
occupants do not wear seat belts) the distribution of HARM by
body region is: head/neck 37% of severe injuries, and 51% of
HARM. The components of head/neck HARM are: brain 33%, neck 5%,
head 6% and face 7%. Distribution of HARM by crash type is:
frontal 46%, side 34%, roll 16% and rear 3% - it is noted that
70% of HARM is suffered by unrestrained occupants. Several
countermeasures are evaluated for mitigating HARM associated
with head/neck injuries (these data are for restrained occupants
and assume 100% effectiveness): airbags 10%, upper interior
padding 9%, combined airbags and upper interior padding 18%,
glazing 6% and seat design/head restraints 5%. Comments are made
about the effectiveness of each countermeasure and methods of
analysing potential benefits. NHTSA has estimated that
fatalities could be reduced by 3% through the use of upper
interior padding. Ejection resistant glazing also shows
"surprisingly large opportunities for injury abatement among
both restrained and unrestrained occupants".
L09
Patterns of abdominal injury in frontal automotive crashes
Elhagediab A and Rouhana S
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
An anthropomorphic device to assess potential
for abdominal injury is under development. NASS crash data
between 1988 and 1994 is analyzed to identify the frequency and
severity of injury to abdominal organs.
L10
Dummy kinematics in offset frontal crashes
Estep C and Lund A
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
An evaluation of dummy kinematics in offset crash tests conducted
by IIHS. Substantial differences were observed between the crash
tests. Seat belt effectiveness and timing of airbag deployment
were important but seat stability, door integrity and dash and
steering column movement were also factors. In addition to
absorbing the occupants initial kinetic energy the restraint
system must continue to keep the occupant's kinematics under
control during rebound.
L11
Epidemiology of the older driver - some preliminary findings
Evans L and Taheri B
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
The study is intended to address
how the risks older drivers face change as they age. The risks
to other road users are also considered.
A14
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
L12
Passenger cars and occupant injury
Fildes B, Lane J, Lenard J and Vulcan P
1991
FORS CR 95,
Literature review,
third party insurance data analysis and investigation of 227
crashes. Potential countermeasures included: padded steering
wheels; belt pretensioners; airbags; ADR10 to include limits on
lateral and vertical movement of steering column; elimination of
steering wheel; improved belt geometry; webbing clamps; improved
seat design; seat belt stalk located to minimise abdominal
injury; seat belt interlocks; research on webbing width and
stiffness and load limiters; inflatable belts; improved energy
absorption by instrument panels; fewer protrusions from
instrument panel; improved knee protection; structural
improvements to footwell and instrument panel; improved interior
padding; improved laminated glass. There were several cases
where a bullbar increased the severity of injuries to occupants
of other vehicles.
L13
Older road user crashes
Fildes B, Corben B, Kent S, Oxley J, Le T and Ry
1994
MUARC Report 61
Mass crash data analysis and trends and literature review. Older road
users appear to be over-involved in intersection crashes,
particularly those with stop or give-way signs. Countermeasures
include: improved protection from chest injuries; improved
intersection design and improved education about the special
problems encountered by older road users. The authors also point
out there is a trade-off in crash and injury risk when a person
ceases driving and becomes a pedestrian.
L14
Lower limb injuries to passenger car occupants
Fildes B, Lane J, Lenard J, Vulcan P and Wenzel
1994
FORS CR 137
501 urban crashes were investigated to determine the
causes of lower leg injuries. The most frequent causes were
contact between: ankle/foot and floor/toepan; lower leg and
floor/toepan; knee and instrument panel; knee and steering
column. 50% of lower limb fracture injuries occurred in crashes
with a delta-V of 50km/h or less. Occupants of smaller cars
were more at risk. Countermeasures include: more forgiving
instrument panels; knee bars (bolsters); removing injurious
fittings; use of less brittle materials in dashboards;
innovative pedal designs and structural improvements.
L15
Lower limb injuries to passenger car occupants
Fildes B, Lenard J, Lane J, Vulcan P and Seyer
1997
J. Accident Analysis and Prevention
In-depth study of 280 cases
where occupants sustained lower leg injuries. More than half the
cases were in crashes with a delta V less than 48km/h. Ankle
dislocations and foot fractures from the floor and toe pan were
the most common type of injury. The study pointed to a need for
further regulation and identified several possible
countermeasures.
A15
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
L16
Foot and leg injuries in frontal car collisions
Foressell J, Jakobsson L, Lund A and Tivesten E
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
Accident data, simulations and crash tests
are analysed to determine the factors involved in foot and leg
injuries. Suggested countermeasures are: Geometry - make
footwell as smooth and flat as possible, design lower instrument
panel to reduce the chance of legs becoming jammed; Acceleration
- avoid having solid objects in front of footwell,
shock-absorbing design of footwell, design so feet are close the
firewall (limit delta V by reducing forward movement); Pedals ­
place pedals as close to footwell as possible, design to avoid
intrusion of brake booster unit; Intrusion - design to limit
intrusion but if intrusion is unavoidable design to avoid
folding and deformation that may trap feet.
L17
Upper interior head, face and neck injury experiments
Friedman D
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
Crash analysis and simulations were used to identify factors leading
to head, face and neck injuries in rollover crashes. It was
concluded that upper interior padding, in combination with
modifications to existing components can substantially reduce
the risk of injury.
L18
Head restraint measuring device
Gane J and Pedder J
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
Description of a
test device used to determine the positional geometry of head
restraints and developed by the Insurance Corporation of British
Columbia (now used by IIHS and Australian NCAP).
L19
Truck seat belts
Haworth N, Bowland L, Foddy Band Elliot B
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
Interviews and surveys. "Very few drivers of articulated trucks
wear seat belts". About 16% of rigid truck drivers wear seat
belts "all of the time". Reasons for non-wearing are:
uncomfortable, "no safety benefits", "dangerous". Improvements
to the ADR have probably improved wearing rates. Further
research into the benefits of seat belts in real world truck
crashes is suggested. Communications strategies are
discussed: improved enforcement, employer lobbying, safety
measure (e.g. risk of loss of control if unrestrained).
L20
The design of car safety belts to reduce injuries
Herbert DC
1961
Snowy Mountains Hydro-Electric Authority Engineering
Pioneering work on the use of seat belts to
reduce injuries.
A16
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
L21
Seat belt limitations in collisions with no compromise of passenger compartment
Hill J, Mackay GM and Henderson S
1997
Occupant Protection and Injury Assessment in the Automotive Crash Enviro
Main types of injury to drivers in frontal collisions
were: head to steering wheel (8%), head to other forward
structure 1%, neck without contact (5% AIS2+), torso to steering
wheel 3%, leg/pelvis to forward structure 13%, lower leg to
footwell 6%. Passengers had similar proportions. "A major
challenge, and priority, could be to provide advanced load
limiting, selectively for older people, without compromising
protection through increased ride-down."
L22
Development of side impact airbag system for head and thorax protection
Igarashi T, Uchimura T and Ehama M
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
Nissan recently
introduced a side airbag system which provides improved
protection for the head. The system is mounted in the seat back.
L23
Inertial seatbelt release
James M, Allsop D, Perl T and Struble D
1993
Frontal Impact Protection: Seat Belts and Airbags,
Investigations of
real-world crashes and engineering analyses indicate that
inertia release is not a safety concern. The loadings are
substantially different from those which cause the buckles to
open in "parlor tricks". The lateral acceleration required to
cause release even when the seat belt is not under tension is
generally well in excess of 100g for several milliseconds. The
authors note that humans are significantly softer than dummies
therefore buckle decelerations resulting from dummy contact with
the buckle are unlikely to be reached with a human occupant.
L24
Injury mechanisms and field accident data in rollover accidents
James M, Allsop D, Nordhagen R and Decker R
1997
Occupant Protection and Injury Assessment in the Automotive
US NASS/CDS data for the period 1988 to 1994 were analysed for
rollover crashes. The authors found that no correlation exists
between roof crush and occupant injury and there were few
serious injuries associated with roof intrusion. In most cases
the head is already in close proximity to the roof and "..peak
neck compression loads occur prior to any substantial roof
deformation.". They also point out that if head to roof contact
(mainly from "vertical" occupant motion) can be eliminated by
restraint systems then there could be an increased risk from
lateral motion and partial ejection.
L25
Strategies for passenger car designs to improve side impact protection
Kanianthra J, Rains G and Trella T
1993
Strategies for Side Impact Protection,
Modelling side impacts. Injury
measures such as the Thoratic Trauma Index. Effect of various
countermeasures applied to several vehicle models.
A17
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
L26
Upper interior head impact protection of occupants in real world crashes
Kanianthra J, Fan W and Rains G
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
NHTSA's research program and rulemaking for interior head protection.
The additional cost, to consumers, of providing suitable padding in
new vehicles is estimated to be US$33 and the cost per
equivalent life saved is US$542. There is a high potential for
reducing serious injuries (c.f. McLean, 1996).
L27
Field study on the potential benefit of different side airbag systems
Kompell K, Habert J and Mebner G
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
Investigations of severe
side-impact collisions involving BMW cars revealed that 75%
involved head injuries. The paper discusses side airbag designs
(Inflatable Tubular Structure or ITS) which protect the head in
these circumstances. Design issues include: assuming that the
side window is shattered so the airbag must bridge the gap,
providing a system which is triggered in rollover crashes and
which remains inflated for a longer period (7 seconds),
provision for a variety of occupant sizes and avoiding
aggressive inflation. Methods of testing side airbag systems are
discussed.
L28
Whiplash associated disorder - factors in rear-end collisions
Krafft M. Thomas A, Nygren A, Lie A and Tingve
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
A study of the relationship between seat
belt geometry and neck injuries. The risk of neck injury in
females is twice as high as that for males. 64% of the Swedish
whiplash injuries are sustained in rear end collisions and is
typically less than 20km/h delta V.
L29
Injuries to different body regions in new and old car models
Kullgren A, Krafft M and Tingvell C
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
"The expected number of permanent
disabilities for injuries to different body regions are shown
for new and old car models based on the injury outcome of real
life accidents in Sweden". "For new car models there is a
dramatic improvement of the disability risk for some body
regions".
L30
The effect of airbags to injuries and accident costs
Langwieder K, Anselm D and Redlich J
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
Results of 500 crashes are presented, with
emphasis on the effects of airbags. The combination of lap/sash
belt and airbag reduced driver serious/fatal injuries by 40%.
Early results on the effects of side airbags are also presented.
Problems with unintended firings, rescues, out-of-position
occupants, child restraints and intentional deactivation of
airbags are discussed. Repair costs are also considered (the
authors are from the German Insurance Association). Prospects
for reusable airbag components and intelligent airbags are
discussed.
A18
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
L31
Human tolerance to impact - the basis of design for protection
Lowne R
1992
Interior Safety of Passenger Transport,
Mechanisms of injury to femur, knees, abdomen, chest
(compression, deceleration, viscous criterion, 'blast' injury),
face, skull and brain. Permanent disability (particularly brain
injury) is not assessed by AIS which is an estimate of
likelihood of survival. Includes performance criteria for
frontal impacts: HIC 1000, neck flexion 190Nm, neck extension
57Nm, chest deflection (compression) 50mm without airbag, 65mm
with airbag, chest deceleration (3ms) 60G, chest viscous
criterion 1m/s, femur compression 9kN peak, 7.6kN over 10ms,
tibia axial compression 8kN, tibia index 1.0 (Moment/225Nm +
Compression/35.9kN).
L32
Guidelines for car seats for improved protection against neck injuries
Lundell B et al
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
"The exact mechanism of (neck) injury has not yet been established".
However, in-depth crash investigations show that a high, fixed
head restraint close to the back of the head is favourable.
Requirements/guidelines should address the performance of the
whole seat, not just the head restraint. Results of tests of new
concepts are presented.
L33
Vehicle design and injuries sustained by female drivers
McFadden M
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
"In 1995 female drivers were 17% more likely to be seriously injured in a
road crash for every kilometre travelled on Australian roads".
Female driving patterns and the characteristics of the cars used
were analysed to identify vehicle characteristics that
contribute to the higher injury rate.
A19
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
L34
Smart seat belts - some population considerations
Mackay GM
1994
Occupant Containment and Methods of Assessing Protection in the
anthropometric characteristics of the population may vary
considerably from that used in crash tests and regulations: Adult
Height (mm) Sitting Ht (mm) Mass (kg)
1%ile female
1450
720
37
5%ile female
1500
750
41
95%ile male
1850
930
102
99% male
1900
960
107
In addition, observational studies have shown that the actual
sitting position can be significantly closer than that of the
relevant dummy (5%ile females typically 70mm closer). Obese
occupants may have difficulty locating the lap portion of the
seat belt across the (load bearing) iliac spines of the pelvis.
Studies of crashes involving fatalities to restrained occupants
indicate that the characteristics (design) of the restraint
system were irrelevant in 80% of the cases, mainly due to
massive intrusion. Advanced systems such as airbags could be
expected to have only a small effect in those cases. Intelligent
restraint systems should allow for: variable biomechanical
properties; variation in body weights; different sitting
positions and different crash severities. Head position relative
to the steering wheel is probably the most critical parameter.
particularly with smart airbags. Other design measures include:
variable seat belt pretensioning; variable seat belt
load-limiting; discretionary web clamps and, for airbags,
variable firing threshold, inflation rates and gas volumes.
Studies of side impacts indicate that 90% of lateral collisions
involving AIS 3 injuries or more could be successfully detected
by a sensor located in the lower quadrant of the door.
Consideration should be given to seat belt pretensioning in the
event of a rollover crash, although prevention of head impacts
with the upper interior is unlikely. See also Mackay GM (1995)
'Smart seat belts - what they offer', Automotive Passenger
Safety, IMechE, London, November 1995.
L35
An historical perspective on impact biomechanics
Mackay GM
unda
(book source unknown - copy held by Staysafe)
Describes pioneering research on impact
biomechanics and physics of crashes. It is noted that Dr John
Lane from Melbourne coined the term crashworthiness in
association with aircraft safety in the 1940s.
L36
The role of the upper car interior in car occupant brain injury
McLean AJ, Kloeden C and Farmer M
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
137 accidents were investigated. There
was a low number of cases where the known head impact was with a
part of the car that could be padded and therefore the effects
of introducing padding were difficult to determine. Subject to
this precaution, it was predicted that padding would have
changed the outcome in 39% of the cases of minor brain injuries,
61% of the cases of moderate brain injuries and 7% of severe
brain injuries. "...there is considerable potential for reducing
the severity and consequences of brain injuries by padding the
upper interior of the passenger compartment."
A20
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
L37
Head and neck injuries in passenger cars: a review of the literature
McLean A et al
1987
FORS CR 59 September 1987.
The review was undertaken to assess the potential for the reduction
of the frequency and severity of head injuries in Australia.
Amongst other devices, seat belt clamps and pre-tensioners were
considered. It was estimated that "the increase in cost of these
devices, compared to a standard inertia-reel belt system" was
1.5 times for webbing clamp and 2 times for pre-tensioners (the
basis of this cost estimate is not clear from the paper). A
comparison of "passive" and "active" seat belt systems is also
discussed but this was based on a USA study and therefore it was
not directly applicable to Australia. Air bags systems are
discussed but costs and effectiveness (in terms of injury
reduction) are not covered.
L38
Protective headgear for car occupants
McLean AJ and Kloeden C
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
The likely benefits of the use of protective headgear by car
occupants are evaluated. The benefits from using a soft-shell
pedal cycle helmet are shown to be much greater than that
previously estimated for padding the interior of the car. An
energy absorbing headband which protected the forehead and sides
of the head would have influenced 44% of the cases studied and
this type of device is proposed as a first step to encouraging
the use of protective headgear by car occupants.
L39
New requirements and solutions on head impact protection
Menking M
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
Describes how Porsche are developing occupant protection systems
to cater for NHTSA's new interior head strike requirements
(FMVSS 201 Part 571). Computer simulations are used to help
optimise the systems while minimising the additional space
necessary for enegry absorbing materials.
L40
Brain injury risk assessment of frontal crash test results
Mertz H amd Irwin A
1994
Occupant Containment and Methods of
Warrendale, February 1994.
Background on the derivation of HIC.
A case is made for evaluating HIC over 15ms rather than 36ms (as
in FMVSS 208). The authors were particularly concerned about the
prolonged moderate decelerations produced by airbags - the HIC36
can be quite high but the risk of injury is claimed to be low.
L41
Fitting and wearing of seat belts in Australia.
Milne P
1985
FORS OR 2 April 1985.
Documents the history of seat belt
initiatives in Australia and reviews literature on the
effectiveness of wearing seat belts. One Victorian study
estimated that urban drivers wearing seat belts were 30% less
likely to be killed or injured than unrestrained drivers. For
rural crashes the comparable figure was 22%. A brief analysis of
the impact of seat belt legislation is also given.
A21
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
L42
A study of soft tissue neck injuries in the UK
Morris A and Thomas P
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
A retrospective study of UK crashes found a the
overall soft tissue neck injury ("whiplash") rate was 16%. Over
50% of these occurred in frontal crashes and 25% in side
impacts. The study found no evidence of benefit from head
restraints in rear crashes. The authors note that poor
adjustment of head restraints might have contributed to this
result. However, females who are probably in a "better"
situation in terms of head restraint position sustained a higher
rate of neck injury. The concept of yielding seats should be
explored further. Some self-reported claims of injury could be
fraudulent.
L43
Feasibility of Occupant Protection Countermeasures
MUARC
1992
FORS CR 100, June 1992
Comprehensive review of a range of
occupant protection countermeasures. Estimates of costs and
benefits, using Harm analysis. Priority should be given to
reducing vertical and lateral steering column intrusions and
footwell intrusions. Key benefit/cost results were:
Countermeasure
Benefit/Cost
% Trauma Saved
1.Improved belt geometry & seat design
7.3
1.7%
2. Energy-absorbing steering wheel
3.2-16
1.9%
3. Seat belt warning device
4.1-7.2
3.4%
4. Knee Bolsters
2.9-4.3
5.3%
1.8-18
2.6%
5. Improved lower instrument panels
6. Fullsize drivers airbag (elct/mech)
1.2
14.9%
7. Webbing clamps
1.1-3.5
1.2%
8. Seat pretensioner
0.8-1.1
2.7%
9. Shoulder pretensioner
0.46
1.6%
10. Padded upper interior(see McLean 1996) 0.3-0.4
0.7%
0.18
2.4%
11.Passenger airbag
Package of 1,2,4,6,7,8 (drivers airbag) 1.4-1.6
25%
Package of 1,2,3,4,7,8 (no airbag)
2.1-3.4
17%
L44
New restraint technologies for vehicle safety
Nordin S and Herrmann B
1998
Proceedings of the Developments in Safer Motor Vehicles Seminar
Autoliv's occupant restraint research program. Effects of belt
pretensioners, load limiters, "gentle" airbags, "smart" airbags,
radially deploying airbags.
A22
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
L45
Effectiveness of Occupant Protection Systems and Their Use
NHTSA
1996
NHTSA 3rd Report to Congress, December 1996.
Estimated effectiveness of airbags and seat belts in reducing
the likelihood of moderate and greater injury to vehicle
occupants. Key findings were: Airbags provide fatality reducing
protection. In car frontal crashes (between 10 and 2 o'clock)
the risk of a fatality is reduced by 19%. The risk is reduced by
11% in all crashes (estimated 1198 lives saved between 1987 and
1995). The effectiveness is similar in light trucks. For front
passengers 13 and over the fatality-reducing effectiveness of a
passenger airbag is 27% in purely frontal crashes (compared with
31% for a drivers airbag in these crashes). Limited data
indicates that children under 13 are at a higher risk of a
fatality with a passenger airbag (but investigations revealed
that out of 31 cases 11 involved rear-facing child seats and 19
involved unrestrained children: only 1 case was wearing a seat
belt). Lap/sash seat belts reduce the risk of an AIS2+ injury
in all crashes by 49%. With the addition of a drivers airbag the
effectiveness is 60%. There is an increased risk of arm injury
with airbags but airbags reduce the likelihood of injury to
head, neck, face, chest and abdomen and these are more likely to
be life-threatening.
L46
NHTSA's frontal offset research using different size dummies
Park B, Morgan R, Hackney J, Lee J and Stucki S
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
A series of crash tests at 60km/h into deformable barrier, 40% offset
overlap. Neon, Camry and Taurus tested. 5th percentile dummy
also used.
L47
Restraint use regulations: 1993/94 exemption review
Preece R
1994
Discussion paper issued by NSW RTA.
Covers exemptions for taxi drivers and heavy vehicle drivers
("compelling evidence to support the removal of the exemption").
L48
Rollover ejection while wearing lap and shoulder harness
Renfroe D
1996
Technologies for occupant protection assessment
Several cases where the retractor mechanism
locked during the initial impact and then released a subsequent
rollover are detailed. The author recommends that a delay
mechanism (at least 10 seconds) be incorporated in the retractor
design to prevent inadvertent release during a rollover crash.
L49
Injuries sustained by older drivers in motor vehicle crashes
Rood D
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
A23
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
L50
The medical consequences of car crashes
Siegel J and Dsichinger P
1992
DOT HS 808 156, July 1992.
Study of injuries suffered by 145 patients receiving
severe injuries (ISS 16+) in crashes. A large proportion
required extrication from the vehicle (mainly due to the
injuries suffered). Most injuries resulted from contact with
intruded structure. Brain injuries in lateral crashes were
significantly associated with head contacts with side windows
and a-pillars. Injuries to the lower extremities and pelvis were
found to be especially costly due to orthopedic, plastic
surgical and critical care services and also prolonged the
length of stay, complicating recovery from other injuries.
Countermeasures include: improved structural integrity of
passenger compartment and side airbags designed to protect the
head.
L51
Head and neck injury in side impacts
Sparke L
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
"There has been a
dramatic increase in brain injury in the last decade, not as a
result of increased accidents, but because of increased
survival". Optimisation of restraint systems in side impacts is
expected to be a more difficult process than that for frontal
impacts. The author cautions that evaluation of performance by a
single measure, such as a regulatory crash test will not
necessarily maximise community benefits - an injury cost model
is more appropriate.
L52
The optimisation of an airbag and seat belt system
Sparke L, Hou J and Tomas J
1998
Proceedings of the Developments in Safer Motor Vehicles Seminar,
Computer modelling of
occupant restraint systems. Validation of the modelling through
experimental investigations. Societal harm approach to
evaluating occupant restraint systems. A 33% reduction in
overall injury risk can be obtained through optimisation of the
seat belt and airbag systems. The simple installation of an
airbag into an existing (non-airbag) restraint system cannot
guarantee the best protection for occupants in a frontal
collision.
L53
The risk of skull/brain injuries in modern cars
Tingvell C, Lie A, Kullgren A and Krafft M
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
The influence of car design, including
airbags, is discussed, based on real world crashes. A risk
function for skull/brain injuries based on change in velocity is
presented.
A24
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
L54
Optimizing seat belt usage by interlock systems
Turbell T et al
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
Measures to improve seat belt wearing rates
are discussed. Problems with the (failed) US attempt in 1973 to
introduce seat belt interlocks are discussed (infringement on
personal freedom, existing seat belts were uncomfortable and
difficult to use, the interlock did not allow low speed driving
or engine idling). Various solutions are discussed: the engine
interlock (not favoured), external visual signals (lights
illuminated or flash when the seat belt is not used), more
"aggressive" internal warning lights/alarms, disabling air
conditioner or radio, throttle pedal feedback, maximum gear
level and maximum speed. At staged approach such as audible
warning followed by speed limiting may be the best approach. It
is pointed out that the last 10% of seat-belt non-wearers
probably represents the most accident prone group and therefore
the benefits of addressing this group are greater than normally
expected. It is estimated that seat-belts would have saved 50%
of the fatalities involving unrestrained occupants.
L55
Evaluation of advanced side airbags for head protection
Vaidyaraman S, Wallner J, Abraham M, Cherry R
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
Lateral collisions comprise about one third of all
automobile crashes. A majority of fatalities are due to injuries
to the head and neck. Head/thorax side airbags and inflatable
curtains are evaluated, using computer modelling and experiments.
L56
Significance of intersection crashes for older drivers
Viano D and Ridella S
1996
Technologies for occupant protection assessment
Older drivers are more likely to be involved in intersection
collisions - a time of complex information processing and
decision making.
L57
Optimisation of an intelligent total restraint system
Voorhies K and Narwani G
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
The system is designed to take into account occupant
position, weight and size, crash severity and seat belt usage in
order to optimise the protection for that occupant. Two-stage
airbag inflators, controllable airbag vents and controllable
seat belt load-limiters, pre-tensioners and upper-anchorage
mounts are included in the system.
L58
Glazing effects of door or frame deformations in crashes, Part 2
Yudenfriend H and Clark C
1997
Occupant Protection and Injury Assessment
Analysis of the uniformity
of tempered glazing used in automotive side windows.
Experimental evaluations of the effects of non-uniformity. The authors refer
NHTSA conclusion that 1300 lives could be saved per year through
improved glazing. The window may shatter from strain induced by impact at
other locations and presents a hazard to occupants from fast-moving
shattered glass. Once the window shatters occupant ejection is more likely.
It is claimed that BMW, Audi, Volvo, Toyota, Nissan and Honda are about to
introduce laminated glazing on the side windows of some of their
models. There are benefits of noise reduction and improve theft resistance
laminated glass.
A25
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
L59
The reduction of the risk of lower leg injuries in offset crash tests
Zeilder F, Scheunert D, Breitner R and Krajewsk
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
Mechanisms of lower
leg injuries are discussed. "Impact shock syndrome" is
presented as frequent injury caused by a small intrusion but
very high intrusion velocity [this has implications for
assessment lower leg injury risk by intrusion alone]. Another
source of injury is
the secondary impact of the foot against the footwell or pedal.
L60
Optimized restraint systems for rear seat passengers
Zellmer H, Luehrs S and Brueggemann K
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
The standard lap/sash seat belt in rear
seats can produce excessive neck moments. The authors note that
airbags do not seem to be practical for rear seating positions.
They investigated the benefits of seat belt pretensioners and
load limiters. The resulting optimized restraint system produced
acceptable dummy measurements even at crash pulses of 40g or
more.
L61
Head injury risk assessment and prevention in automobile accidents
Ziernicki R, Jacobson O and Hamernick J
1996
29th International Symposium on Automotive Technology and Automation,
Methods of testing for head injury
potential. Relationship between HIC, deceleration, impact speed
and the probability of head and brain injury. A North Carolina
survey of 215 drivers who experienced an airbag deployment
during 1991 found: 76% consider the airbag protected them from
injury "a lot", 13% "somewhat" or "a little" ; 2% considered
that it increased their injury; 96% said they would want an
airbag in their next car and 2% said they wouldn't.
L62
Lower extremity loads in offset frontal crashes
Zuby D and Farmer C
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
Results of 17 offset crash tests by IIHS are
evaluated to determine the effects of intrusion on lower leg
injuries. "Lower extremity loads measured by crash dummies in
crash tests are strongly influenced by the magnitude of
intrusion in the occupant compartment".
A26
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
L63
Unexpected deaths in airbag equipped cars: case reports
Zuppichini F, Trenchi G, Rigo C and Marigo M
1994
Advances in Occupant Restraint Technologies
Analysis of three fatalities involving airbags but no
significant intrusion. The two drivers and one passenger were
unrestrained and all appear to have been close to the airbag at
the time of inflation. Possible injury mechanisms related to
airbags are: direct loading of the inflating airbag;
interposition of arms or objects between airbag and head;
contact with steering wheel through airbag; secondary thoratic
perforations by broken ribs; inertial loading of organs;
pressure waves (hypothetical); burning form hot gases; chemical
injury to hands or eyes. Causes of out-of-position movements
are: short stature; unusual driving posture ("advanced
driving"?); pre-impact braking; initial impact below airbag
threshold; occupant leaning forward (eg adjusting radio volume);
hands across steering wheel ("claxon reflex") or in front of
face; stretching arms, legs or back. In the associated
discussion Murray Mckay points out that, unlike medical research
for new drugs, systematic evaluation of vehicle safety
initiatives in actual crashes is relatively under researched and
that field studies are not an integral part of the process of
design and development or rulemaking. In the case of airbag
injuries it is important that occupant characteristics are
recorded. More research is also needed into occupant seating
positions.
L64
Neck and spinal injuries: injury outcome and crash characteristics in Aust.
Fildes B and Vulcan P
1995
Proceedings of The Biomechanics of Neck Injury Seminar
Incidence of neck and spinal injuries in passenger car crashes in Australia
Outcome of injuries in terms of treatment, rehabilitation and costs.
Sources of neck and spinal injuries. Whiplash injuries.
Insurance claims, mass crash data and in-depth studies were analysed.
Countermeasures include roof and header rail padding (taking care not to
increase the risk of the head "socketing" in the padding); front and
side airbags; better designs of head restraints (subject to further
research); helmets for car occupants; improved rear crumple zones;
prevention of rollover crashes and prevention of head ejection.
L65
What happens to the cervical spinal cord during neck injury?
Bilston L
1995
Proceedings of The Biomechanics of Neck Injury Seminar
Biomechanical description of neck injury. Development of a physical model
to better understand the injury mechanisms (computer modelling was
found to be too difficult at the time).
L66
An overview of ergonomic issues in neck injury amelioration
Svensson N
1995
Proceedings of The Biomechanics of Neck Injury Seminar
Incidence of neck injuries. Misuse of head restraints (observational
survey of 2004 motorists showed widespread misuse). Countermeasures
include improved rear end collision energy absorption; improved seat
design and improved head restraint design. Factors such as seat back
stiffness were investigated through computer modelling.
L67
The measurement of neck injury risk
Sparke L
1995
Proceedings of The Biomechanics of Neck Injury Seminar
Limitations of current test dummies in the determination of the risk
of neck injury. Relationship between dummy measurements (moments and
forces) and injury risk. The injury threshold for a 5th% female is
about half of that for a 50th% male. Computer simulations can help to
optimise restraint systems to reduce the risk of neck injury.
"Neck injury resulting from car crashes is potentially a more serious
problem than is currently recognised in Australia".
A27
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
L68
Neck injury severity and vehicle design
McLean AJ
1995
Proceedings of The Biomechanics of Neck Injury Seminar
Report on research conducted in the USA during the 1970s. The study
showed that there are large differences between males and females in
neck injury susceptibility in rear end collisions. There are also large
differences associated with age.
L69
Neck injury in children
Brown J
1995
Proceedings of The Biomechanics of Neck Injury Seminar
L70
Research to quantify the effects of child restraint design and
adjustment on neck loads produced in child dummies. Accident
investigation suggest that the incidence of neck injury from vehicle
accidents is
quite low in children. No cases of serious neck injury have been reported
in correctly restrained children in Australia where the child seats have
a 6-point harnesses and a top tether. Preliminary results suggest
th t
hild'
k i ht b
l
bl t
i l l d [th fl i ]
An overview of manual lap belts in the centre rear
Brown J
1995
Proceedings of The Lap Belt Safety Conference
Deficiencies of lap belts, compared to lap/sash belts. Injuries
patterns. Pointed out that the strength requirements for child
restraint anchorages provided in centre rear seats since 1977 are
similar to those of an upper anchorage for a lap/sash seat belt
therefore arguments that the car structure is unsuitable are unfounded.
L71
Spinal cord injury associated with lap only seat belt usage
Middleton J
1995
Proceedings of The Lap Belt Safety Conference
NSW has about 50 new cases of spinal cord injury resulting from vehicle
accidents each year. The lap belt contributes to a localisation of forces
in a region of the spinal cord that is vulnerable to injury through
hyperflexion. Abdominal injuries may be difficult to diagnose due to
the consequent neurological deficit [(paralysis]. Case studies show
the severe injuries that may result from lap only seat belts.
L72
A study of seat belt syndrome in the centre rear seating position
Lane J
1995
Proceedings of The Lap Belt Safety Conference
"The weight of evidence is that lap belts provide substantial protection
to car occupants, through less than 3-point lap/sash seat belts". A
specific injury - the seat belt syndrome - is associated with lap belts.
Roadside observations were compared with insurance claims to calculate
relative risk. The centre rear lap belt wearer has about twice the risk of
a person wearing a lap/sash seat belt in an outboard rear seat and about
five time the risk of a front passenger wearing a lap/sash seat belt. [this
suggests deficiencies in rear seat design and rear seat restraint design]
L73
Retrofitting of lap sash seat belts in centre rear seating positions
Judd R
1995
Proceedings of The Lap Belt Safety Conference
Restraint system manufacturer discusses the difficulties and solutions
to retrofitting lap sash seat belts to centre rear seating positions.
Vehicles with rear parcel shelves provide the simplest solution.
L74
Effectiveness of ADR69
Morris A, Barnes J, Fildes B, Bentivegna and Se
2001
ATSB CR 199
Case controlled study of crashes with and without airbag deployments.
Puzzling that delta with airbags less than those without. HA per driver 60%
more with no airbag. Passenger airbag effectiveness inconclusive.
A28
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
L75
Benefits of the inflatable tubular structure
Compass K, Digges K and Milliards A
1998
Proceedings of 16th ESV
4.6% of the 4 million injuries sustained by car occupants in the US could b
influenced by a head protecting tube or curtain. Severe injuries (AIS3+) are
reduced by 49%. Minor injuries (AIS2) are reduced by 27%.
L77
Ford focuses on safety
Mateja J
http://cnnfn.cnn.com/2001/09/24/home_auto/q_fordsafety_krt/
L78
VEHICLE OCCUPANT SURVEY 1994
RTA NSW
1994
RTA UNPUBLISHED DATA
SEATING POSITION
DRV 66%, MID-FRONT 0.3%, NS FRONT 21.8%,
OS REAR 4.3%, MID REAR 2.3%, NS REAR 4.9%,
THIRD ROW 0.2%
VEHICLE TYPE: CAR 83%, TAXI 2.6%, VAN 14.3%
NUMBER OF OCCUPANTS: 1-66%, 2-24%, 3-7%, 4-2%
L79
EFFECTIVENESS OF AIRBAGS IN AUSTRALIA
BARNES J
2001
ROAD SAFETY 2001, MUARC, MELBOURNE
L80
SAFETY BENEFITS RESULTING FROM VEHICLE DESIGN CHANGES SINCE THE INTRO OF A
HENDRIE D
2001
ROAD SAFETY 2001, MUARC, MELBOURNE
L81
NARROW OBJECT CRASHES AND INJURY OUTCOMES
MORRIS A
2001
ROAD SAFETY 2001, MUARC, MELBOURNE
L82
TIMBER POLE CRASHES
GRZEBIETA R
2001
ROAD SAFETY 2001, MUARC, MELBOURNE
L83
EFFECT OF OCCUPANT CHARACTERISTICS IN INJURY RISK - ACTIVE RESTRAINTS
MCCARTHY
2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17TH ESV
L84
PRELIMINARY EVALUATION OF PASSENGER AIRBAG EFFECTIVENESS IN AUSTRALIA
MORRIS A, BARNE J AND FILDES B
2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17TH ESV
INCONCLUSIVE
L85
FACTORS INFLUENCING LOWER EXTREMITY INJURIES
HESSE S
2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17TH ESV
FOOTWELL AND PEDAL INTRUSION MAIN FACTORS. AIRBAG AND
BOLSTER HELP IN MORE SEVERE CRASHES.
A29
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
L86
EFFECTIVENESS OF (DRIVER) AIRBAGS IN AUSTRALIA
MORRIS A, BARNES J AND FILDES B
2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17TH ESV
HARM 60% GREATER WITHOUT AIRBAGS
L87
SIDE AIRBAGS: BENEFITS AND RISKS FOR CHILDREN
TYLKO S
2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17TH ESV
SOME PROTECTION. NO HAZARDS IF CORRECTLY SEATED.
L88
CRASH AND FIELD PERFORMANCE OF SIDE AIRBAGS
DIAMOTAS D
2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17TH ESV
CURTAINS ALOS EFFECTIVE FOR SUV INTO CAR SIDE IMPACTS.
L89
COMPARISON OF EURONCAP ASSESSMENTS WITH INJURY CAUSATION IN ACCIDENTS
FAILS A AND MINTON R
2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17TH ESV
GOOD AGGREEMENT. HEAD EJECTION IN SIDE IMPACT NEEDS
MORE WORK.
L90
STEERING COLUMN MOVEMENT IN SEVERE FRONTAL CRASHES - EFFECT ON AIRBAG
ZUBY D AND ONEILL B
2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17TH ESV
REGULATIONS THAT LIMIT STR COL MOVEMENT IN OFFSET TEST
DESIRABLE
L91
LOWER EXTREMITY INJURIES AND ASSOCIATED INJURY CRITERIA
KUPPA
2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17TH ESV
INJURY RISK FUNCTIONS. FUNCTIONAL LOSS ISSUES
CATEGORY
M01
M
Child restraints
Risk of death among child passengers in front and rear seating positions
Braver E, Whitfield R and Ferguson S
1997
Proceedings of the 2nd Child Occupant Protection Symposium,
Data from the US FARS are analysed to determine impact
severity, direction of impact and other factors. "Children are
at significantly lower risk of dying in rear seats of passenger
vehicles whether or not these vehicles are equipped with a
[front] passenger airbag... Children were at a lower risk in
rear centre than rear outboard positions".
M02
A comparison of anchorage systems for child restraints in side impacts
Brown J, Kelly P and Griffiths M
1997
Proceedings of the 2nd Child Occupant Protection Symposium
Three child restraint systems were
subjected to side impact tests. The systems were CAUSFIX (two
rigid lower anchorages and top tether), UCRA (flexible lower
anchorages with and without top tether) and "conventional"
Australian (adult belt and top tether). The CAUSFIX system
performed best. The UCRA system performed well with top tether
but poorly without the top tether. The authors point out that it
is important to analyse the kinematics of the dummy in addition
to measuring head excursion and deceleration because the head
may come close to potentially injurious surfaces without
showing
up in the measurements. Concern is expressed that spacing the
lower anchorage in the ISOFIX system would not allow the
installation of three child restraints in the rear of most
vehicles.
A30
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
M03
Universal anchorage systems for child restraint devices
Brown J and Kelly P
1998
Proceedings of the Developments in Safer Motor Vehicles Seminar
Review of the progress in the development of an
international standard for child restraints. Compares rigid
(ISOFIX) and conventional child restraint anchorage systems. The
latest consensus involves two rigid lower anchorages and
provision for an optional top tether. This will provide a
significant countermeasure to misuse (a problem when adult seat
belts are used for restraining the device) and it will improve
side impact protection. The authors are concerned that the
spacing of the ISOFIX anchorage will preclude the installation
of three child restraints across the rear seat.
M04
Passive security for wheel-chair users travelling in motor vehicles
Cordes J, Burger H and Schrimpf H
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
Requirements for wheel-chair
restraint systems are markedly less than those applying to
passenger car restraint systems. Possible safety improvements
are discussed. An "impact cushion" which is secured by a lap
belt is evaluated. Force limiting devices on the wheel-chair
restraint system also increase safety for the occupant.
M05
Use and misuse of child restraint devices in Michigan
Eby D and Kostyniuk L
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
A statewide direct observation study of child restraint
use and misuse, including random-sample driver interviews at day
care centres. 75% of children under 4 years of age used child
restraints, but this reduced to 51% if the driver was unbelted.
87 driver interviews were conducted. 97% believed that the child
restraint was correctly installed and used. 71% learned how to
install the device by reading the manufacturer’s instructions but
none used this information in learning how to secure the child
in the restraint because it was "obvious". The overall misuse
rate was 89% (vehicle containing at least one incorrectly
installed or incorrectly used restraint). Errors in placing the
child in the seat were more common than installing the restraint
in the vehicle. Most common problems were slack in the
adjustment for the child or attachment of the restraint to the
vehicle.
M06
Child restraint device use and misuse in Michigan
Eby D, Kostyniuk L and Christoff C
1997
University of Michigan Transportation Research Unit
Detailed report on the project summarised in the
ESV paper. See also UMTRI Research Review April-June 1997, Vol 28, No
M07
Optimisation of the wheelchair tiedown and occupant restraint system
Gu J and Roy P
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
Tests of restraint systems built to
proposed ISO standards. It was concluded that b-pillar mounted
restraints offer superior protection to floor-mounted restraints.
A31
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
M08
Children in car crashes
Henderson M
1994
Child Accident Prevention Foundation of Australia (CAPFA now Kidsafe).
An in-depth study of car crashes in which child occupants were
injured. The study covered 247 children in 131 vehicles.
Intrusion, collapsing seats, broken glass and loose objects
were found to be the most likely causes of injury to properly
restrained children. For infant capsules the advantages of the
move from body bands to harnesses was confirmed. Properly used
forward-facing child seats provided exceptionally good
protection and no significant neck injury, even in severe
crashes. The one child seat fatality was a case of gross misuse.
Performance of booster seats was found to be good, except where
mis-used with a lap belt only (the only booster seat fatality).
Adult lap/sash seat belts were found to provide good protection
for children, even in high speed crashes and neck injury was not
found to be a problem. The problem of the lack of a lap/sash
seat belt in the centre-rear seat of most vehicles was noted ­
lap only seat belts were found to be an incomplete restraint
with significantly greater incidence of abdominal injuries.
Four-wheel-drives and passenger vans comprised a high proportion
of the vehicles in the study.
M09
Adult seat belts: how safe are they for children?
Henderson M, Brown J and Griffiths M
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
The CAPFA study (see above) recorded 121
cases of children wearing lap-sash seat belts and 35 cases of
children wearing lap only seat belts. Sled tests were conducted
to simulate some of the crashes. "To obtain maximum protection,
children should be restrained in dedicated child seat, or adult
seat belts with booster seats, until they are of a size
appropriate to use adults belts. However, field data... show
that (children) were generally well protected (by adult
lap/shoulder seat belts) even in severe frontal crashes and none
sustained belt-induced inertial neck injury...Lap-belted
children sustained a higher proportion of abdominal injuries and
a similar proportion of head injuries despite almost all being
seated in the centre position...". "...adult lap/shoulder belts
do not present a significant risk of severe injury to young
children".
M10
Injuries to restrained children
Henderson M, Brown J and Paine M
1994
Proceedings of the 38th Annual AAAM.
Analysis of the cases from the CAPFA Study where there was injury to
children in child restraints or booster seats. When properly fitted and
adjusted these devices worked exceptional well, even in crashes
regarded as "unsurvivable" for adult occupants. The principal
threats are from impact intrusion, collapsing seats, broken
glass and loose objects.
A32
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
M11
Children in adult seat belts and child harnesses: crash sled comparisons
Henderson M, Brown J and Griffiths M
1997
Proceedings of the 2nd Child Occupant Protection Symposium,
Three types of restraint system were
evaluated adult lap/sash, lap only and lap belt with child
harness. Three child dummies (18months, 3 years and 6 years)
were used. The results of an in-depth field study indicated
that, while a dedicated child seat offered the best protection,
adult lap/sash belts provide acceptable protection, even in
severe crashes. The sled test results confirmed this
observation: the lap/sash belt minimised head excursion and risk
of head and abdominal injury and there was nothing in the
results to suggest that the lap/sash system increases the risk
of neck injury compared to the lap only seat belt. The addition
of a harness to a lap seat belt reduces head excursion but
increases neck forces and head accelerations, compared with a
lap/sash seat belt. Also the harness tends to pull the lap belt
upwards - increasing the risk of submarining. The 18 month dummy
was not well restrained in by either the lap/sash or lap only
seat belts - this emphasises the importance of using child seats
up to at least two years of age.
M12
Injury risks, misuse rates and the effects depending child restraint system
Hummel Th, Lanwieder K, Finkbeiner F and Hell
1997
Proceedings of the 2nd Child Occupant Protection Symposium
Real world accident data
covering 593 restrained children in car crashes was analysed. It
was found that the frequency of injury and risk of severe
injury were significantly higher when the children were
restrained solely by an adult seat belt. "Misuse" was observed
in 63% of the cases were installation of child restraints was
observed and serious misuse was observed in one third of all
cases. Sled tests confirmed that misuse can substantially reduce
the protection provided by the restraint. The ISOFIX system
displayed a decisive improvement in the number of mistakes made
during installation. "ISOFIX" appears to be a central element in
the improvement of future child restraint systems".
M13
Trends and effects of child restraint systems based on Volvo's Database
Isaksson-Hellman I, Jakobsson L, Gustafsson C
1997
Proceedings of the 2nd Child Occupant Protection Symposium
Rearward facing child
restraints were found to be especially effective, with a
calculated injury reducing effect of 96% (compared with no
restraint?). The findings for other systems were 77% for booster
seats with adult belts and 59% for adult seat belts alone.
Forward-facing child seats were not evaluated (uncommon in
Sweden?).
M14
Child restraint evaluation program
Kelly P et al
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
Background and initial results of a
consumer testing program for child restraints available in
Australia.
A33
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
M15
Crash tests with forward facing child restraints & passenger airbags
Krafft M, Kullgren A, Malm S and Ydenius A
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
Crash tests show there is a large injury risk for forward facing
systems in front of a passenger airbag in a collision with
pre-impact braking (note the child restraints are unlikely to
have had top tethers and therefore the adult inertia reel seat
belt might have allowed excessive forward movement of the child
restraint).
M16
Side impact to children in cars - accident analysis and safety tests
Langwieder K, Hell W, Lowne R and Huijskens C
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
Comprehensive report of research into side
impacts involving child restraints. Severe and fatal injuries
were found to be overrepresented in lateral collisions. Head
contact against the child restraint or inner door structure was
important. A sled test needs to simulate a 50km/h side impact
and must reproduce door intrusion. Forward movement of the head
in pre-impact braking may contribute to injuries in the case of
M17
Towards improved infant restraint system requirements
Legault F, Stewart D and Dance M
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
Crash data files and crash tests were
conducted to compare the protection provided by different
devices at various ages. "Infants and young toddlers are
provided with a higher level of safety when restrained by in a
rear-facing infant restraint system as long as possible rather
than not being restrained, being restrained in a forward facing
restraint or restrained by a seat belt".
M18
A comparison of the performance of child restraint attachment systems
Lowne R, Roy P and Paton I
1997
Proceedings of the 2nd Child Occupant Protection Symposium
Five types of child restraint systems
were subjected to user trials and dynamic tests. The systems
were: A-rigid four point ISOFIX, B-rigid two points with top
tether, B'-rigid two points with a device that pushes the
restraint against the seat back (pre-tensioning), C-flexible
lower attachments and top tether (similar to Australian system)
and a "conventional" British installation using only the adult
seat belt. The conventional system was more likely to be
incorrectly fitted than the other systems and performed worst
overall in the front impact dynamic tests. Scheme A provided the
least head excursion (desirable), followed by B, C and B'. B'
was little different to the conventional system. The systems
with rigid attachments performed much better in the side
impacts. Scheme C (flexible lower attachments) produced greater
head displacement and chest deceleration than the conventional
system. Schemes B' and C were particularly sensitive to slack in
the top tether. With more than 25mm slack in the top tether
Scheme C deteriorated to greater head displacement than the
conventional system in both the front and side impacts. The
importance of eliminating slack in the top tether is emphasised.
A34
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
M19
Child restraint tether straps - increasing safety for children
Lumley M
1997
Proceedings of the 2nd Child Occupant Protection Symposium
Four child restraint systems were tested according to FMVSS213 to assess
the effect of the top tether and slack in the top tether. It was
concluded that the addition of a top tether provided a
substantial reduction in head excursion in child restraints
which normally comply with FMVSS213 and HIC tends to be lower. A
top tether can reduce the disadvantages of not tightening the
adult seat belt correctly. Retro-fitting of top tethers to child
restraints in the USA is recommended. It is also noted that the
FMVSS test requirements that the adult seat belt be tightened to
60N is unrealistic - finger tight (20N) would be more
appropriate.
M20
Australian child restraints lead the world
Lumley M
1998
Proceedings of the Developments in Safer Motor Vehicles Seminar,
Review of the history of
child restraint development in Australia. International
developments. Benefits of the top tether.
M21
The frontal impact performance of ISOFIX child restraint systems
Paton I, Roy P and Roberts A
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
A series of sled impact tests were conducted to assess the
performance of ISOFIX and CANFIX (with top tether) child
restraints. The CANFIX system, complete with properly adjusted
top tether, provided a level of performance similar to the
ISOFIX system when tested to ECE R44 02 in a frontal impact. The
authors point out the importance of top tether use and
adjustment.
M22
Development of a sled side impact test for child restraint systems
Paton I and Roy P
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
The Australian/NZ standards test does not
include the effects of intrusion. The authors conducted a (TRL)
research program in a (partially successful) attempt to
reproduce intrusion effects.
M23
Usability trials of alternative child restraint attachment systems
Pedder J, Gane J, Pasco D, Deibert M and Lumle
1997
Proceedings of the 2nd Child Occupant Protection Symposium
Five systems were evaluated in user
trials: The "conventional" Australian system using adult seat
belts and a top tether, ISOFIX with four "rigid" attachment
points, CAUSFIX with two "rigid" lower attachment points and a
top tether, UCRA with two lower webbing attachments and a top
tether and a development of the UCRA system. The conventional
system was found to be most likely to be misused and the "rigid"
systems were found to be best overall. CAUSFIX and UCRA were the
systems preferred by most participants but the ISOFIX
attachments were used without difficulty (contrary to concerns
of some vehicle manufacturers). Simple pictograms were found to
be adequate for informing users about the installation of each
type of restraint system.
A35
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
M24
Effect of harness mounting location on child restraint performance'
Sampson D, Lozzi A, Kelly P and Brown J
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
Sled tests to
determine the effects of using different harness slot positions.
The optimum mounting height is level with the child's shoulders.
If this is not possible then the next higher slot should be
used. The Australian Standard should require that the highest
slot be no lower than the average shoulder height of the oldest
users for which the restraint is intended.
M25
Evaluation of aftermarket devices to reposition shoulder belts
Sullivan L and Chambers F
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
Sled tests on 3
brands of aftermarket devices for improving the fit of the sash
portion of a seat belt when worn by small adults or children.
"All of the devices evaluated in this study produced some
degradation in the performance of the lap/shoulder belt system
as compared to baseline conditions...". The authors note that
the 1994 amendments to FMVSS 208 to improve seat belt fit and
comfort should reduce demand for these devices.
M26
A comprehensive surveillance system for child occupant protection
Winston F et al
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
Limitations of current crash
databases are described. A new system which utilises insurance
claim settlements has been developed in Philadelphia. Telephone
surveys follow up on notifications and some crash investigations
are conducted. MADYMO modelling is used to simulate some crashes
and to determine the possible effects of changes to the
restraint system.
M27
Airbags - Consumer information on airbag on-off switches
NHTSA
1998
NHTSA web site
Description of the US policy and procedures concerning passenger airbag
switches.
M28
Lap-only seat belts: findings from the CAPFA study
Henderson M
1995
Proceedings of The Lap Belt Safety Conference
Of the 247 cases in the CAPFA Study 35 children used a lap-only
seat belt and one used a lap-only seat belt in conjunction with a
booster seat. "The lap seat belt is an incomplete restraint - to be
used only when no better system is available. There was significantly
greater incidence of belt-induced abdominal injury among lap-belt wearers
than lap/sash users". Incidence of head injuries were similar despite
that reduced likelihood of head contacts in the centre rear seat. A
mechanism of fatal injury was found to be axial tension in the spinal
cord due to the deceleration forces when the body was flexed over the
seat belt, combined with relatively insignificant head contact. This
occurred with one lap-seat belt wearer and the case of the lap seat belt
with booster seat - which was considered to be a dangerous combination
A36
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
M29
Seat belt and child restraint usage - 1993
Roads and Traffic Authority of NSW
1992
Research Note 16/94
Regular report on observational surveys of seat belt usage in NSW.
In an unpublished report, Michael Paine conducted further analysis of
the data to examine trends with child occupants. Key results were:
Total of 30,842 occupants in 20411 vehicles. 9.1% of VEHICLES had at
least one child on board. 13% had at least one rear seat occupant.
Of the 16802 CARS, 12.5% had at least one rear seat occupant, 0.9% had
three occupants in the rear seat and 9.6% had a child onboard.
Of the 1614 CARS WITH CHILREN ONBOARD: 80% had at least one child
in
the rear seat, 62% had an infant on board and 2.3% had two infants and
one other rear seat occupant [implications for ISOFIX proposal].
For comparison, for the 110 cars in the CAPFA Study: 86% had at least on
child in the rear seat, 52% had an infant onboard, 4% had two infants and
other occupant in the rear seat.
M30
CHILD INJURY TOLERANCE THROUGH CASE RECONSTRUCTION
HAGEDORN A
2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17TH ESV
3 CASE STUDIES.
M31
INFLUENCE OF REAR (LUGGAGE) LOADING ON CHILD RESTRAINTS
CLAIRE M
2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17TH ESV
EXCESSIVE EXCURSION A PROBLEM
M32
CHILD RESTRAINT SYSTEMS - CREST RESULTS
XAVIER T AND SCHROOTEN M
2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17TH ESV
TNO P SERIES NOT BIOFIDELIC, NOT ABLE TO EVALUATE
PROTECTION IN DETAIL
M33
Crash protection for child passengers: a review of best practice
Weber, K
2000
UMTRI Research Review, Vol. 31, No. 3,
Comprehensive review of child restraint issues. Supportive of Australian
practices.
CATEGORY
N01
N
Pedestrians
The school bus crossing control arm: an evaluation
Adams A and Paine M
1997
Research report for the NSW Department of Transport.
Accident statistics involving school buses,
objectives of the crossing control arm, application to NSW,
on-road observations of children near school buses (without a
crossing control arm), closed-road observations of children near
a bus with a crossing control arm. It was found that the NSW
situation was very different to that in the USA where, in many
states, motorists are supposed to stop for a stationery school
bus. The crossing control arm may introduce additional dangers
in the NSW situation where children are taught to "wait, watch,
walk".
A37
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
N02
Benefits from changes in vehicle exterior design - in Europe
Ashton S and Mackay G M
1983
Pedestrian Impact Injury and Assessment
Patterns of injury in real world
crashes. Design measures to reduce injury are discussed. "If
vehicles were designed such that there were no [severe] vehicle
contact head, pelvis and leg injuries at impact speeds below
40km/h then there would be a reduction of about one third in the
number of pedestrians seriously injured when struck by the front
of a car. Arguably, the benefits from [pedestrian friendly] car
exterior designs are equal to or greater than the benefits from
the provision of passive restraints for occupants". See also
Ashton S (1982) 'Vehicle design and pedestrian injuries',
Pedestrians Accidents, John Wiley & Sons.
N03
Vehicle engineering to protect vulnerable road users
Bly P
1991
The Vulnerable Road User, International Conference on Traffic Safety
"Careful design of the front of cars can greatly reduce injuries caused to
pedestrians they may hit. The requirements need not be very
restrictive of styling and need not add significantly to overall
cost". "Safer car fronts and truck under-run guards protect
other road users: they do not benefit the vehicle owner, who has
little incentive to purchase them...the way forward seems to
require regulation..."
N04
Risk and safety on the roads: the older pedestrian
Clark T, Packham D, Salter D and Silcock D
1995
AA Foundation for Road Safety Research
33% of British road fatalities are pedestrians.
50% of these are people aged 60 or
more. Accidents involving older pedestrians are more likely when
the pedestrian is on the far side of the road - an indication
that faulty judgment of the speed and distance of approaching
vehicles is a factor (most of these accidents occurred in
daylight during fine weather and women were at higher risk).
However, a laboratory study found the relative speed judgment
of older people was no worse than a control group.
N05
The practicalities of engineering cars for pedestrian protection
Clemo K, Davies R and Keys S
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
MIRA has carried out many tests to the
EEVC pedestrian impact procedures. "It appears that cars will
need to undergo profound changes in design to meet the required
standard" [compare this conclusion with Lawrence below].
N06
Injury pattern of pedestrians hit by cars of recent design
Foret-Bruno J, Faverjon G and Le Coz J
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
929 cases of car and pedestrian collisions
were evaluated. "At the same impact speed, injury frequencies
related to every body area are statistically lower, compared to
those found for cars designed in the 70s".
A38
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
N07
An analysis of head injuries in real world pedestrian accidents
Greetham and Guenther D
1983
Pedestrian Impact Injury and Assessment
1042 pedestrian accidents investigated. Elderly pedestrian were found
to be at a much higher risk of receiving severe injuries (AIS4+)
at impact speeds above 33km/h (persons over 60 had 2.5 times the
risk of younger people, including children) or when impacting
stiff structures. Severe injuries were more often caused by
vehicle contacts than ground contacts (20% of vehicle contacts
were AIS4+ compared with only 7% of ground contacts).
N08
Analysis of circumstances and injuries in 217 pedestrian fatalities
Harruff R, Avery A and Alter-Pandya A
1998
Accident Analysis and Prevention
Retrospective analysis of fatal pedestrian accidents over a six
year period. Proportions of fatal injuries (not cumulative):
head 73%, torso 51%, extremities 30%. A related study found that
pick-up trucks were over-represented in pedestrian fatality
statistics. [Based on limited information such as speed zoning]
the authors concluded that vehicle speed alone was a poor
predictor of extent of pedestrian injuries. Elderly pedestrians
were most vulnerable.
N09
Update on Pedestrian Crash Data Study
Isenberg R and Chidester A
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
Results
of more than 200 pedestrian collisions are presented.
Vehicle/pedestrian interaction, injuries, physical
characteristics and avoidance actions are analysed. See also
15th ESV.
N10
EEVC test methods to evaluate pedestrian protection
Jansenn E
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
Comprehensive report on the EEVC-developed
tests: legform to bumper, upper legform to bonnet leading edge
and headform to bonnet top. "Test programs on current cars have
shown that it is technical feasible to fulfil the
requirements...with new car designs". The requirements should be
extended to cover aftermarket bullbars.
N11
Pedestrian injury - analysis of the PCDS field collision data
Jarrett K, Reynolds D and Saul R
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
The Pedestrian Crash Data Study (PCDS) is
collecting data about pedestrian collisions in the US. Analysis
covers age, impact speed, injured body region and vehicle
components which caused injury. Changes in injury patterns over
the past 20 years are noted. Societal costs of pedestrian
injuries are presented.
N12
Pedestrian safety testing using the EEVC pedestrian impactors
Lawrence G and Hardy B
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
Report of TRL tested conducted in accordance
with EEVC procedures - mainly under Euro-NCAP. "...solutions to
the problem of achieving better pedestrian safety are often
readily available, low cost and could be applied over a higher
proportion of the car surface".
A39
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
N13
Accidents to young pedestrians
Lawson S
1990
Birmingham City Council.
Analysis of 2470 accidents involving
young pedestrians (19 and under) in the Birmingham area between
1985 and 1988. 11 of the 30 fatalities to children 9 or under
were immediately outside their home. Only 10% were at locations
where they were crossing for the first time. One third of all
child pedestrian casualties were on a trip to or from school and
25% were going to or from shops. 20% or all casualties were in
hospital for more than a month. 1.6% received severe disability
and 16.4% had some residual dysfunction. 66% of drivers had
regularly driven through the site (50% were returning home from
work!). 20% of the pedestrians admitted they did not look for
traffic before stepping out and 50% said they did not see the
vehicle before the accident. 33% of drivers said they had no
time to take avoidance action. 42% of drivers said that a parked
vehicle or other obstruction prevented them from seeing the
pedestrian.
N14
Application of ITS to enhance vehicle safety for elderly and disabled
Ling Suen S and Mitchell C
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
Driver/occupants aids are "mayday"
systems, night vision enhancement, obstacle detection and
navigation/traffic information systems. Pedestrians could be
assisted by people detectors at signal controlled crossings ­
these detect slow-moving pedestrians and extend the signal
phase. "Insufficient effort is being made to ensure that ITS
equipment is easy for elderly and disabled people to use".
N15
Pedestrian safety
McFadden M
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
Analysis of 350 pedestrian fatalities in
Australia during 1992. 66% had serious (severe?) head injuries,
47% had serious chest injuries. 74% were considered primarily
responsible for the accident. Alcohol was a factor in 30% of the
cases. 10% emerged from behind parked vehicles (on the same side
of the side). 85% occurred in built-up areas and 66% were in
areas with a speed limit of 60km/h or less. 26% were in
"residential" streets. "It is probable that bullbars are
involved in 20% of pedestrian fatalities". In 42% of cases there
was no braking or swerving prior to impact. A further 12% were
unknown, suggesting that no avoidance action is taken by the
driver in about half of all pedestrian fatalities. 40% of
fatally injured pedestrians were over the age of 60 years.
N16
Bumper structure for pedestrian protection
Nagatomi K, Akiyama A and Kobayashi T
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
Honda's research into the use of a
readily-crushable bumper to reduce injuries to pedestrians.
Dummy tests were used to confirm the simulations.
A40
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
N17
Injury causing parts and influence parameters in pedestrian accidents'
Otte D
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
760 cases of car pedestrian collisions were analysed.
81% were at impact speeds up to 40km/h.
Many of the severe head injuries occur at speeds
of more than 40km/h. "Current model cars have a lower injury
severity risk for head, thorax and lower extremities compared
with older models". The EEVC pedestrian impact test procedure is
discussed.
N18
Towards a pedestrian-friendly bonnet
Otubushin A and Green J
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
Approximately 60% of pedestrian head strikes to vehicle front
structures are to the bonnet. Bonnet design has the potential to
reduce the severity of the resulting head injuries. A series of
headform impacts to the bonnets of 7 European vehicles was
conducted.
N19
Evaluation of school bus signaling systems
Paine M and Fisher A
1995
Research report for NSW Department of Transport.
Field evaluation of several school bus signaling systems, analysis of
signal range requirements (for motorists to be given sufficient
warning in order to slow down), visual ergonomics of flashing
signal lights, specification of signal requirements, comparison
with the systems evaluated in the field. High-intensity
fixed-beam "wig-wag" lights at the front and rear were found be
the best of the evaluated systems.
N20
Flashing lights on school buses
Paine M and Fisher A
1996
Proceedings of 15th ESV
Based on the research report for
the NSW Department of Transport (see above). Bright,
high-mounted, fixed beam lights have the advantage that the
signals are highly visible from 250m away but approaching
drivers ride under the beam (move into a lower intensity
portion) as they get closer to the bus . Copy on the World Wide
Web: http://www1.tpgi.com.au/users/mpaine/buslight.html
N21
Pedestrian head impact testing at the University of Adelaide
Streeter L, Anderson R, McLean J and Garrett M
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
A free-flight headform
launcher is being used to reconstruct actual pedestrian/vehicle
impacts.
N22
The risk of injuries to pedestrians for different car models
Tingvell C, Lie A, Kullgren A, Krafft M
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
Real world accidents with pedestrians were studied in relation to car mod
A41
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
N23
Dart out accidents involving young pedestrians
Vaughan R
1997
Proceedings of Accident Investigation, Reconstruction, Interpretation
Accident statistics are presented.
The maximum safe travelling speed is shown to be less than
10km/h for four scenarios. "Strategies for avoiding young
pedestrian emerging collisions by lowering speed limits are
unlikely to succeed, although injury severity will be reduced".
This is a rather pessimistic analysis.
N24
Realization of pedestrian protection measures on cars
Wollert W, Blodorn J, Appel H and Kuhnel A
1983
Pedestrian Impact Injury and Assessment
A description of the "pedestrian friendly" features of the UNI_CAR
experimental safety vehicle: a low, long gently inclined front
end with a smooth surface rounded off in all directions; energy
absorbing front and bonnet; marked withdrawal (contours?) of the
roof edges and sides and steeply raked windscreen [many of these
features are now appearing in modern car designs - but mainly
for aerodynamic purposes]. Includes a graph of HIC vs head
impact velocity for impacts with the bonnet - it was found that
the HIC stayed below 1000 up to impact speeds of about 14m/s
(50km/h) and then climbed rapidly above 1000. Also at speeds
above about 10m/s the head impact speed (to bonnet) was similar
to the collision velocity (ie speed of the car).
N25
Computer simulation system for car-pedestrian accident
Yoshida S
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
A simulation system was developed
by Honda to predict whole body pedestrian dynamic behaviour and
the influence of car shape and structure.
N26
AUSTRALIA'S INVOLVEMENT IN IHRA PEDESTRIAN SAFETY
ANDERSON R
2001
ROAD SAFETY 2001, MUARC, MELBOURNE
N27
YOUNG PEDESTRIANS AND REVERSING MOTOR VEHICLES
PAINE M AND HENDERSON M
2001
ROAD SAFETY 2001, MUARC, MELBOURNE
N28
PEDESTRIAN INJURY PROJECTION IN AUSTRALIA IF VEHICLES ACHIEVE HIGH STAR RATIN
COXON C
2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17TH ESV
NO ESTIMATE OF EFFECTIVENESS
N29
SUMMARY OF IHRA PEDESTRIAN SAFETY WG
MIZUNO Y
2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17TH ESV
MAKING CARS 'SAFE' AT 40km/h REDUCES FATALS BY 35% AND
SERIOUS BY 19%
N30
EVALUATION OF PEDESTRIAN AIRBAG THROUGH MODELLING AND TESTING
HOLDING P
2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17TH ESV
CATEGORY
O
Motorcycles and bicycles
A42
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
O01
New developments in retrospective data banks of accidents
Anselm D and Langwieder K
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
The German Insurance Association
(GDV) accident database is described. It includes details on 600
motorcycle/car crashes, including crash characteristics and
injury patterns.
O02
Analysis of the passive safety of motorcycles
Berg F, Niewohner W, Schmitt B, Eppla J and Bu
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
216 motorcycle accidents were analysed.
Collision characteristics, injuries and causes of injuries are
described. Pointers are given toward possibilities for
improvements.
O03
Collision dynamics and injury causation in motorcycle accidents
Careme L
1990
Rider-passenger Protection in Motorcycle Collisions
In depth study of
23 motorcycle crashes involving AIS4+ injuries to neck and
chest. The most severe injuries resulted during impacts where
the rear wheel of the motorcycle lifted during impact and the
rider was pitched forward. The concept of an energy absorbing
structure which resisted this pitch motion was proposed.
O04
Development and testing of a motorcycle airbag restraint system
Chin B, Okello J, McDonough P and Grose G
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
TRL simulations and tests of a specially designed airbag system for
a (large) Norton Commander motorcycle. The system was found to
fully restrain the rider during the sled tests and neck loads
were significantly less than published tolerance values.
O05
Motorcycle and bicycle protective helmets
Corner J, Whitney C, O'Rouke N and Morgan D
1987
FORS CR 55, May 1987.
Post-crash investigation of 329 motorcycle and bicycle
accidents. Of the unhelmeted bicyclists who received severe head
injuries 40% would definitely have had an improved outcome if a
substantial helmet had been worn. Laboratory simulations of
impacts and sliding motions. It was concluded that the
Australian Standards needed to provide improved protection for
facial (particularly jaws) and temporal areas, to soften helmet
liners (substantial reduction in liner stiffness) and to improve
the sliding properties of helmets.
A43
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
O06
Motorcycle related injuries to children and adolescents
Haworth N, Ozanne-Smith, Fox B and Brumen I
1994
MUARC Report 56,
Analyses of hospital admissions. Also a study of 185
injured motorcyclists. "The most effective intervention
currently available to reduce motorcyclist injuries is the
motorcycle helmet". Uncertainty about the effectiveness of leg
protection and airbags. Recessed fuel filler caps reduce injury
potential. Protective clothing can significantly reduce soft
tissue injury and increase thresholds for some serious injuries.
A 1991 benefit/cost study by MUARC indicated that protective
clothing would need to be only 2.5% effective to reach breakeven point. Conspicuity - failure of a motorist to see an
approaching motorcycle may have been responsible for between 12%
and 21% of crashes. Daytime use of headlights appears effective
(about three times less likely to be involved in a crash). Noted
that a headlamp which is in use at the time of a crash can
increase the risk of fire [this appears doubtful but there may
be a need for a fuel system integrity test]. Maintenance of
brakes, suspension, clutch and throttle may be an issue.
O07
Motorcycle crash countermeasures
Haworth N and Schulze M
1996
MUARC Report 87,
Extensive literature review covering crash avoidance
(conspicuity, rider training, car driver training, licensing and
enforcement, alcohol, pillion passengers, brakes, rider vision,
engine capacity and road environment issues) and injury
reduction (helmets, protective clothing, leg protection and
airbags). A workshop analysed the achievability and desirability
of each countermeasure. Notable results for crash avoidance
were: improved road environment, conspicuity of other vehicles
and conspicuity of motorcyclists rated high but research was
needed on these issues; better maintenance (brakes, suspension,
clutch and throttle), daytime headlights/running lights and
discouraging use of car phones rated moderate; ABS, bright
clothing, pillion restrictions and engine restrictions rated
low. Notable results for injury reduction were: protective
clothing and footwear, reducing danger from bullbars, improved
truck under-run protection, improved education/advice about
fastening helmets rated high; expiry dates on helmets, banning
sale of second hand helmets and encouraging motorcycle designs
which are less hazardous for an ejected rider rated moderate;
standards for protective clothing, mandatory full-face helmets
and investigation of leg protection devices, while desirable
rated low for achievability. It was noted that novices are
restricted to low capacity bikes which are unlikely to have
advanced features such as ABS (and airbags) but this was not a
safety concern. DIY maintenance is a problem because the owners
can see the components. Strapless helmets are being developed in
France and USA. These use an air bladder to retain the helmet.
Window tinting on cars may make it more difficult to
detect motorcyclists (also the approaching cyclists cannot see
whether the motorists is looking at them).
O08
Feasibility research on a prototype airbag system for motorcycles
Iijima S
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
Describes Honda's research program on motorcycle
aribags. Some benefits and potential adverse effects were found.
A44
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
O09
Braking, stability and handling of motorcycles
Juniper R & Good M
1983
FORS CR 29
This study involved a
literature review and comprehensive analysis of motorcycle
dynamics. In regard to accident risk, the study found that "the
effect of motorcycle handling characteristics on accident risk
has not been studied, due in part to the lack of knowledge of
appropriate ways to characterise handling qualities".
O10
Safety potential of a new motorcycle concept
Kalliske I and Albus C
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
BMW has developed a new concept in motorcycling. The
vehicle incorporates a roll cage, frontal crush element and a
rider restraint system. One outcome might be exemption from
wearing a helmet (on the basis that it would "as safe as" a
normal motorcycle).
O11
Improvement to motorcycles by protectors fitted to rider's clothing
Koch H
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
Assessment of protective devices
conforming to draft CEN standard 1621-1. Energy-absorbing
devices to protect shoulders, elbow, forearms, hip, knees and
lower legs. "Leather clothing...does not influence the number or
severity of injuries in collisions". Improvements to materials
now mean that effective protective devices can be developed.
O12
The mortality rate in motorcycle accidents - wearing helmets
Korbori N, Yamaki T and Nakagawa Y
1991
The Vulnerable Road User, International Conference on
These neurosurgeons examined trends in fatal head injuries to
motorcyclists before and after mandatory helmet wearing. They
found that although helmets reduce the incidence of focal brain
injuries, they are less effective at preventing the severe lifethreatening brain injuries such diffuse brain injury. A
change is rotational velocity of the head at the time of a blow
is one of the causes of this type of injury.
A45
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
O13
Appropriate and inappropriate strategies for injury reduction
Ouillet J
1990
Rider-passenger Protection in Motorcycle Collisions
Review of a range of countermeasures. Head injury
rates (per 1000 crashes) for non-helmeted riders were three
times that of helmeted riders. Rider kinematics in a collision
showing the rider being pitched forward. NHTSA-sponsored study
of a "crashworthy" motorcycle (roll-cage, anti-pitch front crash
bar, airbag, padded knee bolsters) - "it failed to protect the
dummy in a collision with a moving car". "tank mounted airbags
worked very well in perpendicular impacts with a stationary car
...[but] were nearly useless in impacts with moving cars".
"...adding more and more structures to the motorcycle does not
work". The assumption that loss of leg space is correlated with
severity of leg injuries is disputed: a study of motorcycle
crashes found that of 21 cases involving severe leg injuries 57%
had little or no loss of leg space. Also out of 16 cases where
the leg space was completely collapsed there were 6 severe leg
injuries. "... a fundamental flaw in the strategy of putting the
protection on the motorcycle: the rider's body moves around too
freely during impact to derive much protection from stationary
structures". Airbag jackets appeared to show promise in early
tests but were dropped from research in favour of tank-mounted
airbags. "Perhaps one of the primary benefits of heavy clothing
may be the reduction of badly contaminated wounds that delay and
prolong medical treatment". Fuel spills were reported in 62% of
900 motorcycle accidents and fire in 14 cases.
O14
Pedal cycle helmet effectiveness: a field study of accidents
McIntosh A, Dowdell B and Svensson N
1998
Accident Analysis and Prevention,
42 cases where a pedal cyclist's helmet sustained an impact during a road
accident were studied. Where possible, helmet impact dynamics
were reproduced to better understand the nature of the impact
and any failure mechanisms of the model of helmet. In 75% of the
cases there was no head injury. There were 4 fatalities but only
one was due to head injuries alone. It was found that impacts to
the tempero-parietal region produce the greatest risk of injury
but parts of this region could be below the test line for the
current Australian Standard and therefore might not provide
adequate protection. The reduced protection provided by the rim
region of the helmet was also noted. Some helmets were found to
separate into two or more pieces after the initial impact and
this could be dangerous if a second impact occurred.
O15
Motor cycle safety research literature review 1987-1991.
Nairn R
1993
FORS CR 117 March 1993.
The review included
motorcycle design features such as anti-lock braking systems,
crash protection and air bags. In the case of anti-lock and
integrated braking systems it was estimated that the cost would
be $1,200 per motorcycle and that the measure would be
cost-effective if it reduced the cost of motorcycle accidents by
at least 5%. An estimate of accident savings was not given.
O16
Bike racks on the front of buses
Paine M
1997
Report for ACT Dept Urban Services
Literature review, description of the design of a proprietary bike rack
in use in the USA. Comments from users. Mechanisms for pedestrian injury
Scarce statistics on pedestrian/bus accidents. Effects of bike rack on
injury, road space requirements, driver visibility, visibility
of bus lights, cognitive burden on bus driver and overall
community health issues resulting from increased bicycle travel.
A46
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
O18
An overall evaluation of leg protectors based on ISO 13232
Rogers N and Zellner J
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
501 cases of motorcycle accidents
were analysed by 200 computer simulations, 32 laboratory tests
and 14 full-scale tests. Results are presented (see [15th ESV]
for negative findings on leg protectors - head and upper body
injury risk increased). See also a paper by the same authors in
the 15th ESV.
O19
How can we improve the safety of vulnerable road users?
Swadling D
1997
ARRB Transport Research WA
Effect of speed on injury severity, WA accident
statistics, lack of bicycle parking facilities, road design
issues, bicycle lights and reflective clothing (summary of ARRB
research report), manual and motorised wheelchairs.
O20
Positional stability of motorcycle helmets
Thom D, Hurt H, Ouellet and Liu W
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
Current motorcycle helmet performance standards test
the strength of the retention system but the authors claim this
does not necessarily ensure that the helmet will be retained on
the head, even when securely fastened. Laboratory tests and
volunteer tests were conducted. Deficiencies in both the DOT and
ISO standards need to be addressed.
CATEGORY
P01
P
Heavy vehicles
Improving the safety of commercial vehicles'
Berg F, Grandel J, Niewohner W and Morschheu
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
DEKRA and Mercedes Benz research into heavy vehicle accidents. Truck
occupant
protection measures include: reducing the size of the steering
wheel and making it collapsible, padding surfaces and removing
sharp edges in the cabin and improve cabin strength. It was
estimated that about 21% of truck driver injuries could have
been prevented with an airbag (14% "possible" plus 7% "likely").
P02
Pointers towards the improvement of safety in buses - Germany
Berg F and Niewohner W
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
Crash analysis determined collision
parameters such as mass, impact directions, delta-V, and were
used to conduct two bus crash trials. Causes of the bus rolling
onto its side were examined.
P03
Improved crashworthy designs for truck underride guards
Bloch B and Schmutzler L
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
Detailed accident investigations were used to
evaluate the effectiveness of typical underride guards. "Clearly
improved designs are needed". Innovative practical designs are
now available. Existing regulations should be upgraded and
manufacturers should be encouraged to "go beyond any minimal
requirements...".
A47
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
P04
Heavy truck crashworthiness - case studies of truck occupant fatality
Cheng L, Werner S, Khatua T, Ray R and Lau E
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
Analysis of over 9000 heavy truck fatal
accidents (FARS data) and in-depth analysis of 68 cases (NTSB
data). 22% of the NTSB crashes were offset head-on crashes
between trucks, with substantial intrusion on the driver's side
of the cabin, 52% were rear-end collisions between two trucks
(often with the trailer tray intruding into the colliding
truck's cabin), 12% were collisions with (unyielding) fixed
objects. In 60% of the cases the truck rolled onto its side or
more (not mutually exclusive from the above percentages). 16% of
the crashes were judged to be "survivable" if seat belts had
been used.
P05
Body engineering considerations to improve the safety in minibuses
Dickison M and Buckley S
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
Examines the feasibility of
fitting lap/sash seat belts in minibuses. MIRA has developed a
low cost, low weight solution which is applicable to most vans
of unitary construction. Computer modelling is necessary to
ensure that the structure is adequate.
P06
Buses and coaches: evacuation
Gurley A
1992
Interior Safety of Passenger Transport
A review of European investigations
into the evacuation of buses. Several serious bus crashes are
evaluated. Difficulties with trial evacuations are discussed.
Evacuation times could be reduced by 50% after two practice runs
with school children.
P07
School bus seat belts: their fitment, effectiveness and cost
Henderson M and Paine M
1995
Research report for the NSW Department of Transport.
Literature review, the task of
transport of school children in NSW, bus safety standards,
occupant protection principles and the effectiveness of seat
belts in buses, usage issues, technical issues (most buses are
unsuitable for seat belts without major reconstruction), other
occupant protection options, cost effectiveness of a range of
options. It was recommended that fitment of seat belts in large
route service buses not be pursued as a mandatory safety
measure, that handrails on seats be replaced or padded, that a
code of practice be developed for retrofitting seat belts to
small buses (now available), that provisions in the ADRs which
exempt some small buses from fitting seat belts be withdrawn and
that bus door safety be reviewed (all but one of the fatalities
analysed during the study were from door entrapment).
P08
Safety of buses and coaches - problems and recent solutions
Kecman D
1995
Automotive Passenger Safety,
Review of Cranfield Impact Centre's recent
research on coach safety. Rollover strength, seats and seat
belts.
A48
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
P09
Seat strength in minibuses
Kecman D, Lenard J and Thomas P
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
The crashworthiness of seats in minibuses is assessed. A severe
minibus accident has the potential to result in multiple
casualties.
P10
Safety measures for the structure of trucks and buses
Miyazaki T
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
Japan has established 2 expert committees to look at the role of
vehicle structure in injuries to heavy vehicle occupants. A
range of safety measures is proposed.
P11
A study of car-truck impacts - energy absorbing guards
Murray N
1988
Monash University Dept Civil Engineering
Physics of car-truck impacts. Energy-absorbing structures. Designs issue
are: the whole system (truck, guard, car, occupant) must be
considered; the truck guard would need to absorb at least 100kJ
of energy (0.5m stroke and actuation force of 200kN);
standardised bumper heights. Preliminary estimates indicated
that the benefit cost ratio would, at best, be marginal.
Compatible bumper heights would be more effective.
P12
Australian bus safety standards
Paine M
1995
Project report for National Road Transport Commission.
Review of construction
standards and purchase specifications for buses in each
Australian state and territory. Comparison with Australian
Design Rule (ADR) requirements. Identification of potential
additions to the ADRs based on the bus accident study: Issues
included interior padding, seats, seat belts, buses used for
school excursions, automatic transmissions, driver's field of
view, tachographs, conspicuity and:
Issue
% of all % of Fat
% Ser.inj.
Fire
3%
4%
3%
Brake failure (mostly older buses) 6%
18%
13%
Evacuation an issue (emergency exits) 27%
67%
52%
Door entrapment (estimate from other work) - 2 per year 8 per year
P13
Bus accidents in Australia: 1970-93
Paine M
1995
Project report for National Road Transport Commission.
Analysis of bus
accident statistics from each state and territory. Analysis of
press clippings and reports covering 240 bus crashes or incidents
P14
Belt systems in passenger coaches
Rasenack W, Appel H, Rau H and Rietz C
1996
Proceedings of 15th ESV
Use of computer
simulation to assess the effectiveness of various seat belt
systems in coaches. A problem in rollover crashes with occupants
"hanging in the air" unable to release the seat belt is
postulated but this disadvantage (if it exists) does not outweigh
the advantages of seat belts in preventing injury.
A49
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
P15
Development and testing of rear underrun barriers
Rechnitzer G, Powell C and Seyer K
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
Design and testing of a prototype system. Fibreglass composite tubes
are placed within light-weight steel tubes provide very
effective energy absorption.
P16
Research on the evacuation readiness of bus crews and passengers
Shiosaka Y and Kuboike T
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
Trials of bus emergency evacuation
procedures. Regular door and window exits were evaluated. Of
concern is that all school children and half of the aged persons
failed to exit the bus during the first test. Difficulties were
found with reading instructions, operating the opening
mechanisms and fear about the height above the ground. An
improved display overcame many of the problems.
P17
Towing caravans and trailers safely
Staysafe
1992
Staysafe 22
Crash involvement of
caravans and trailers in NSW. Issues include tow bar design,
brakes, LPG equipment, crashworthiness, roadworthiness, tyres,
suspension design (roll steer) and stability.
P18
Heavy vehicle crash test method in Japan
Sukegawa Y, Matsukawa F and Oki W
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
Crash tests of a car into a truck fitted with an EEVC
"Front Underrun Protection System" are described. The impact
speed was 65km/h. Full, 50% and 30% overlap were tested. Effects
on injury risk and car deformation are discussed.
A50
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
P19
NSW Heavy Vehicle Crash Study - Final Technical Report.
Sweatman P et al
1990
FORS CR 92 August 1990.
Summarises the findings of
a study of 83 heavy vehicle crashes on two NSW highways. In
general, vehicles were not available for inspection in this
retrospective study therefore the report cautions that the
results for vehicle factors must be considered a lower bound.
The role played by various vehicle factors is discussed. An
estimate is made of the number of crashes in which each
countermeasure would have influenced the outcome.
Vehicle Countermeasure
Number of crashes
Reduced truck frontal stiffness
40 (48%)
Improved truck cab crashworthiness
20 (24%)
Truck seat belts fitted/used
19 (23%)
Speed limiters/tachographs
18 (22%)
Driver fatigue detectors
16 (19%)
Improved car crashworthiness
15 (18%)
Truck brake compatibility & ABS
11 (13%)
Fatigue detectors in cars
11 (13%)
Remove truck bullbars
10 (12%)
Lower height of truck & bus front bumpers 9 (11%)
Lower truck centre of gravity (rollover) 9 (11%)
Radar braking on trucks & buses
6 (7%)
Improved truck conspicuity (lights/refl) 5 (6%)
Improved truck load security
5 (6%)
Continued random truck inspections
4 (5%)
Annual truck inspections
2
Improved tyre maintenance
2
Improved truck driver visibility
2
Truck side under-run protection
2
Truck rear under-run protection
2
Note these were confined to highway crashes.
P20
Heavy vehicle crashes in urban areas
Sweatman P et al
1995
FORS CR 155.
Literature review, analysis of mass crash data
and detailed crash investigation of 88 crashes.
50 to 75% of serious rigid truck crashes and 25 to 50% of
serious articulated vehicle crashes occur in urban areas. 25% of
articulated vehicle crashes in urban areas were fatal. Heavy
vehicles were judged to be wholly or partially responsible in
33% of the crashes. Vehicle factors in these crashes were:
drivers field of view (13%); lack of side underrun protection
(11%); unguarded wheel areas (11% - mainly for pedestrians and
cyclists); length and width (11%); stiffness of rear structure
(7%); lack of rear underrun protection (5%); swept path (7%);
maintenance (7% - mainly older trucks) ; stiffness of side
structure (4%); stiffness of front structure (4%) and front
underrun protection (4%). Potential ITS technologies are:
pedestrian detectors; on-board red traffic signal indicators and
heavy vehicle-sensing traffic signal systems (running red lights
was found to be a problem); stability warning systems; route
guidance and "Mayday" systems.
P21
A look at the NHTSA compliant underride guard at speeds above 30mph
Tomassoni J
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
A series of 8 underride crash tests
indicated that underride magnitude was marginally close to
passenger compartment intrusion at 30mph. The performance of
minimally compliant systems at speeds above 30mph are assessed.
A51
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
P22
Design of an energy absorbing truck front bumper bar
Wasiowych A, Lozzi A and Griffiths M
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
Full scale car to truck crash tests were
conducted to assess potential improvements to front bumpers
on trucks (underrun barriers). The device included innovative
energy absorbing elements.
P23
Pedestrian safety: school children around buses
Staysafe
1992
Staysafe 26
Literature review. Accident data. Regulations. Vehicle engineering
issues. Behavioral issues. Traffic and road engineering issues. Technical
recommendations included: bright red and amber flashing lights; 40km/h
limit when passing buses with the lights flashing; investigate
a safety boom; improved bus mirrors; improved demisters; investigate
loudspeaker systems; door sensors to reduce risk of entrapment.
P24
Safety of school children near buses
Roads and Traffic Authority of NSW
1992
School Bus Task Force Report
Accident data analysis. 107 casualties between 1988 and 1989;
5 were fatal, 38 were serious injuries; 65% were aged 12 or less but
appeared to be peaks at the start of primary and high school
[inexperience?]; 88% were in the afternoon [child more easily distracted];
75% of cases the bus obstructed the motorists view; 50% were emerging
from the front of the bus and hit by overtaking vehicle (all in 60km/h
zones and none were fatal); 25% emerged from the rear of the bus and
were hit by an oncoming vehicle (10 serious injuries and 3 fatalities,
mostly in 80+ speed zones). Many children were described as "running".
The problem of the bus hiding crossing children from oncoming motorists
was examined in detail. Recommendations included flashing lights at the
front and rear of the bus, a behavioral program (which became "Wait,
walk") and making parents aware of the hazards of waiting on the other
side of the road.
Influence of presence of bus. Review
of current Australian and overseas practices. Strategies and
countermeasures:
P25
The Travel Safe Report
Bus and Coach Association
1994
Bus and Coach Association of NSW
Survey of community perception of bus safety. Comparison of risk factors
between various types of transport:
Mode
% of passenger km % of casualties
Relative risk
Bus
36
5
0.17
Car Passenger
39
46
1.19
Bicycle
1
17
39
Pedestrian
6
27
5.2
Other
23
5
P26
EVALUATION OF ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH SEAT BELTS ON SCHOOL BUSES
SWADLING
2001
ROAD SAFETY 2001, MUARC, MELBOURNE
P27
RESEARCH ON BUS PASSENGER SAFETY IN FRONTAL CRASHES
MITSUISHI H
2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17TH ESV
SLED TESTS OF BUS SEATS WITH 2-PT SEAT BELTS
A52
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
P28
POTENTIAL GAIN [FROM] SEAT BELTS AND AIRBAGS IN TRUCKS
SIMON M
2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17TH ESV
37% OF FATALS, 36% SERIOUS, 22% MINOR
P29
SEAT BELTS IN BUSES AND RECENT ACCIDENTS IN SPAIN
FERRER I
2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17TH ESV
HIGHLY EFFECTIVE IN 3 STUDIED CRASHES
P30
SIMULATIONS OF LARGE SCHOOL BUS SAFETY RESTRAINTS
MCCRAY L
2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17TH ESV
P31
LARGE SCHOOL BUS SAFETY RESTRAINT EVALUATION
ELIAS J
2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17TH ESV
P32
IMPROVED SAFETY FOR MINIBUSES BY BETTER SEAT AND OCCUPANT RETENTION
LAWRENCE G
2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17TH ESV
CATEGORY
Q01
Q
Post-crash rescue and medical care
Design and implementation of an automobile collision notification system
Blatt A, Funke D,Donnelly B and Carter A
1996
29th International Symposium on Automotive Technology and Automation,
Comprehensive study and trial funded by NHTSA. "The
lifesaving potential is obvious" but the extent of this
potential has not been quantitatively demonstrated. The
study is
addressing this issue and is looking at the many technical and
operational challenges. False alarms need to be kept to a
minimum.
Q02
Emergency Preemption Systems Technical Manual.
1991
Emergency Preemption Systems
Propriety manual
Technical details about a system which is part
of a traffic signals controller and detects the sound of an
approaching siren. This avoids the need for special transmitters
on emergency vehicles [but the technology is now dated].
Q03
A searchable transportation fire safety bibliography
1998
LaDue D and Kononen D
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
Over 1000 articles concerning vehicle fires are
included in a searchable database, on CD ROM.
Q04
Field data improvements for fire safety research
1998
Lavelle J, Nelander J and Kononen D
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
Various US accident databases were analysed
to evaluate the possible causes and effects of vehicle fires and
to recommend enhancements to the databases to better understand
the causes of vehicle fires.
A53
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
Q05
Relationship between crash casualties and crash attributes
Malleris A, Digges K and DeBlois
1997
Occupant Protection and Injury Assessment in the Crash Environment
Post- crash treatment of
automotive crash victims can be improved if the medical
personnel have an indication of the crash characteristics. The
authors analysed a range of crashes and found that some types of
injuries could be predicted from key crash parameters. On-board
crash sensors which could be interrogated by rescuers (or which
automatically transmits crash data to a trauma centre) could
assist in this approach.
Q06
New technology gives motorists an early warning
NASA
1998
News release by NASA dated 15 June 1998.
As a spin-off of space research NASA has developed an improved
system for warning motorists that an emergency vehicle is approaching
a controlled intersection. A visual display gives an indication of the
direction from which the emergency vehicle is approaching.
Q07
A case study of 214 fatal crashes involving fire
Ragland C
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
The FARS database was analysed to determine the intensity, location and
timing of fires in fatal crashes. Cases where the fire caused
death were identified.
Q08
ENHANCING POST-CRASH SAFETY THROUGH AUTOMATIC COLLISION NOT.
KANIANTHRA J
2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17TH ESV
OPTIMISITC 2% OF ALL CRASHES. TRIALS HAD 50% FALSE ALARMS.
Q09
AUTOMATED CRASH NOTIFICATION: DESIGN AND VALIDATION
HAMPTON G
2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17TH ESV
CATEGORY
R01
R
Strategy
Injury Control - a Global View
Berger L and Mohan D
1996
Oxford University Press, Delhi.
World statistics on accidental
death and injury. In line with Haddon's work, the following
strategies are proposed for reducing injuries in road crashes
(examples in brackets): 1.Preventing/reducing exposure to
injurious "agents" (alternative travel modes, speed reduction);
2.Preventing inappropriate release of the agent (vehicle and
road designs to simplify the driver's task); 3.Modifying the
release of the agent (use of seat belts); 4.Separating in time
or space or with physical barriers (restricting the transport of
hazardous materials, median barriers); 5.Modifying surfaces and
basic structures (airbags, removing projections); 6. Increasing
resistance to injury (therapy for osteoporosis); 7.Emergency
response or medical care and rehabilitation (systems that route
patients to appropriately trained physicians).
A54
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
R02
The potential gains for road safety from existing vehicle technology
Brown J and Holgate J
1998
Proceedings of the Developments in Safer Motor Vehicles Seminar
Serious injury rate by year of
manufacture (decreasing from 5 serious injuries per 100 crashes
in pre-1975 vehicles to 2 in 1995). Composition of NSW vehicle
fleet. On current trends the % of older vehicles will increase
(54% older than 10 years in 1997, predicted 57% in 2015).
Strategies to reduce the age of the fleet and increase the
uptake of safety options are discussed, including tax
incentives, consumer information and targeting fleet buyers.
R03
Promoting the safe driving policy in NSW fleets of 20 or more vehicles
Collingwood V
1996
29th International Symposium on Automotive Technology and Automation
Description of the NSW Roads and Traffic Authority's
program targeted at fleet operators. "...new vehicles will be
chosen and equipped to enhance safe performance. Vehicles will
be maintained, presented and operated for maximum safety".
Attention is drawn to the results of NCAP tests and Used Car
Safety Ratings. Benefits of the program include: community
involvement at an organisational level; a means of tackling road
safety problems outside the general deterrence approach; a means
of targeting heavy vehicles; improved driving at work can carry
over into non-work driving; integration of road safety and
occupational health and safety and influencing the market for
safety features in vehicles.
R04
Reducing traffic injuries through vehicle safety improvements
ETSC
1993
European Transport Safety Council, Brussels November 1993.
Background on the road crash situation in Europe
and the car safety standards. Priorities in car design for
accident avoidance: speed control, vision and conspicuity, ABS,
ITS and need for accident research. Occupant protection design
issues: improved steering wheel design, airbags, improved seat
belts, improved leg protection by limiting footwell intrusion,
protection for chest and abdomen in side impacts (structure
and padding), improved neck protection (head restraint design)
and kinematics in rear impacts (seats and seat belts), padding
of upper interior, performance of door latches, fuel system
integrity, effects of smaller vehicles, structural
incompatibility.
R05
Comprehensive plan for ITS in Japan.
Government of Japan
1996
Booklet.
ITS issues relevant to occupant protection are:
provision of public transport information (to encourage use of
public transport), pedestrian route guidance, vehicle-pedestrian
collision avoidance, automatic emergency notification and route
guidance for emergency vehicles.
R06
Vehicle and Equipment Safety Issues
Griffiths M
1994
Road Safety 2000 Review Conference 1994
Comprehensive review of vehicle safety
issues. Concern that advances made under the Australian Design
Rule system had stalled during the 1980s (comparison with safety
advances in the USA). Benefits of consumer-driven change such as
NCAP.
A55
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
R07
The crash safety of new car models - a comparative accident study
Lie A, Tingvell C and Larsson P
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
A car manufactured in 1985 has about twice the risk of a severe or
fatal injury than a car manufactured in 1995. The decline in
risk only started to show strongly from 1993 onwards. The
improvement in crashworthiness has not been at the expense of an
increase in aggressivity. Minor injuries are largely unaffected.
R08
The aging of the Australian car fleet and occupant protection
McIntosh L and Coxon C
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
Describes factors influencing the safety of
occupants in older vehicles. Strategies for reducing the age of
the fleet are discussed.
R09
ESV Government Reports - The Netherlands
Meekel G
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
Vehicle-related measures were assessed for accessibility, sustainability
(emissions) and safety by a group of experts. Chances of
implementation were assessed. The most promising measures for
the short term were: active vehicle control, improved vehicle
conspicuity, front and side underrun protection on heavy
vehicles, improved integration of car and public transport.
Other promising short term measures were improved tyres,
measures to improve vehicle control and driver behaviour,
improved interior safety of buses and improved vehicle
identification. The most promising long-term measures were:
collision avoidance systems, in-car information systems,
intelligent speed limiters and automated highway guidance
systems. Examples of low-scoring measures were: electric
vehicles, improved motorcycle stability, periodic inspections,
electronic road pricing, integration of car and bicycles (?),
hybride vehicles, fuel cells, forewarning systems, automated
car-following systems and automated people movers. These are
preliminary results.
R10
NSW Occupant Protection Strategy 1996-2000 and Action Plan 1996-97
Roads and Traffic Authority of NSW
1996
CRB 96.146.
R11
Willingness to pay for vehicle safety features
Roy Morgan Research
1992
FORS CR 112, November 1992.
515 new car purchasers
were surveyed. On average they were willing to pay $486 for the
non-airbag safety package (improved seat belts and seats,
improved leg protection, padded steering wheel and seat belt
warning device - total estimated retail $270) and $1236 for the
airbag safety package (above plus driver's airbag - total
estimated retail $700). 68% of low-price car purchasers were
willing to pay the $700 estimated retail price of the airbag
package. This increased to 80% of fleet managers (also fleet
drivers).
A56
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
R12
Development of a method of estimating the costs of injuries - NCAP
Ryan G, Hendrie D and Mullan N
1998
Proceedings of the 16th ESV
The project developed a database of injury costs by body region and
injury severity, estimated the cost of injuries from crash
test measurements and looked for trends by vehicle age and model
grouping. "Head injury was by far the largest component of
predicted injury costs".
R13
Crashworthiness testing and rating and zero deaths in road traffic
Tingvell C, Lie A and Larsson P
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
Swedish approach to publishing
retrospective (real crash) ratings and new car crash test
results. The intention is to develop a series of crash tests
which simulate a variety of crash situation, including roadside
furniture and other vehicles. Certain injury criteria must be
met in these crashes. "In a sense, the [vision zero] is also a
market driven concept where it is up to the [motor] industry to
increase the attractiveness of the road transport system by
better protection and not let the road user take the whole
responsibility to stay alive by being more restrictive by lower
speed limits etc."
R14
Vehicle Defects in Crashes - In-depth Vehicles Factor Study
Duignan P, Williams S and Griffiths M
1996
Proceedings of the 15th ESV
Description of a project by the NSW RTA to investigate vehicle factors
in crashes. teams of motor vehicle inspectors were trained in crash
investigation techniques. They were notified about crashes by emergency
services and attended the scene of the accident. In most cases a thorough
vehicle inspection was conducted.
R15
Current Road and Vehicle Safety Research
DETR
1998
UK Dept Environment, Transport and the Regions
Description of road safety projects being undertaken by the UK
Dept. Topics include: serious injuries to child occupants, airbags,
interior pillar padding, pedestrian protection, NCAP, lower back
injuries, compatibility, advanced restraint systems, bus emergency
exits, bus seat belts, fire in buses, motorcycle airbags, leg
protectors and helmets, whiplash injuries.
R16
Vision Zero - a Road Safety Concept
SNRA
1996
Swedish National Road Administration
Description of the vision of "no harm done - no one was hurt"
R17
Towards Safer Roads
DETR
1997
UK Dept Environment, Transport and the Regions
Description of UK vision for road safety
R18
Report to Congress on the NHTSA ITS Program
NHTSA
1997
NHTSA
Description of US ITS program to date and the plan for future
developments. Most are for crash avoidance. An exception is
the "Automated Collision Notification Program".
A57
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
R19
National Guidelines for Assessment of Defective Vehicles
Paine M
1995
NRTC/Austroads November 1995
Guidelines for use by enforcement officers for deciding on the
appropriate severity of defect notice to be issued. Contributing
factors to crashes, effects of defects: impair driver's view,
impair visibility of the vehicle to other road users or prevent
driver from signaling intentions, impair driver's control of
the vehicle, intrude into the roadspace of others or cause a
nuisance (noise or emissions), impair the built-in occupant
protection afforded by the vehicle in the event of a crash,
increase risk of injury after a crash has occurred (rescue).
Circumstance were: immediate, imminent, delayed and gradual.
A matrix defines the classification of a defect based on its
type and the circumstances. Serious injury risk factors for
various conditions were provided: high speed limit x2,
winding or hilly road x3, wet weather x2, night x2,
motorcycle x10, heavy vehicle x2, dangerous goods x2
R20
Optimising the fleet experience
Craigen R
1992
Wheels 92
Purchasing trends, resale, maintenance.
52% of new vehicle purchases non-private. Of the 75% business, 13%
govt, 5% local govt, 4% federal govt, 3% rental.
R21
ROAD TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS IN NSW - 1999
RTA NSW
2001
ROADS AND TRAFFIC AUTHORITY OF NSW
R22
SPEED CONTROL DEVICES FOR CARS
PAINE M
1996
RTA RESEARCH REPORT 5/96
BENEFIT COSTS OF SPEED LIMITERS AND OTHER SPEED CONTROL
DEVICES:
10% OF RURAL CRASHES INVOLVE SPEEDS OVER 120km/h. TOP
SPEED LIMITER 100% EFFECTIVE FOR THESE CRASHES. LIMITED
SPEEDO SCALE 50% EFFECTIVE.
AUTOMATIC SPEED LIMITER 50% EFFECTIVE FOR ALL SPEED
RELATED CRASHES. SPEED ALARMS 25%.
R23
OVERCOMING BARRIERS TO FLEET SAFETY IN AUSTRALIA
MURRAY W
2001
ROAD SAFETY 2001, MUARC, MELBOURNE
R24
INTELLIGENT SPEED ADAPTION: THE BEST COLLISION AVAOIDANCE SYSTEM
CARSTEN O
2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17TH ESV
B/C RANGE FROM 7.9 TO 15.4. 37% FATALS, 20% INJURIES.
R25
RISK-BENEFIT ANALYSIS METHODS FOR VEHICLE SAFETY DEVICES
THOMPSON K
2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17TH ESV
NOT MUCH USEFUL DETAIL
R26
QUALITY CRITERIA FOR CRASHWORTHINESS ASSESSMENT FROM REAL-WORLD CRASHE
LANGWIEDER K, FILDES B, ERNVALL T AND
2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17TH ESV
A58
VEHICLE SAFETY BIBLIOGRAPHY
R27
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF SEVERAL VEHICLE SAFETY RATING SYSTEMS
CAMERON M
2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 17TH ESV
REAL WORLD CRASHES ANALYSED
A59
Appendix B - Summary of Safety Features
VEHICLE SAFETY FEATURES (SORTED BY BENEFIT/COST RATIO)
ANNUAL
INITIAL
NET
BENEFIT/
COST(NET)
MAINT.
$1
$0
$10
67.22
HEADLIGHTS ON WARNING/AUTO
$50
$20
$55
7.79
DRL
DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS
$50
$2
$55
7.67
SB_ILOCK
SEAT BELT INTERLOCK
$50
$0
$23
3.19
SB_LL_F
SEAT BELT LOAD LIMITERS, FRONT
$20
$0
$6
1.95
SL_ALARM
SPEED ALARM
$50
$0
$14
1.92
HI_GLASS
HIGH TRANSMITTANCE GLAZING
$50
$0
$10
1.40
KNEE_PAD
KNEE BOLSTER/PADDING
$100
$0
$19
1.36
$100
$0
$16
1.12
$40
$0
$6
1.12
$100
$0
$16
1.12
CODE
DESCRIPTION
SL_TOP
TOP SPEED LIMITER (SET AT 120km/h
HEADL_ON
GLASS_LAM LAMINATED OR SHATTER-PROOF GLAZING
SAVINGS
COST
SB_WG_F
SEAT BELT WEBBING GRABBERS, FRONT
SB_PT_F
SEAT BELT PRETENSIONER, FRONT
SEAT_SUB
ANTI-SUBMARING SEAT DESIGN
$40
$0
$6
1.12
HAZ_ACT
HAZARD LIGHT ACTIVATE IN SEVERE CRAS
$50
$0
$8
1.11
HELMET
HELMETS/HEAD BANDS FOR OCCUPANTS
$30
$10
$4
0.90
SB_BUCK
SEAT BELT BUCKLE MOUNTED ON SEAT (F
$50
$0
$6
0.89
PED_IMP
PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY VEHICLE FRONT
$500
$0
$60
0.85
ABS
ABS BRAKES
$400
$0
$47
0.83
SIDE_ABFT
SIDE AIRBAG - FRONT SEAT, THORAX
$400
$0
$46
0.81
AIRBAG_D
DRIVER AIRBAG
$600
$0
$67
0.79
BDY_COL
CONSPICUOUS BODY COLOUR
$100
$0
$10
0.70
LOAD_REST LOAD RESTRAINT DEVICES (TETHERS)
$100
$0
$10
0.67
ISA
$800
$0
$68
0.60
FOOT_PROT IMPROVED FOOT PROTECTION
$100
$0
$8
0.55
WIPER_SPD SPEED SENSITIVE INTERMITTENT WIPERS
$100
$0
$7
0.51
WIPER_AUT WIPERS AUTOMATIC
$100
$0
$7
0.51
HR_ADJ
ADJUSTABLE HEAD RESTRAINT
$100
$0
$7
0.50
HEAD_PAD
HEAD PROTECTION PADDING
$200
$0
$14
0.49
CARGO_BAR CARGO BARRIER
$300
$0
$20
0.47
MIRROR_AU EXTERNAL MIRRORS ELECTRICALLY ADJUS
$200
$0
$13
0.47
AB_BONNET BONNET AIRBAG FOR PEDESTRIAN PROTEC
$500
$0
$32
0.45
AB_SMART
$500
$0
$28
0.39
CRASH_REC CRASH RECORDER
$500
$0
$27
0.38
PHONE
MOBILE PHONE AVAILABLE IN EVENT OF A
$200
$0
$11
0.38
SB_LL_R
SEAT BELT LOAD LIMITERS, REAR
$20
$0
$1
0.37
ALC_LOCK
ALCOHOL/DRUG INTERLOCK
$200
$0
$10
0.36
SB_HT_ADJ
SEAT BELT D-RING HEIGHT ADJUSTABLE/A
$100
$0
$5
0.33
MAYDAY
MAYDAY DISTRESS CALL IN SEVERE CRASH
$500
$0
$21
0.30
CRUISE
CRUISE CONTROL
$150
$0
$6
0.27
INTELLIGENT SPEED ADAPTION
SMART AIRBAG SYSTEM
B1
ANNUAL
INITIAL
CODE
DESCRIPTION
COST(NET)
MAINT.
NET
BENEFIT/
SAVINGS
COST
ENG_IMMOB ENGINE IMMOBILISER
$300
$0
$11
0.25
STR_ADJ
ADJUSTABLE STEERING COLUMN
$100
$0
$3
0.24
SEAT_ADJ
ADJUSTABLE DRIVERS SEAT (MULTI-FUNCT
$200
$0
$7
0.24
$50
$0
$2
0.24
AUTO_TRAN AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION
$200
$0
$7
0.24
SEAT_COOL COOLED/HEATED DRIVERS SEAT
$200
$0
$7
0.24
SIDE_AB_FH SIDE AIRBAG - FRONT, HEAD-PROTECTING (
$400
$0
$12
0.20
HEADWAY
HEADWAY RADAR FOR EXCESSIVE CLOSING
$800
$0
$23
0.20
FUEL_CUT
FUEL AND ENGINE CUT-OFF IN SEVERE CRA
$100
$0
$3
0.19
AIRBAG_P
FRONT PASSENGER AIRBAG
$400
$0
$11
0.19
SB_CR3
SEAT BELT, CENTRE REAR 3-POINT
$100
$0
$3
0.19
HR_RO
HEAD RESTRAINTS FOR REAR OUTBOARD S
$80
$0
$2
0.18
POWER_STR POWER STEERING
$300
$0
$7
0.16
SB_PT_R
SEAT BELT PRETENSIONERS, REAR
$100
$0
$2
0.15
SB_WB_R
SEAT BELT WEBBING GRABBERS, REAR
$40
$0
$1
0.15
HR_RA
HEAD RESTRAINTS FOR ALL REAR SEATS
$120
$0
$2
0.14
SIDE_AB_RT SIDE AIRBAG, REAR, THORAX
$400
$0
$7
0.12
SB_INFLATE INFLATABLE SEAT BELT
$200
$0
$3
0.11
IRS
INDEPENDENT REAR SUSPENSION
$300
$0
$4
0.09
MIRR_DIM
AUTO DIMMING REAR VIEW MIRROR
$200
$0
$2
0.06
CR_INT
CHILD SEAT INTEGRATED
$500
$0
$4
0.06
SB_HARNESS HARNESS SEAT BELT FOR ADULTS (4PT OR
$400
$0
$2
0.04
SIDE_AB_RH SIDE AIRBAG, REAR, HEAD-PROTECTING
$400
$0
$2
0.04
$1,500
$0
$7
0.03
SEAT_LUM ADJUSTABLE LUMBAR SUPPORT
NAV_SYS
NAVIGATION SYSTEM (GPS)
TRACTION
TRACTION CONTROL
$700
$0
$2
0.02
TYRE_RF
RUN FLAT TYRES
$400
$0
$1
0.01
MIRR_FOG
ANTI FOGGING (HEATED) EXTERNAL MIRRO
$200
$0
$0
0.01
$400
$0
$0
0.00
TYRE_PRES TYRE PRESSURE MONITORING
B2
Appendix C - Details of Benefit/Cost Analyses
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
AIR_COND
DRIVERS CONTROL OF VEHICLE
CATEGORY
AIR CONDITIONING/CLIMATE CONTROL
ACCEPTANCE GOOD
HARVEST
NET COST (1 OFF)
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$1,200.00
$40.00
COST NOTE: GLASS' SGUIDE AND SURVEY OF DEALERS
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: CASES WHERE DRIVER DISCOMFORT A FACTOR. ASSUMED TO BE ONE THIRD OF
FATIGURE CASES: F-17.6%, OTHERS 8.6%.
EFFECTIVENESS: ASSUMED ONE QUARTER EFFECTIVE.
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
6%
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
3%
3%
3%
25%
25%
25%
25%
$2.06
$1.76
$0.95
$1.00
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$5.78
-$34.22
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.00
MINOR
HI*: 0.00
NET SAVINGS/YR
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
P19
R21
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
NSW Heavy Vehicle Crash Study - Final Technical Report.
ROAD TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS IN NSW - 1999
ALC_LOCK
CATEGORY
ALCOHOL/DRUG INTERLOCK
ACCEPTANCE POOR
START-UP
NET COST (1 OFF)
DRIVERS CONTROL OF VEHICLE
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$200.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: PROTOTYPES ONLY AT THIS STAGE. BASED ON COST OF SIMILAR GADGETS SUCH AS
(Also see references HEADLIGHT ALERT.
CRASH INFLUENCE: 17% OF FATALS AND 5% OF OTHERS.
EFFECTIVENESS: ASSUMED 20% EFFECTIVE. THIS MAY BE OPTIMISTIC.
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
17%
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
5%
5%
5%
20%
20%
20%
20%
$4.83
$2.52
$1.36
$1.43
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$10.14
$10.14
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.36
MINOR
HI*: 0.36
NET SAVINGS/YR
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
R04
R21
Reducing traffic injuries through vehicle safety improvements
ROAD TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS IN NSW - 1999
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C1
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
AUTO_TRANS
CATEGORY
AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
ACCEPTANCE GOOD
HARVEST
NET COST (1 OFF)
DRIVERS CONTROL OF VEHICLE
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$200.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: GLASS'S GUIDE.
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: CASES WHERE CHANGING MANUAL GEARS CONTRIBUTED TO ACCIDENT. LIKELY TO
BE LESS THAN 1%.
EFFECTIVENESS: SHOULD ELIMINATE ALL CASES. COST ASSUMED TO BE EXTRA ON MANUAL COST.
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
1%
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
1%
1%
1%
100%
100%
100%
100%
$1.42
$2.52
$1.36
$1.43
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$6.73
NET SAVINGS/YR
$6.73
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.24
MINOR
HI*: 0.24
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
P19
R04
FEATURE CODE
NSW Heavy Vehicle Crash Study - Final Technical Report.
Reducing traffic injuries through vehicle safety improvements
CRUISE
DESCRIPTION
CATEGORY
DRIVERS CONTROL OF VEHICLE
CRUISE CONTROL
READINESS
ACCEPTANCE GOOD
HARVEST
NET COST (1 OFF)
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$150.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: SURVEY OF DEALERS AND GLASS'S GUIDE
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: FATIGUE CRASHES (18% FATALS AND 9% OF OTHERS) AND HIGH SPEED CRASHES
(10% OF FATALS AND 5% OF OTHERS)
EFFECTIVENESS: SMALL EFFECT - PERHAPS 5% REDUCTION.
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
28%
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
14%
14%
14%
5%
5%
5%
5%
$1.99
$1.76
$0.95
$1.00
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$5.71
NET SAVINGS/YR
$5.71
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.27
MINOR
HI*: 0.27
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
R21
R22
ROAD TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS IN NSW - 1999
SPEED CONTROL DEVICES FOR CARS
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C2
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
ISA
DRIVERS CONTROL OF VEHICLE
CATEGORY
INTELLIGENT SPEED ADAPTION
ACCEPTANCE POOR
START-UP
NET COST (1 OFF)
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$800.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: BASED MAINLY ON A COMPREHENSIVE REPORT BY UNI OF LEEDS. COST
(Also see references SUBSTANTIALLY LESS IF PIGGY-BACKED ON A NAVIGATION SYSTEM.
CRASH INFLUENCE: SPEED-RELATED CRASHES 40% OF FATALS AND 15% OF OTHERS (R21).
EFFECTIVENESS: POTENTIAL FOR HIGHLY EFFECTIVE ADVANCED SYSTEM. ASSUME BASIC SYSTEM
RESULTS IN 50% REDUCTION.
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
40%
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
DISCOUNT RATE
PROPERTY
$143.00
15%
15%
15%
50%
50%
50%
$28.40
$18.90
$10.20
$10.73
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$68.23
$68.23
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.60
$136.00
50%
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
MINOR
HI*: 0.60
NET SAVINGS/YR
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
P19
R21
R22
R24
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
NSW Heavy Vehicle Crash Study - Final Technical Report.
ROAD TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS IN NSW - 1999
SPEED CONTROL DEVICES FOR CARS
INTELLIGENT SPEED ADAPTION: THE BEST COLLISION AVAOIDANCE SYSTEM
NAV_SYS
CATEGORY
NAVIGATION SYSTEM (GPS)
ACCEPTANCE MODERATE
TAKE-OFF
NET COST (1 OFF)
DRIVERS CONTROL OF VEHICLE
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$1,500.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: DEALER SURVEY.
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: ASSUMING A VOICE ACTIVATED SYSTEM IS USED SO THAT RISK OF ACCIDENT DOES
NOT INCREASE, THEN BENEFITS ARE FROM GREATER AWARENESS OF ROAD
CONDITIONS. FEWER ACCIDENTS DUE TO UNKNOWN ROAD CONDITIONS (WHEN TO
TURN ETC). PERHAPS 1% OF ACCIDENTS.
EFFECTIVENESS: GOOD SYSTEM HAS POTENTIAL TO BE 100% EFFECTIVE IN CASE OF ACCIDENTS
CAUSED BY UNKNOWN ROAD CONDITIONS.
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
1%
1%
1%
1%
100%
100%
100%
100%
$1.42
$2.52
$1.36
$1.43
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$6.73
NET SAVINGS/YR
$6.73
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.03
MINOR
HI*: 0.03
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
R09
ESV Government Reports - The Netherlands
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C3
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
SEAT_ADJ
DRIVERS CONTROL OF VEHICLE
CATEGORY
ADJUSTABLE DRIVERS SEAT (MULTI-FUNCTION)
ACCEPTANCE MODERATE
HARVEST
NET COST (1 OFF)
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$200.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: NOMINAL COST BASED ON 33% TYPICAL COST OF ENTIRE SEAT (~$600) .
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: ACCIDENTS WHERE DISCOMFORT OR FATIGUE A FACTOR. SAY 5% OF ALL.
EFFECTIVENESS: NO DATA. ASSUME 20% EFFECTIVENESS.
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
5%
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
DISCOUNT RATE
5%
5%
5%
20%
20%
20%
$1.42
$2.52
$1.36
$1.43
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$6.73
NET SAVINGS/YR
$6.73
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.24
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
20%
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
MINOR
HI*: 0.24
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
R25
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
RISK-BENEFIT ANALYSIS METHODS FOR VEHICLE SAFETY DEVICES
SEAT_COOL
DRIVERS CONTROL OF VEHICLE
CATEGORY
COOLED/HEATED DRIVERS SEAT
ACCEPTANCE MODERATE
TAKE-OFF
NET COST (1 OFF)
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$200.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: PROTOTYPES ONLY AT THIS STAGE. ASSUMES AIR CONDITIONER ALREADY FITTED.
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: ACCIDENTS WHERE DISCOMFORT OR FATIGUE A FACTOR. SAY 5% OF ALL.
EFFECTIVENESS: NO DATA. ASSUME 20% EFFECTIVENESS.
FATALS
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
5%
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
20%
$1.42
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.24
HI*: 0.24
MINOR
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
5%
5%
5%
20%
$2.52
20%
20%
$1.36
$1.43
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$6.73
NET SAVINGS/YR
$6.73
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
R25
RISK-BENEFIT ANALYSIS METHODS FOR VEHICLE SAFETY DEVICES
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C4
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
SEAT_LUM
DRIVERS CONTROL OF VEHICLE
CATEGORY
ADJUSTABLE LUMBAR SUPPORT
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
ACCEPTANCE MODERATE
HARVEST
NET COST (1 OFF)
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$50.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: NOMINAL COST ASSUMES SYSTEM CAN BE READILY INCORPORATED ON THE
(Also see references PRODUCTION LINE.
CRASH INFLUENCE: ACCIDENTS WHERE DISCOMFORT OR FATIGUE A FACTOR. SAY 5% OF ALL.
EFFECTIVENESS: NO DATA. ASSUME 5% EFFECTIVENESS.
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
5%
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
$0.36
$0.63
$0.34
$0.36
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$1.68
$1.68
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.24
MINOR
HI*: 0.24
NET SAVINGS/YR
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
R25
FEATURE CODE
RISK-BENEFIT ANALYSIS METHODS FOR VEHICLE SAFETY DEVICES
SL_ALARM
DESCRIPTION
CATEGORY
DRIVERS CONTROL OF VEHICLE
SPEED ALARM
READINESS
ACCEPTANCE MODERATE
TAKE-OFF
NET COST (1 OFF)
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$50.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: BASED ON RTA SPEED CONTROL REPORT OF 1996. AFTERMARKET COST ABOUT $100.
(Also see references ASSUMED THAT OE COST ABOUT HALF OF THIS.
CRASH INFLUENCE: SPEED RELATED CRASHES 40% OF FATALS AND 15% OF OTHERS
EFFECTIVENESS: LOW EFFECTIVENESS DUE TO NEED TO MANUALLY SET SPEED. ASSUME 10%.
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
40%
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
15%
15%
15%
10%
10%
10%
10%
$5.68
$3.78
$2.04
$2.15
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$13.65
$13.65
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 1.92
MINOR
HI*: 1.92
NET SAVINGS/YR
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
R21
R22
R24
ROAD TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS IN NSW - 1999
SPEED CONTROL DEVICES FOR CARS
INTELLIGENT SPEED ADAPTION: THE BEST COLLISION AVAOIDANCE SYSTEM
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C5
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
SL_TOP
DRIVERS CONTROL OF VEHICLE
CATEGORY
TOP SPEED LIMITER (SET AT 120km/h
ACCEPTANCE POOR
TAKE-OFF
NET COST (1 OFF)
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$1.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: ASSUMES THAT ENGINE MANAGEMENT CHIP IS RECODED TO LOWER THE MAXIMUM
(Also see references SPEED (MOST ARE SET AT 250km/h+). IN THE LONG TERM THIS WILL BE NIL COST
CRASH INFLUENCE: PROPORTION OF CRASHES ESTIMATED TO INVOLVE SPEEDS IN EXCESS OF 120km/h.
ESTIMATED 3% OF ALL FATALS AND 1% OF OTHERS.
EFFECTIVENESS: HIGHLY EFFECTIVE FOR THESE CRASHES. ASSUME 100%.
JOYRIDING DETERRENT (HIGH RISK GROUP)
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
MINOR
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
3%
1%
1%
1%
100%
100%
100%
100%
$4.26
$2.52
$1.36
$1.43
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$9.57
$9.57
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 67.22 HI*: 67.22
NET SAVINGS/YR
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
R22
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
SPEED CONTROL DEVICES FOR CARS
STR_ADJ
DRIVERS CONTROL OF VEHICLE
CATEGORY
ADJUSTABLE STEERING COLUMN
ACCEPTANCE GOOD
HARVEST
NET COST (1 OFF)
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$100.00
COST NOTE:
$0.00
NOMINAL COST BASED ON PRODUCTION LINE CHANGE. NEGLIGIBLE IN LONG TERM.
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: LOSS OF CONTROL CRASHES. SMALL NUMBER OF FATIGURE CRASHES. ASSUMED 5%
OF ALL.
EFFECTIVENESS: MODERATE. ASSUME 10%
FATALS
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
5%
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
10%
$0.71
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.24
HI*: 0.24
MINOR
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
5%
5%
5%
10%
$1.26
10%
10%
$0.68
$0.72
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$3.37
NET SAVINGS/YR
$3.37
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
L90
STEERING COLUMN MOVEMENT IN SEVERE FRONTAL CRASHES - EFFECT ON AI
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C6
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
WIPER_AUTO
CATEGORY
WIPERS AUTOMATIC
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
ACCEPTANCE MODERATE
TAKE-OFF
NET COST (1 OFF)
DRIVERS CONTROL OF VEHICLE
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$100.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: BASED ON AFTERMARKET KITS SUCH AS HEADLIGHT ALERTS.
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: WET WEATHER ACCIDENTS. 18% OF FATALS, 21% OF INJURY, 26% OF PROPERY
EFFECTIVENESS: ONLY WHERE DRIVER'S FAIL TO OPERATE WIPERS. PERHAPS 5%.
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
18%
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
DISCOUNT RATE
PROPERTY
$143.00
21%
21%
26%
5%
5%
5%
$1.28
$2.65
$1.43
$1.86
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$7.21
NET SAVINGS/YR
$7.21
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.51
$136.00
5%
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
MINOR
HI*: 0.51
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
R25
FEATURE CODE
RISK-BENEFIT ANALYSIS METHODS FOR VEHICLE SAFETY DEVICES
ABS
DESCRIPTION
CATEGORY
HANDLING AND BRAKING
ABS BRAKES
READINESS
ACCEPTANCE GOOD
HARVEST
NET COST (1 OFF)
COST NOTE:
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$400.00
$0.00
GLASS'S GUIDE TYPICAL VALUE.
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: ASSUME 70% OF ALL ACCIDENTS INVOLVE EMERGENCY BRAKING. FORS STUDIES OF
PEDESTRIAN ACCIDENTS FOUND THAT IN HALF THE CASES THERE WAS NO PRE­
CRASH AVOIDANCE. LESS WITH OTHER TYPES OF ACCIDENTS.
EFFECTIVENESS: ABS ONLY EFFECTIVE FOR A SMALL PROPORTION WHERE LOSS OF CONTROL
OCCURRED OR DRIVER WAS RELUCTANT TO BRAKE HEAVILY FOR FEAR OF SKIDDING.
ASSUMED 10% OF ALL EMERGENCY BRAKING CASES.
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
FATALS
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
70%
10%
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
$9.94
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.83
HI*: 0.83
MINOR
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
70%
70%
70%
10%
$17.64
10%
10%
$9.52
$10.01
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$47.11
NET SAVINGS/YR
$47.11
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
N15
R04
Pedestrian safety
Reducing traffic injuries through vehicle safety improvements
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C7
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
HEADWAY
HANDLING AND BRAKING
CATEGORY
HEADWAY RADAR FOR EXCESSIVE CLOSING SPEEDS
ACCEPTANCE POOR
START-UP
NET COST (1 OFF)
$0.00
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$800.00
COST NOTE: PROTOTYPES ONLY AT THIS STAGE. BASED ON SIMILAR ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS SUCH
(Also see references AS CD PLAYER.
CRASH INFLUENCE: MOSTLY VEHICLES RUNNING INTO THE REAR OF VEHICLE IN FRONT ABOUT 20% OF
ALL CRASHES
EFFECTIVENESS: US DATA SUGGESTS 25% OF ALL ACCIDENTS INVOLVE DISTRACTION. ASSUME
HEADWAY ALERT WOULD INFLUENCE ABOUT ONE THIRD OF THESE - SAY 10%
OVERALL.
FATALS
$214.00
SERIOUS
$341.00
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
20%
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
10%
$4.28
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.20
HI*: 0.20
MINOR
$194.00
PROPERTY
$376.00
20%
20%
20%
10%
$6.82
10%
10%
$3.88
$7.52
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$22.50
NET SAVINGS/YR
$22.50
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
K67
HOW SON TO BRAKE AND HOW HARD TO BRAKE
K68
DISTANCE BEHAVIOUR ON MOTORWAYS WITH REGARD TO ACTIVE SAFTEY
K69
NHTSA DRIVER DISTRACTION RESEARCH
L64
R21
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
Neck and spinal injuries: injury outcome and crash characteristics in Aust.
ROAD TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS IN NSW - 1999
IRS
HANDLING AND BRAKING
CATEGORY
INDEPENDENT REAR SUSPENSION
ACCEPTANCE GOOD
HARVEST
NET COST (1 OFF)
$0.00
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$300.00
COST NOTE: GLASS'S GUIDE
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: ASSUME 30% OF ALL ACCIDENTS INVOLVE SWERVING OR OTHER DIRECTIONAL
CONTROL.
EFFECTIVENESS: LOW EFFECTIVENESS (ASSUME 2%) UNLESS COMBINED WITH BETTER TYRES.
FATALS
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
30%
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
2%
$0.85
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.09
HI*: 0.09
MINOR
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
30%
30%
30%
2%
$1.51
2%
2%
$0.82
$0.86
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$4.04
NET SAVINGS/YR
$4.04
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
R21
ROAD TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS IN NSW - 1999
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C8
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
POWER_STR
CATEGORY
HANDLING AND BRAKING
POWER STEERING
ACCEPTANCE GOOD
SATURATION
NET COST (1 OFF)
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$300.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: GLASS'S GUIDE
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: SOME ACCIDENTS INVOLVING LOSS OF CONTROL AND A SMALL PROPORTION OF
FATIGUE ACCIDENTS. ASSUME AROUND 20% OF ALL ACCIDENTS
EFFECTIVENESS: LOW EFFECTIVENESS. ASSUME 5%.
FATALS
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
20%
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
5%
$1.42
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.16
MINOR
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
20%
20%
20%
5%
$2.52
5%
5%
$1.36
$1.43
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$6.73
NET SAVINGS/YR
$6.73
HI*: 0.16
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
R25
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
RISK-BENEFIT ANALYSIS METHODS FOR VEHICLE SAFETY DEVICES
TRACTION
CATEGORY
TRACTION CONTROL
COST NOTE:
ACCEPTANCE GOOD
TAKE-OFF
NET COST (1 OFF)
HANDLING AND BRAKING
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$700.00
$0.00
SURVEY OF DEALERS
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: LOSS OF CONTROL ACCIDENTS INVOLVING EXCESSIVE ACCELERATION. 5% OF ALL
EFFECTIVENESS: LOW DUE TO EXTRA RISK TAKING. SAY 5%.
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
5%
5%
5%
$0.36
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.02
HI*: 0.02
MINOR
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
$0.63
$0.34
$0.36
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$1.68
$1.68
NET SAVINGS/YR
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
R25
RISK-BENEFIT ANALYSIS METHODS FOR VEHICLE SAFETY DEVICES
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C9
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
TYRE_PRES
CATEGORY
TYRE PRESSURE MONITORING
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
ACCEPTANCE MODERATE
START-UP
NET COST (1 OFF)
HANDLING AND BRAKING
$0.00
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$400.00
COST NOTE: PROTOTYPE TECHNOLOGY (FOR CARS). BASED ON SIMILAR ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS.
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: ACCIDENTS INVOLVING TYRE FAILURE. 0.5%
EFFECTIVENESS: LOW. PERHAPS 5%
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
MINOR
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
1%
1%
1%
1%
5%
5%
5%
5%
$0.04
$0.06
$0.03
$0.04
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$0.17
NET SAVINGS/YR
$0.17
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.00
HI*: 0.00
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
R25
FEATURE CODE
RISK-BENEFIT ANALYSIS METHODS FOR VEHICLE SAFETY DEVICES
TYRE_RF
DESCRIPTION
CATEGORY
HANDLING AND BRAKING
RUN FLAT TYRES
READINESS
ACCEPTANCE MODERATE
TAKE-OFF
NET COST (1 OFF)
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$400.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: ASSUMES A NOMINAL $100 EXTRA PER TYRE (IE ABOUT DOUBLE THE COST OF A
(Also see references NORMAL TYRE)
CRASH INFLUENCE: ACCIDENTS DUE TO TYRE FAILURE 0.5%
EFFECTIVENESS: MODERATE. PERHAPS 20%
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
1%
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
1%
1%
1%
20%
20%
20%
20%
$0.14
$0.25
$0.14
$0.14
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$0.67
$0.67
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.01
MINOR
HI*: 0.01
NET SAVINGS/YR
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
R25
RISK-BENEFIT ANALYSIS METHODS FOR VEHICLE SAFETY DEVICES
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C10
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
DRV_LIGHTS
DESCRIPTION
CATEGORY
HAZARD RECOGNITION BY DRIVER
DRIVING LIGHTS
READINESS
ACCEPTANCE POOR
HARVEST
NET COST (1 OFF)
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$100.00
$5.00
COST NOTE: RETAIL PRICE OF BASIC SYSTEMS. MAINTENANCE COST ASSUMES GLOBE FAILURE
(Also see references EVERY 3 YEARS.
CRASH INFLUENCE: NIGHTTIME (36% OF FATALS. 21% OF OTHERS) WHERE NORMAL HEADLIGHTS DID NOT
PROVIDE SUFFICIENT LIGHTING (PERHAPS 10%): 3.6% FATALS, 2.1% OF OTHERS
EFFECTIVENESS: PERHAPS ONE QUARTER COULD HAVE BEEN PREVENTED BY BETTER LIGHTING.
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
4%
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
2%
2%
2%
25%
25%
25%
25%
$1.28
$1.32
$0.71
$0.75
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$4.07
NET SAVINGS/YR
-$0.93
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.00
MINOR
HI*: 0.00
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
R21
FEATURE CODE
ROAD TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS IN NSW - 1999
FOG_LAMPS
DESCRIPTION
CATEGORY
HAZARD RECOGNITION BY DRIVER
FOG LAMPS
READINESS
ACCEPTANCE POOR
HARVEST
NET COST (1 OFF)
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$100.00
$5.00
COST NOTE: RETAIL PRICE OF BASIC SYSTEMS. MAINTENANCE COST ASSUMES GLOBE FAILURE
(Also see references EVERY 3 YEARS.
CRASH INFLUENCE: ACCIDENTS OCCURRING IN FOG. PROBABLY LESS THAN 1% OF ALL IN AUSTRALIA (CF
20% ON WET ROADS).
EFFECTIVENESS: PERHAPS ONE QUARTER COULD BE PREVENTED.
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
1%
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
1%
1%
1%
25%
25%
25%
25%
$0.36
$0.63
$0.34
$0.36
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$1.68
-$3.32
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.00
MINOR
HI*: 0.00
NET SAVINGS/YR
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
R21
ROAD TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS IN NSW - 1999
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C11
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
HI_GLASS
HAZARD RECOGNITION BY DRIVER
CATEGORY
HIGH TRANSMITTANCE GLAZING
ACCEPTANCE MODERATE
START-UP
NET COST (1 OFF)
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$50.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: COULD BE NIL COST IN THE LONG TERMN BUTR ASSUME THE IMPROVED GALZING
(Also see references TECHNOLOGY IS NEEDED TO CUT HEAT TRANSMISSION WHILE LETTING VISIBLE
CRASH INFLUENCE: NIGHT, DUSK AND DAWN 58% OF FATALS AND 47% OF OTHERS
EFFECTIVENESS: PERHAPS 3%, BASED ON US FIELD OF VIEW RESEARCH. RAMIFICATIONS FOR TINTED
WINDOWS.
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
58%
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
DISCOUNT RATE
PROPERTY
$143.00
47%
47%
47%
3%
3%
3%
$2.47
$3.55
$1.92
$2.02
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$9.96
$9.96
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 1.40
$136.00
3%
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
MINOR
HI*: 1.40
NET SAVINGS/YR
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
R21
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
ROAD TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS IN NSW - 1999
MIRR_DIM
HAZARD RECOGNITION BY DRIVER
CATEGORY
AUTO DIMMING REAR VIEW MIRROR
ACCEPTANCE MODERATE
TAKE-OFF
NET COST (1 OFF)
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$200.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: NOMINAL COST BASED ON SIMILAR ELECTRONIC DEVICES.
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: NIGHTTIME (36% FATALS, 21% OF OTHERS)
EFFECTIVENESS: WHERE GLARE FROM FOLLOWING VEHICLE'S HEADSLIGHTS CONTRIBUTED TO
ACCIDENT. NO DATA BUT ASSUME 1%.
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
36%
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
DISCOUNT RATE
PROPERTY
$143.00
21%
21%
21%
1%
1%
1%
$0.51
$0.53
$0.29
$0.30
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$1.63
$1.63
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.06
$136.00
1%
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
MINOR
HI*: 0.06
NET SAVINGS/YR
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
R21
ROAD TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS IN NSW - 1999
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C12
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
MIRR_FOG
HAZARD RECOGNITION BY DRIVER
CATEGORY
ANTI FOGGING (HEATED) EXTERNAL MIRRORS
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
ACCEPTANCE MODERATE
TAKE-OFF
NET COST (1 OFF)
COST NOTE:
$0.00
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$200.00
NOMINAL COST BASED ON SIMILAR ELECTRONIC EQUIP.
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: COLD, HUMID CONDITIONS - MOSTLY AT NIGHT. VERY DEPENDENT ON GEOGRAPHIC
LOCATION. PERHAPS 1% OF ACCIDENTS ON AVERAGE
EFFECTIVENESS: CASES WHERE POOR VIEW IN EXTERNAL MIRRORS CONTRIBUTED. PERHAPS 5%
EFFECTIVE.
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
MINOR
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
1%
1%
1%
1%
5%
5%
5%
5%
$0.07
$0.13
$0.07
$0.07
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$0.34
NET SAVINGS/YR
$0.34
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.01
HI*: 0.01
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
R25
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
RISK-BENEFIT ANALYSIS METHODS FOR VEHICLE SAFETY DEVICES
MIRROR_AUTO
HAZARD RECOGNITION BY DRIVER
CATEGORY
EXTERNAL MIRRORS ELECTRICALLY ADJUSTABLE
ACCEPTANCE MODERATE
HARVEST
NET COST (1 OFF)
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$200.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: NOMINAL COST BASED ON ETSC REPORT.
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: ACCIDENTS WHERE DRIVER DID NOT RECOGNISE HAZARD TO REAR. PERHAPS 20%
OF ALL ACCIDENTS.
EFFECTIVENESS: CASES WHERE MIRROR WAS NOT CORRECTLY ADJUSTED FOR DRIVER (20%?) TIMES
CHANCES THAT DRIVER WOULD USE THE ELECTRIC ADJUSTMENT CORRECTLY (50%?)
= 10%
FATALS
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
20%
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
10%
$2.84
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.47
HI*: 0.47
MINOR
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
20%
20%
20%
10%
$5.04
10%
10%
$2.72
$2.86
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$13.46
NET SAVINGS/YR
$13.46
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
R04
Reducing traffic injuries through vehicle safety improvements
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C13
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
WIPER_SPD
HAZARD RECOGNITION BY DRIVER
CATEGORY
SPEED SENSITIVE INTERMITTENT WIPERS
ACCEPTANCE MODERATE
TAKE-OFF
NET COST (1 OFF)
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$100.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: NOMINAL COST BASED ON COST OF OTHER ELECTRONIC GADGETS. MANY LUXURY
(Also see references VEHICLES NOW HAVE THIS FEATURE AS STANDARD.
CRASH INFLUENCE: WET WEATHER ACCIDENTS. 18% OF FATALS, 21% OF INJURY, 26% OF PROPERY
EFFECTIVENESS: LIGHT RAIN/SPRAY WHERE FIXED PERIOD NOT ADEQUATE. PERHAPS 5% OF CASES.
FATALS
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
18%
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
5%
$1.28
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.51
HI*: 0.51
MINOR
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
21%
21%
26%
5%
$2.65
5%
5%
$1.43
$1.86
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$7.21
NET SAVINGS/YR
$7.21
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
R25
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
RISK-BENEFIT ANALYSIS METHODS FOR VEHICLE SAFETY DEVICES
BDY_COL
CATEGORY
CONSPICUOUS BODY COLOUR
ACCEPTANCE MODERATE
HARVEST
NET COST (1 OFF)
HAZARD RECOGNITION BY OTHERS
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$100.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: NOMINAL COST. COULD BE NIL COST FOR SOME COLOURS. FOR COMPARISON
(Also see references "METALLIC" PAINT TYPICALLY COSTS ABOUT $200-$300.
CRASH INFLUENCE: ACCIDENTS WHERE OTHER DRIVER DID NOT SEE SUBJECT VEHICLE. ASSUMED DAWN
AND DUSK (20% OF ALL ACCIDENTS) . TWO VEHICLE ACCIDENTS (70% OF FATALS, 75%
OF OTHERS) = 14% FATALS AND 15% OF OTHERS.
EFFECTIVENESS: BODY COLOUR WILL ONLY CHANGE OUTCOME WHERE AMBIENT LIGHT AND
BACKGROUND ARE MORE FAVORABLE TO THE CHOSEN COLOUR. PERHAPS 10% OF
ALL CASES. TOKEN COST OF ALTERNATIVE BODY COLOUR MAKES B/C CALC DUBIOUS.
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
FATALS
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
14%
10%
$1.99
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.70
HI*: 0.70
MINOR
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
15%
15%
15%
10%
$3.78
10%
10%
$2.04
$2.15
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$9.95
NET SAVINGS/YR
$9.95
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
R09
R21
ESV Government Reports - The Netherlands
ROAD TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS IN NSW - 1999
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C14
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
DRL
CATEGORY
DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS
ACCEPTANCE MODERATE
HARVEST
NET COST (1 OFF)
HAZARD RECOGNITION BY OTHERS
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$50.00
$2.00
COST NOTE: OE COSTS AND ANNUAL MAINTENANCE BASED ON DUTCH AND CANADIAN
(Also see references ESTIMATES. AFTERMARKET COST ABOUT $200 BASED ON DISCUSSIONS WITH AUTO­
CRASH INFLUENCE: NON-NIGHTTIME (64% OF FATALS. 79% OF OTHERS) TWO VEHICLE ACCIDENTS (70%
OF FATALS, 75% OF OTHERS) = 45% FATALS AND 59% OF OTHERS.
EFFECTIVENESS: MORE EFFECTIVE AT DAWN AND DUSK (AROUND ONE QUARTER OF NON-NIGHT
ACCIDENTS. RESEARCH ESTIMATES AVERAGE 15% EFFECTIVE.
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
MINOR
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
45%
59%
59%
59%
15%
15%
15%
15%
$9.59
$22.30
$12.04
$12.66
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$56.58
NET SAVINGS/YR
$54.58
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 7.67
HI*: 7.67
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
K58
R21
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS - A NORTH AMERICAN SUCCESS STORY
ROAD TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS IN NSW - 1999
HEADL_ON
HAZARD RECOGNITION BY OTHERS
CATEGORY
HEADLIGHTS ON WARNING/AUTO
ACCEPTANCE GOOD
HARVEST
NET COST (1 OFF)
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$50.00
$20.00
COST NOTE: OE COSTS AND ANNUAL MAINTENANCE BASED ON DUTCH AND CANADIAN
(Also see references ESTIMATES. AFTERMARKET COST ABOUT $150 BASED ON DISCUSSIONS WITH AUTO­
CRASH INFLUENCE: NON-NIGHTTIME (64% OF FATALS. 79% OF OTHERS) TWO VEHICLE ACCIDENTS (70%
OF FATALS, 75% OF OTHERS) = 45% FATALS AND 59% OF OTHERS.
EFFECTIVENESS: MORE EFFECTIVE AT DAWN AND DUSK (AROUND ONE QUARTER OF NON-NIGHT
ACCIDENTS). DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS AROUND 15% AND HEADLIGHTS SHOULD BE
MORE EFFECTIVE - PERHAPS 20% (ALARM LESS EFFECTIVE). HEADLIGHT
REPLACEMENT COULD BE COSTLY.
FATALS
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
45%
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
20%
$12.78
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 7.79
HI*: 7.79
MINOR
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
59%
59%
59%
20%
$29.74
20%
20%
$16.05
$16.87
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$75.44
NET SAVINGS/YR
$55.44
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
K58
R04
R09
DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS - A NORTH AMERICAN SUCCESS STORY
Reducing traffic injuries through vehicle safety improvements
ESV Government Reports - The Netherlands
R21
ROAD TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS IN NSW - 1999
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C15
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
CARGO_BAR
DESCRIPTION
CATEGORY
HAZARD TO OCCUPANTS
CARGO BARRIER
READINESS
ACCEPTANCE GOOD
HARVEST
NET COST (1 OFF)
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$300.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: SURVEY OF DEALERS FOR COST AS OPTIONAL EQUIPMENT.
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: STATION WAGGONS AND VANS = 25% OF ALL LIGHT VEH. BUT COSTED PER VEHICLE
THEREFORE 100%. MOSTLY FRONTAL COLLISIONS - 60%.
EFFECTIVENESS: ONLY EFFECTIVE WHERE HAZARDOUS CARGO IS PRESENT. PERHAPS 5% OF CASES.
NO EFFECT ON PROPERTY LOSS.
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
60%
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
60%
60%
60%
5%
5%
5%
5%
$4.26
$7.56
$4.08
$4.29
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$20.19
NET SAVINGS/YR
$20.19
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.47
MINOR
HI*: 1.89
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
K15
L78
M31
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
Automotive load protection
VEHICLE OCCUPANT SURVEY 1994
INFLUENCE OF REAR (LUGGAGE) LOADING ON CHILD RESTRAINTS
FOOT_PROT
CATEGORY
IMPROVED FOOT PROTECTION
ACCEPTANCE GOOD
START-UP
NET COST (1 OFF)
HAZARD TO OCCUPANTS
$0.00
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$100.00
COST NOTE: NOMINAL COST. IMPROVED DESIGNS SHOULD NOT COST MORE IN LONG TERM.
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: MOSTLY FRONTAL COLLISIONS (60%) INVOLVING FOOT INJURY (6%) GIVES 4% FOR
INJURY BUT NIL FOR FATALS AND PROPERTY.
EFFECTIVENESS: SCOPE FOR MAJOR IMPROVEMENT. 50% REDUCTION ASSUMED.
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
0%
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
4%
4%
0%
0%
50%
50%
0%
$0.00
$5.04
$2.72
$0.00
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$7.76
$7.76
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.55
MINOR
HI*: 0.55
NET SAVINGS/YR
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
L15
L16
L21
L59
Lower limb injuries to passenger car occupants
Foot and leg injuries in frontal car collisions
Seat belt limitations in collisions with no compromise of passenger compartment
The reduction of the risk of lower leg injuries in offset crash tests
L62
L80
L85
Lower extremity loads in offset frontal crashes
SAFETY BENEFITS RESULTING FROM VEHICLE DESIGN CHANGES SINCE THE IN
FACTORS INFLUENCING LOWER EXTREMITY INJURIES
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C16
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
GLASS_LAM
HAZARD TO OCCUPANTS
CATEGORY
LAMINATED OR SHATTER-PROOF GLAZING FOR ALL WINDOWS
ACCEPTANCE MODERATE
START-UP
NET COST (1 OFF)
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$100.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: ASSUMES THAT WINDSCREENS ARE ALREADY LAMINATED. COST BASED ON
(Also see references ESTIMATED COST DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LAMINATED AND TEMPERED WINDSCREEN,
CRASH INFLUENCE: MOSTLY SIDE IMPACT AND ROLLOVER CRASHES - 30% OF CRASHES.
EFFECTIVENESS: ONLY EFFECTIVE WHERE IT HELPS TO RESTRAIN OCCUPANT WITHIN VEHICLE AND
PREVENT CONTACT WITH EXTERNAL OBJECTS OR PREVENTS LACERATIONS. L58
ESTIMATES 3% OF ALL CASUALTIES SUGGESTING 10% EFFECTIVENESS.
FATALS
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
30%
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
10%
$4.26
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 1.12
HI*: 1.12
MINOR
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
30%
30%
0%
10%
$7.56
10%
0%
$4.08
$0.00
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$15.90
NET SAVINGS/YR
$15.90
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
L58
Glazing effects of door or frame deformations in crashes, Part 2
L64
Neck and spinal injuries: injury outcome and crash characteristics in Aust.
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C17
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
HEAD_PAD
CATEGORY
HEAD PROTECTION PADDING
ACCEPTANCE MODERATE
TAKE-OFF
NET COST (1 OFF)
HAZARD TO OCCUPANTS
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$200.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: NOMINAL COST BASED ON PAPERS FROM 16TH ESV.
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: MOSTLY SIDE IMPACTS AND ROLLOVERS (30% OF CRASHES).
EFFECTIVENESS: NHTSA ESTIMATE 6% OF ALL FATALITIES DUE TO HEAD CONTACTS, SUGGESTING 20%
OF INFLUENCED CRASHES (6/0.3). ASSUME 50% EFFECTIVE IN THESE CASES = 10% OF
FATAL AND SERIOUS. PERHAPS 5% OF MINOR.
FATALS
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
30%
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
10%
$4.26
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.49
HI*: 0.49
MINOR
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
30%
30%
30%
10%
$7.56
5%
0%
$2.04
$0.00
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$13.86
NET SAVINGS/YR
$13.86
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
L17
Upper interior head, face and neck injury experiments
L26
Upper interior head impact protection of occupants in real world crashes
L36
The role of the upper car interior in car occupant brain injury
L38
Protective headgear for car occupants
L39
New requirements and solutions on head impact protection
L51
Head and neck injury in side impacts
L53
L61
L81
The risk of skull/brain injuries in modern cars
Head injury risk assessment and prevention in automobile accidents
NARROW OBJECT CRASHES AND INJURY OUTCOMES
L82
TIMBER POLE CRASHES
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C18
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
HELMET
HAZARD TO OCCUPANTS
CATEGORY
HELMETS/HEAD BANDS FOR OCCUPANTS
ACCEPTANCE POOR
START-UP
NET COST (1 OFF)
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$30.00
$10.00
COST NOTE: BASED ON A LOW COST BICYCLE HELMET (RETAIL VALUE)
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: MOSTLY SIDE IMPACTS AND ROLLOVERS (30% OF CRASHES).
EFFECTIVENESS: NHTSA ESTIMATE 6% OF ALL FATALITIES DUE TO HEAD CONTACTS, SUGGESTING 20%
OF INFLUENCED CRASHES (6/0.3). ASSUME 50% EFFECTIVE IN THESE CASES = 10% OF
FATAL AND SERIOUS. PERHAPS 5% OF MINOR. REPLACED EVERY THREE YEARS.
FATALS
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
30%
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
10%
$4.26
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.90
HI*: 0.90
MINOR
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
30%
30%
30%
10%
$7.56
5%
0%
$2.04
$0.00
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$13.86
NET SAVINGS/YR
$3.86
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
K01
Crashworthiness research at the NHMRC Road Accident Research Unit
L26
Upper interior head impact protection of occupants in real world crashes
L36
The role of the upper car interior in car occupant brain injury
L38
Protective headgear for car occupants
L39
New requirements and solutions on head impact protection
L53
The risk of skull/brain injuries in modern cars
L61
L81
Head injury risk assessment and prevention in automobile accidents
NARROW OBJECT CRASHES AND INJURY OUTCOMES
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C19
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
KNEE_PAD
CATEGORY
KNEE BOLSTER/PADDING
ACCEPTANCE MODERATE
HARVEST
NET COST (1 OFF)
HAZARD TO OCCUPANTS
$0.00
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$100.00
COST NOTE: BASED ON MUARC REPORT CR100.
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: Frontal crashes involving upper leg injury.
EFFECTIVENESS: Properly designed bolsters should be effective. MUARC estimates 5.3% HARM reduction
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
0%
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
10%
10%
0%
0%
50%
50%
0%
$0.00
$12.60
$6.80
$0.00
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$19.40
NET SAVINGS/YR
$19.40
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 1.36
MINOR
HI*: 1.36
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
L43
L85
Feasibility of Occupant Protection Countermeasures
FACTORS INFLUENCING LOWER EXTREMITY INJURIES
L89
COMPARISON OF EURONCAP ASSESSMENTS WITH INJURY CAUSATION IN ACCI
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
LOAD_RESTR
HAZARD TO OCCUPANTS
CATEGORY
LOAD RESTRAINT DEVICES (TETHERS)
ACCEPTANCE MODERATE
TAKE-OFF
NET COST (1 OFF)
COST NOTE:
$0.00
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$100.00
AUTHOR'S EXPERIENCE PURCHASING THESE ITEMS (RETAIL).
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: FRONTAL CRASHES INVOLVES WAGONS, VANS AND HATCHES. ~ 40% OF LIGHT
VEHICLE FLEET BUT 100% OF THESE VEHICLES.
EFFECTIVENESS: NO DATA. ASSUME HALF EFFECTIVENESS OF CARGO BARRIER DUE TO MISUSE AND
LACK OF USE.
FATALS
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
60%
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
3%
$2.56
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.67
HI*: 2.68
MINOR
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
60%
60%
60%
3%
$4.54
3%
0%
$2.45
$0.00
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$9.54
NET SAVINGS/YR
$9.54
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
K15
M31
Automotive load protection
INFLUENCE OF REAR (LUGGAGE) LOADING ON CHILD RESTRAINTS
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C20
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
AB_BONNET
HAZARD TO OTHER ROAD USERS
CATEGORY
BONNET AIRBAG FOR PEDESTRIAN PROTECTION
ACCEPTANCE POOR
START-UP
NET COST (1 OFF)
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$500.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: NOT IN PRODUCTION. COST BASED ON PASSENGER AIRBAG, ASSUMING VOLUME
(Also see references PRODUCTION IN LONG TERM.
CRASH INFLUENCE: PEDESTRIAN FATALITIES EQUIVALENT TO 31% OF CAR OCCUPANT FATALITIES. 16%
OF INJURIES.
EFFECTIVENESS: ABOUT 60% ARE SERIOUS HEAD INJURIES. ASSUME AIRBAGS WILL REDUCE THESE
BY HALF.
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
MINOR
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
31%
16%
16%
0%
30%
30%
30%
0%
$13.21
$12.10
$6.53
$0.00
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$31.83
NET SAVINGS/YR
$31.83
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.45
HI*: 0.45
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
L77
N21
N25
N29
Ford focuses on safety
Pedestrian head impact testing at the University of Adelaide
Computer simulation system for car-pedestrian accident
SUMMARY OF IHRA PEDESTRIAN SAFETY WG
N30
R21
EVALUATION OF PEDESTRIAN AIRBAG THROUGH MODELLING AND TESTING
ROAD TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS IN NSW - 1999
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C21
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
PED_IMP
HAZARD TO OTHER ROAD USERS
CATEGORY
PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY VEHICLE FRONT
ACCEPTANCE POOR
START-UP
NET COST (1 OFF)
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$500.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: COST ESTIMATE BASED ON 2 PAPERS AT 16TH ESV (LAWRENCE AND OTUBUSHIN).
(Also see references MID-RANGE USE TO BALANCE GOVERNMENT AND INDUSTRY ESTIMATES.
CRASH INFLUENCE: NEARLY ALL PEDESTRIAN ACCIDENTS (27% OF FATALS INVOLVING LIGHT VEHICLES,
25% OF SERIOUS, 14% OF MINOR)
EFFECTIVENESS: EUROPEAN RESEARCH SUGGESTS MEASURES WOULD BE HIGHLY EFFECTIVE BUT
ASSUME 50% TO COVER UNCERTAINTY.
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
27%
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
DISCOUNT RATE
PROPERTY
$143.00
25%
14%
0%
50%
50%
0%
$19.17
$31.50
$9.52
$0.00
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$60.19
NET SAVINGS/YR
$60.19
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.85
$136.00
50%
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
MINOR
HI*: 0.85
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
K54
N02
N12
N15
N26
N28
N29
Road safety strategy: current problems and future options
Benefits from changes in vehicle exterior design - in Europe
Pedestrian safety testing using the EEVC pedestrian impactors
Pedestrian safety
AUSTRALIA'S INVOLVEMENT IN IHRA PEDESTRIAN SAFETY
PEDESTRIAN INJURY PROJECTION IN AUSTRALIA IF VEHICLES ACHIEVE HIGH S
SUMMARY OF IHRA PEDESTRIAN SAFETY WG
N30
EVALUATION OF PEDESTRIAN AIRBAG THROUGH MODELLING AND TESTING
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C22
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
AB_SMART
CATEGORY
SMART AIRBAG SYSTEM
ACCEPTANCE MODERATE
TAKE-OFF
NET COST (1 OFF)
OCCUPANT RESTRAINT
$0.00
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$500.00
COST NOTE: NOMINAL COST BASED ON AUTOLIV PAPER.
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: ASSUME FRONTAL CRASHES ONLY - 60% OF ALL
EFFECTIVENESS: AIRBAGS + SEAT BELTS ALREADY HIGHLY EFFECTIVE. SMART AIRBAGS WILL BENEFIT
AGED AND SMALL OCCUPANTS - SAY 20% OF ALL OCCUPANTS AND 50% EFFECTIVE =
10% OF ALL OCCUPANTS
K54 ESTIMATES 4 TO 8% OF ALL CASUALTIES
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
60%
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
60%
60%
60%
10%
10%
5%
0%
$8.52
$15.12
$4.08
$0.00
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$27.72
NET SAVINGS/YR
$27.72
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.39
MINOR
HI*: 0.39
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
K54
L34
L44
L57
L83
Road safety strategy: current problems and future options
Smart seat belts - some population considerations
New restraint technologies for vehicle safety
Optimisation of an intelligent total restraint system
EFFECT OF OCCUPANT CHARACTERISTICS IN INJURY RISK - ACTIVE RESTRAIN
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C23
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
AIRBAG_D
DESCRIPTION
CATEGORY
OCCUPANT RESTRAINT
DRIVER AIRBAG
READINESS
ACCEPTANCE EXCELLENT
HARVEST
NET COST (1 OFF)
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$600.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: GLASS'S GUIDE AND DATA GATHERED FOR ANCAP.
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: ASSUME FRONTAL CRASHES - 60% OF ALL
EFFECTIVENESS: L30 INDICATES FATALS AND SERIOUS INJURIES REDUCE BY 40%. BUT L43 INDICATES
OVERALL SAVING OF 15%, SUGGESTING 25% EFFECTIVENESS. LATTER USED.
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
60%
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
60%
60%
60%
25%
25%
10%
0%
$21.30
$37.80
$8.16
$0.00
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$67.26
NET SAVINGS/YR
$67.26
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.79
MINOR
HI*: 0.79
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
K07
L30
The effectiveness of ADRs aimed at occupant protection.
The effect of airbags to injuries and accident costs
L43
L45
L79
Feasibility of Occupant Protection Countermeasures
Effectiveness of Occupant Protection Systems and Their Use
EFFECTIVENESS OF AIRBAGS IN AUSTRALIA
L80
L86
L90
R09
R11
SAFETY BENEFITS RESULTING FROM VEHICLE DESIGN CHANGES SINCE THE IN
EFFECTIVENESS OF (DRIVER) AIRBAGS IN AUSTRALIA
STEERING COLUMN MOVEMENT IN SEVERE FRONTAL CRASHES - EFFECT ON AI
ESV Government Reports - The Netherlands
Willingness to pay for vehicle safety features
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C24
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
AIRBAG_P
CATEGORY
FRONT PASSENGER AIRBAG
ACCEPTANCE MODERATE
HARVEST
NET COST (1 OFF)
OCCUPANT RESTRAINT
$0.00
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$400.00
COST NOTE: GLASS'S GUIDE AND SURVEY OF DEALERS.
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: FRONTAL CRASHES. INJURIES TO FRONT PASSENGER ONLY. 60% OF CRASHES x 20%
OF INJURED OCCUPANTS (L78)
EFFECTIVENESS: L43 SUGGESTS PASSENGER AIRBAG ABOUT 20% EFFECTIVE (LESS THAN DRIVER).
COST OF UNNECESSARY DEPLOYMENTS?
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
12%
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
12%
12%
12%
20%
20%
10%
0%
$3.41
$6.05
$1.63
$0.00
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$11.09
$11.09
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.19
MINOR
HI*: 0.97
NET SAVINGS/YR
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
L43
L78
L80
L84
R04
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
Feasibility of Occupant Protection Countermeasures
VEHICLE OCCUPANT SURVEY 1994
SAFETY BENEFITS RESULTING FROM VEHICLE DESIGN CHANGES SINCE THE IN
PRELIMINARY EVALUATION OF PASSENGER AIRBAG EFFECTIVENESS IN AUSTR
Reducing traffic injuries through vehicle safety improvements
CR_INT
CATEGORY
CHILD SEAT INTEGRATED
ACCEPTANCE MODERATE
TAKE-OFF
NET COST (1 OFF)
OCCUPANT RESTRAINT
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$500.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: NOMINAL COST BASED ON SEAT COSTS AND UPMARKET CHILD RESTRAINTS.
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: YOUNG CHILDREN INJURED IN CAR ACCIDENTS: 2% OF CAR OCCUPANTS INJURED OR
KILLED.
EFFECTIVENESS: ONLY EFFECTIVE WHERE A CHILD RESTRAINT IS NOT USED OR MISUSED. PERHAPS
50% OF SERIOUS INJURIES BASED ON M08.
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
2%
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
2%
2%
0%
50%
50%
0%
0%
$1.42
$2.52
$0.00
$0.00
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$3.94
NET SAVINGS/YR
$3.94
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.06
MINOR
HI*: 0.28
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
M08
R21
Children in car crashes
ROAD TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS IN NSW - 1999
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C25
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
HR_ADJ
OCCUPANT RESTRAINT
CATEGORY
ADJUSTABLE HEAD RESTRAINT
ACCEPTANCE GOOD
HARVEST
NET COST (1 OFF)
$0.00
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$100.00
COST NOTE: NOMINAL COST FOR ALL SEATS.
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: MOSTLY REAR IMPACTS AND LOWER SEVERITY CRASHES - 23% OF MINOR INJURY
AND PERHAPS 10% OF SERIOUS/FATAL CRASHES.
EFFECTIVENESS: MARGINAL BECAUSE USER NEEDS TO ADJUST HEAD RESTRAINT TO OPTIMUM
POSITION. PERHAPS 10% OF CASES.
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
10%
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
10%
23%
23%
10%
10%
10%
0%
$1.42
$2.52
$3.13
$0.00
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$7.07
$7.07
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.50
MINOR
HI*: 0.50
NET SAVINGS/YR
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
K17
L64
L65
Effects of car and seat on the loading of occupant's neck in rear impacts
Neck and spinal injuries: injury outcome and crash characteristics in Aust.
What happens to the cervical spinal cord during neck injury?
L66
L67
An overview of ergonomic issues in neck injury amelioration
The measurement of neck injury risk
L68
Neck injury severity and vehicle design
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C26
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
HR_RA
OCCUPANT RESTRAINT
CATEGORY
HEAD RESTRAINTS FOR ALL REAR SEATS
ACCEPTANCE MODERATE
HARVEST
NET COST (1 OFF)
$0.00
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$120.00
COST NOTE: NOMINAL COST BASED ON 15% OF SEAT COST
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: MOSTLY LOWER SEVERITY REAR IMPACTS (23% OF MINOR, 10% OF SERIOUS/FATAL)
WHERE THERE ARE REAR SEAT OCCUPANTS (12% OF CARS) = 3% OF MINOR, 1% OF
SERIOUS/FATAL
EFFECTIVENESS: PERHAPS 30% EFFECTIVE IN THESE CRASHES, ASSUMING CORRECT GEOMETRY.
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
FATALS
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
MINOR
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
23%
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
1%
1%
3%
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
30%
$0.43
30%
$0.76
30%
0%
$1.22
$0.00
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$2.41
NET SAVINGS/YR
$2.41
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.14
HI*: 0.70
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
K17
Effects of car and seat on the loading of occupant's neck in rear impacts
L64
Neck and spinal injuries: injury outcome and crash characteristics in Aust.
L68
Neck injury severity and vehicle design
L78
VEHICLE OCCUPANT SURVEY 1994
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
HR_RO
OCCUPANT RESTRAINT
CATEGORY
HEAD RESTRAINTS FOR REAR OUTBOARD SEATS
ACCEPTANCE MODERATE
HARVEST
NET COST (1 OFF)
$0.00
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$80.00
COST NOTE: NOMINAL COST BASED ON 15% OF SEAT COST
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: MOSTLY LOWER SEVERITY REAR IMPACTS (23% OF MINOR, 10% OF SERIOUS/FATAL)
WHERE THERE ARE OUTBOARD REAR SEAT OCCUPANTS (10% OF CARS) = 2% OF
MINOR, 1% OF SERIOUS/FATAL
EFFECTIVENESS: PERHAPS 30% EFFECTIVE IN THESE CRASHES, ASSUMING CORRECT GEOMETRY.
FATALS
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
MINOR
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
1%
1%
2%
2%
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
30%
$0.43
30%
$0.76
30%
0%
$0.82
$0.00
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$2.00
NET SAVINGS/YR
$2.00
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.18
HI*: 0.70
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
K17
L64
L68
Effects of car and seat on the loading of occupant's neck in rear impacts
Neck and spinal injuries: injury outcome and crash characteristics in Aust.
Neck injury severity and vehicle design
L78
VEHICLE OCCUPANT SURVEY 1994
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C27
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
SB_BUCK
OCCUPANT RESTRAINT
CATEGORY
SEAT BELT BUCKLE MOUNTED ON SEAT (FRONT)
ACCEPTANCE GOOD
SATURATION
NET COST (1 OFF)
$0.00
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$50.00
COST NOTE: MAINLY THE ESTIMATED OF COST OF STRENGTHENING SEAT. MOST VEHICLE NOW
(Also see references HAVE THIS FEATURE.
CRASH INFLUENCE: FRONTAL CRASHES. 60% OF ALL.
EFFECTIVENESS: LOW - ONLY EFFECTIVE WHERE A POORLY FITTING SEAT BELT RESULTED IN INJURY.
MOST VEHICLES NOW HAVE THIS FEATURE. SAY 10% OF ALL CASUALTIES AND 20%
REDUCTION = 2%
FATALS
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
60%
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
2%
$1.70
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.89
HI*: 0.89
MINOR
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
60%
60%
0%
2%
$3.02
2%
0%
$1.63
$0.00
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$6.36
NET SAVINGS/YR
$6.36
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
R25
RISK-BENEFIT ANALYSIS METHODS FOR VEHICLE SAFETY DEVICES
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
SB_CR3
OCCUPANT RESTRAINT
CATEGORY
SEAT BELT, CENTRE REAR 3-POINT
ACCEPTANCE GOOD
HARVEST
NET COST (1 OFF)
COST NOTE:
$0.00
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$100.00
BASED ON PAPER FROM LAP BELT CONFERENCE, 1994.
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: MAINLY FRONTAL CRASHES (60% OF ALL) BUT ONLY WHERE CENTRE REAR SEAT IS
OCCUPIED AND NO CHILD RESTRAINT USED. OBSERVATIONAL SURVEYS SUGGEST
LESS THAN 1% OF VEHICLES. ASSUME 1% OVERALL.
EFFECTIVENESS: 3 POINT BELT HALVES INJURY RISK COMPARED TO 2 POINT BELT. ASSUME 50%
EFFECTIVE.
FATALS
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
1%
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
50%
$0.71
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.19
HI*: 1.86
MINOR
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
1%
1%
0%
50%
$1.26
50%
0%
$0.68
$0.00
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$2.65
NET SAVINGS/YR
$2.65
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
L70
L72
L73
M28
An overview of manual lap belts in the centre rear
A study of seat belt syndrome in the centre rear seating position
Retrofitting of lap sash seat belts in centre rear seating positions
Lap-only seat belts: findings from the CAPFA study
M29
Seat belt and child restraint usage - 1993
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C28
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
SB_HARNESS
OCCUPANT RESTRAINT
CATEGORY
HARNESS SEAT BELT FOR ADULTS (4PT OR 6PT)
ACCEPTANCE POOR
TAKE-OFF
NET COST (1 OFF)
$0.00
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$400.00
COST NOTE: NOMINAL COST BASED ON COST OF NORMAL SEAT BELTS AND ALLOWING FOR EXTRA
(Also see references ANCHORAGE POINTS.
CRASH INFLUENCE: FRONTAL CRASHES (60% OF ALL)
EFFECTIVENESS: LIMITED SCOPE FOR REDUCING INJURY BEYOND EXISTING 3 POINT BELTS. ASSUME
10% OF FATAL AND SERIOUS INJURY INVOLVE SEAT BELT LIMITATIONS AND HARNESS
WOULD BE 10% EFFECTIVE = 1% OVERALL..
FATALS
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
60%
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
1%
$0.85
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.04
HI*: 0.04
MINOR
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
60%
60%
0%
1%
$1.51
0%
0%
$0.00
$0.00
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$2.36
NET SAVINGS/YR
$2.36
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
R25
RISK-BENEFIT ANALYSIS METHODS FOR VEHICLE SAFETY DEVICES
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
SB_HT_ADJ
OCCUPANT RESTRAINT
CATEGORY
SEAT BELT D-RING HEIGHT ADJUSTABLE/AUTOMATIC
ACCEPTANCE GOOD
HARVEST
NET COST (1 OFF)
$0.00
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$100.00
COST NOTE: NOMINAL COST. NEGLIGIBLE COST IN LONG TERM.
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: MOSTLY FRONTAL CRASHES (60% OF ALL)
EFFECTIVENESS: CASES WHERE INCORRECT FIT OF SEAT BELT CONTRIBUTED TO INJURY. ASSUME 10%
OF FATAL/SERIOUS INJURIES AND 20% EFFECTIVE = 2% OVERALL.
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
60%
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
DISCOUNT RATE
60%
60%
0%
2%
0%
0%
$1.70
$3.02
$0.00
$0.00
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$4.73
$4.73
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.33
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
2%
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
MINOR
HI*: 0.33
NET SAVINGS/YR
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
L83
M29
EFFECT OF OCCUPANT CHARACTERISTICS IN INJURY RISK - ACTIVE RESTRAIN
Seat belt and child restraint usage - 1993
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C29
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
SB_ILOCK
CATEGORY
SEAT BELT INTERLOCK
ACCEPTANCE MODERATE
TAKE-OFF
NET COST (1 OFF)
OCCUPANT RESTRAINT
$0.00
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$50.00
COST NOTE: OE COST BASED ON MUARC REPORT CR100 AND ESV15 - TURBELL. THESE ARE
(Also see references RELATIVELY SIMPLE SYSTEMS.
CRASH INFLUENCE: ACCIDENTS (MOSTLY FRONTAL) INVOLVING UNRESTRAINED OCCUPANTS WHERE A
SEAT BELT WAS AVAILABLE. 22% OF FATALS AND SERIOUS INJURIES, 3% OF MINOR
INJURIES.
EFFECTIVENESS: SEAT BELTS 50% EFFECTIVE, COMPARED WITH UNRESTRAINED OCCUPANTS.
INTERLOCK PERHAPS 50% EFFECTIVE = 25% OVERALL
FATALS
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
22%
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
25%
$7.81
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 3.19
HI*: 3.19
MINOR
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
22%
3%
0%
25%
$13.86
25%
0%
$1.02
$0.00
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$22.69
NET SAVINGS/YR
$22.69
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
K54
Road safety strategy: current problems and future options
L41
Fitting and wearing of seat belts in Australia.
L43
Feasibility of Occupant Protection Countermeasures
L54
Optimizing seat belt usage by interlock systems
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
SB_INFLATE
CATEGORY
INFLATABLE SEAT BELT
ACCEPTANCE GOOD
START-UP
NET COST (1 OFF)
OCCUPANT RESTRAINT
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$200.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: PROTOTYPE TECHNOLOGY. NOMINAL COST BASED ON PASSENGER AIRBAG (40%)
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: MOSTLY FRONTAL CRASHES (60% OF ALL)
EFFECTIVENESS: CASES WHERE SEAT BELTS CONTRIBUTED TO INJURY. ASSUME 10% OF ALL CASES
AND INFALTABLE BELT 10% EFFECTIVE = 1% OVERALL.
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
60%
60%
1%
$0.85
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.11
HI*: 0.11
MINOR
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
60%
0%
1%
1%
0%
$1.51
$0.82
$0.00
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$3.18
$3.18
NET SAVINGS/YR
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
R25
RISK-BENEFIT ANALYSIS METHODS FOR VEHICLE SAFETY DEVICES
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C30
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
SB_LL_F
OCCUPANT RESTRAINT
CATEGORY
SEAT BELT LOAD LIMITERS, FRONT
ACCEPTANCE MODERATE
TAKE-OFF
NET COST (1 OFF)
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$20.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: ASSUMED SIMILAR TO WEBBING CLAMPS.
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: MOSTLY FRONTAL CRASHES (60% OF ALL)
EFFECTIVENESS: CASES WHERE SEAT BELT CONTRIBUTED TO INJURY. ASSUME 10% OF ALL CASES AND
THAT LOAD LIMITERS WOULD BE 20% EFFECTIVE = 2% OVERALL FOR FATAL AND
SERIOUS. LESS FOR MINOR INJURY.
FATALS
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
60%
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
2%
$1.70
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 1.95
HI*: 1.95
MINOR
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
60%
60%
0%
2%
$3.02
1%
0%
$0.82
$0.00
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$5.54
NET SAVINGS/YR
$5.54
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
R25
RISK-BENEFIT ANALYSIS METHODS FOR VEHICLE SAFETY DEVICES
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
SB_LL_R
OCCUPANT RESTRAINT
CATEGORY
SEAT BELT LOAD LIMITERS, REAR
ACCEPTANCE MODERATE
TAKE-OFF
NET COST (1 OFF)
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$20.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: BASED ON MUARC REPORT CR100
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: MOSTLY FRONTAL CRASHES WITH REAR SEAT OCCUPANTS. 60% OF ALL CRASHES X
13% REAR SEAT OCCUPANCY = 8% OVERALL.
EFFECTIVENESS: CASES WHERE SEAT BELTS CONTRIBUTED TO INJURY - HIGHER THAN FRONT SEATS SAY 15% OF ALL. ASSUME LOAD LIMITERS 20% EFFECTIVE = 3% OVERALL
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
8%
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
DISCOUNT RATE
8%
8%
0%
3%
1%
0%
$0.34
$0.60
$0.11
$0.00
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$1.05
$1.05
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.37
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
3%
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
MINOR
HI*: 1.85
NET SAVINGS/YR
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
L60
M29
Optimized restraint systems for rear seat passengers
Seat belt and child restraint usage - 1993
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C31
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
SB_PT_F
OCCUPANT RESTRAINT
CATEGORY
SEAT BELT PRETENSIONER, FRONT
ACCEPTANCE GOOD
HARVEST
NET COST (1 OFF)
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$100.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: BASED ON MUARC REPORTR CR100.
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: MOSTLY FRONTAL CRASHES (60% OF ALL)
EFFECTIVENESS: CASES WHERE SEAT BELTS ALLOWED TOO MUCH OCCUPANT EXCURSION. SAY 20%
OF ALL CASES. ASSUME 25% EFFECTIVENESS FOR PRETENSIONERS = 5% OVERALL.
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
60%
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
60%
60%
0%
5%
5%
5%
0%
$4.26
$7.56
$4.08
$0.00
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$15.90
$15.90
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 1.12
MINOR
HI*: 1.12
NET SAVINGS/YR
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
L43
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
Feasibility of Occupant Protection Countermeasures
SB_PT_R
OCCUPANT RESTRAINT
CATEGORY
SEAT BELT PRETENSIONERS, REAR
ACCEPTANCE MODERATE
TAKE-OFF
NET COST (1 OFF)
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$100.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: BASED ON MUARC REPORT CR100.
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: MOSTLY FRONTAL CRASHES (60%) WITH REAR SEAT OCCUPANTS (13%) = 8% OVERALL
EFFECTIVENESS: CASES WHERE SEAT BELTS ALLOWED TOO MUCH OCCUPANT EXCURSION. SAY 20%
OF ALL CASES. ASSUME 25% EFFECTIVENESS FOR PRETENSIONERS = 5% OVERALL
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
8%
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
8%
8%
0%
5%
5%
5%
0%
$0.57
$1.01
$0.54
$0.00
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$2.12
NET SAVINGS/YR
$2.12
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.15
MINOR
HI*: 0.74
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
L43
L60
M29
Feasibility of Occupant Protection Countermeasures
Optimized restraint systems for rear seat passengers
Seat belt and child restraint usage - 1993
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C32
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
SB_WB_R
OCCUPANT RESTRAINT
CATEGORY
SEAT BELT WEBBING GRABBERS, REAR
ACCEPTANCE MODERATE
TAKE-OFF
NET COST (1 OFF)
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$40.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: BASED ON MUARC REPORT CR100.
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: MOSTLY FRONTAL CRASHES (60%) WITH REAR SEAT OCCUPANTS (13%) = 8% OVERALL
EFFECTIVENESS: CASES WHERE SEAT BELTS ALLOWED TOO MUCH OCCUPANT EXCURSION. SAY 20%
OF ALL CASES. ASSUME 10% EFFECTIVENESS FOR WEBBING GRABBERS = 2% OVERALL
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
MINOR
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
8%
8%
8%
0%
2%
2%
2%
0%
$0.23
$0.40
$0.22
$0.00
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$0.85
NET SAVINGS/YR
$0.85
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.15
HI*: 0.74
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
L60
M29
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
Optimized restraint systems for rear seat passengers
Seat belt and child restraint usage - 1993
SB_WG_F
OCCUPANT RESTRAINT
CATEGORY
SEAT BELT WEBBING GRABBERS, FRONT
ACCEPTANCE GOOD
HARVEST
NET COST (1 OFF)
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$40.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: BASED ON MUARC REPORT CR100.
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: MOSTLY FRONTAL CRASHES (60% OF ALL)
EFFECTIVENESS: CASES WHERE SEAT BELTS ALLOWED TOO MUCH OCCUPANT EXCURSION. SAY 20%
OF ALL CASES. ASSUME 10% EFFECTIVENESS FOR WEBBING GRABBERS = 2%
OVERALL.
FATALS
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
60%
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
2%
$1.70
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 1.12
HI*: 1.12
MINOR
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
60%
60%
0%
2%
$3.02
2%
0%
$1.63
$0.00
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$6.36
NET SAVINGS/YR
$6.36
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
L43
Feasibility of Occupant Protection Countermeasures
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C33
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
SEAT_SUB
OCCUPANT RESTRAINT
CATEGORY
ANTI-SUBMARING SEAT DESIGN
ACCEPTANCE MODERATE
HARVEST
NET COST (1 OFF)
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$40.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: BASED ON MUARC REPORT CR100.
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: MOSTLY FRONTAL CRASHES (60% OF ALL)
EFFECTIVENESS: CASES WHERE SUBMARINING A FACTOR. PERHAPS 10% OF ALL. IMPROVED SEAT
DESIGN MIGHT BE 20% EFFECTIVE = 2% OVERALL.
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
60%
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
60%
60%
0%
2%
2%
2%
0%
$1.70
$3.02
$1.63
$0.00
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$6.36
$6.36
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 1.12
MINOR
HI*: 1.12
NET SAVINGS/YR
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
L43
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
Feasibility of Occupant Protection Countermeasures
SIDE_AB_FH
OCCUPANT RESTRAINT
CATEGORY
SIDE AIRBAG - FRONT, HEAD-PROTECTING (CURTAIN)
ACCEPTANCE GOOD
TAKE-OFF
NET COST (1 OFF)
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$400.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: USUALLY PART OF SAFETY PACKAGE. NOMINAL COST BASED ON PASSENGER AIRBAG.
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: See reference L75. 4.6% of US crashes potentially influenced by head-protecting tubular structure.
EFFECTIVENESS: See reference L75. Effectiveness better for severe injuries.
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
5%
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
5%
5%
0%
50%
50%
25%
0%
$3.55
$6.30
$1.70
$0.00
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$11.55
NET SAVINGS/YR
$11.55
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.20
MINOR
HI*: 0.20
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
L75
L81
L82
L88
Benefits of the inflatable tubular structure
NARROW OBJECT CRASHES AND INJURY OUTCOMES
TIMBER POLE CRASHES
CRASH AND FIELD PERFORMANCE OF SIDE AIRBAGS
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C34
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
SIDE_AB_RH
OCCUPANT RESTRAINT
CATEGORY
SIDE AIRBAG, REAR, HEAD-PROTECTING
ACCEPTANCE GOOD
TAKE-OFF
NET COST (1 OFF)
$0.00
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$400.00
COST NOTE: NOMINAL COST BASED ON PASSENGER AIRBAG.
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: US RESEARCH SUGGESTS 5% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED BY HEAD PROTECTING SIDE
AIRBAGS. 13% OF VEHCLES HAVE REAR SEAT OCCUPANTS = 1% OVERALL
EFFECTIVENESS: ASSUME 50% EFFECTIVE FOR FATALS AND SERIOUS INJURIES. LESS FOR MINOR.
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
1%
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
1%
1%
0%
50%
50%
25%
0%
$0.71
$1.26
$0.34
$0.00
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$2.31
$2.31
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.04
MINOR
HI*: 0.20
NET SAVINGS/YR
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
K02
K14
L03
L22
L55
Advanced designs for side impact and rollover protection
Side impact protection opportunities
Reduction of head rotational motions in side impacts - inflatable curtains
Development of side impact airbag system for head and thorax protection
Evaluation of advanced side airbags for head protection
L75
L81
L82
L88
M29
Benefits of the inflatable tubular structure
NARROW OBJECT CRASHES AND INJURY OUTCOMES
TIMBER POLE CRASHES
CRASH AND FIELD PERFORMANCE OF SIDE AIRBAGS
Seat belt and child restraint usage - 1993
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C35
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
SIDE_AB_RT
CATEGORY
SIDE AIRBAG, REAR, THORAX
ACCEPTANCE GOOD
TAKE-OFF
NET COST (1 OFF)
OCCUPANT RESTRAINT
$0.00
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$400.00
COST NOTE: NOMINAL COST BASED ON PASSENGER AIRBAG (70%)
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: SIDE IMPACTS (20%) WITH REAR SEAT OCCUPANTS (13%) = 3% OVERALL.
EFFECTIVENESS: ASSUME 50% EFFECTIVENESS FOR FATAL AND SERIOUS.
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
MINOR
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
3%
3%
3%
0%
50%
50%
25%
0%
$2.13
$3.78
$1.02
$0.00
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$6.93
NET SAVINGS/YR
$6.93
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.12
HI*: 0.61
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
K02
K14
Advanced designs for side impact and rollover protection
Side impact protection opportunities
K25
L22
L25
L27
L88
Side impact regulation benefits for Australia
Development of side impact airbag system for head and thorax protection
Strategies for passenger car designs to improve side impact protection
Field study on the potential benefit of different side airbag systems
CRASH AND FIELD PERFORMANCE OF SIDE AIRBAGS
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C36
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
SIDE_ABFT
OCCUPANT RESTRAINT
CATEGORY
SIDE AIRBAG - FRONT SEAT, THORAX
ACCEPTANCE GOOD
HARVEST
NET COST (1 OFF)
$0.00
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$400.00
COST NOTE: BASED ON PROPORTIONAL COST OF A TYPICAL "SAFETY PACK" THAT INCLUDES SIDE
(Also see references AIRBAGS AND DATA GATHERING FOR ANCAP.
CRASH INFLUENCE: SIDE IMPACT CRASHES (20%)
EFFECTIVENESS: ASSUME 50% EFFECTIVENESS FOR FATAL AND SERIOUS.
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
20%
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
20%
20%
0%
50%
50%
25%
0%
$14.20
$25.20
$6.80
$0.00
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$46.20
$46.20
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.81
MINOR
HI*: 0.81
NET SAVINGS/YR
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
K02
K14
K25
L22
L25
L27
Advanced designs for side impact and rollover protection
Side impact protection opportunities
Side impact regulation benefits for Australia
Development of side impact airbag system for head and thorax protection
Strategies for passenger car designs to improve side impact protection
Field study on the potential benefit of different side airbag systems
L88
CRASH AND FIELD PERFORMANCE OF SIDE AIRBAGS
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
CRASH_REC
CATEGORY
CRASH RECORDER
ACCEPTANCE POOR
START-UP
NET COST (1 OFF)
OTHER AVOIDANCE FACTORS
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$500.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: BASED ON RTA SPEED CONTROL STUDY.
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: SPEED-RELATED CRASHES 40% OF FATALS AND 15% OF OTHERS (R21).
EFFECTIVENESS: KNOWLEDGE THAT SPEEDING BEHAVIOUR IS BEING RECORDED MAY INFLUENCE
SOME DRIVERS TO SLOW DOWN. PERHAPS 20% REDUCTION.
FATALS
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
40%
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
20%
$11.36
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.38
HI*: 0.38
MINOR
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
15%
15%
15%
20%
$7.56
20%
20%
$4.08
$4.29
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$27.29
NET SAVINGS/YR
$27.29
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
P19
R21
NSW Heavy Vehicle Crash Study - Final Technical Report.
ROAD TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS IN NSW - 1999
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C37
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
ENG_IMMOB
CATEGORY
ENGINE IMMOBILISER
ACCEPTANCE GOOD
HARVEST
NET COST (1 OFF)
OTHER AVOIDANCE FACTORS
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$300.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: GLASS'S GUIDE.
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: JOY RIDING DETERRENT.
EFFECTIVENESS: REDUCED RISK OF THEFT
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
10%
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
DISCOUNT RATE
10%
5%
5%
20%
20%
20%
$2.84
$5.04
$1.36
$1.43
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$10.67
NET SAVINGS/YR
$10.67
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.25
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
20%
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
MINOR
HI*: 0.25
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
R25
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
RISK-BENEFIT ANALYSIS METHODS FOR VEHICLE SAFETY DEVICES
FUEL_CUT
POST-CRASH FACTORS (RESCUE)
CATEGORY
FUEL AND ENGINE CUT-OFF IN SEVERE CRASH
ACCEPTANCE GOOD
TAKE-OFF
NET COST (1 OFF)
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$100.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: NOMINAL COST BASED ON SIMILAR KITS SUCH AS HEADLIGHT ALERT.
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: ALL SEVERE CRASHES (FATAL OR INJURY) INVOLVING FIRE. ABOUT 3%
EFFECTIVENESS: MOST FIRES PROBABLY DUE TO RUPTURE OF FUEL TANK OR LINES. PERHAPS 20%
REDUCTION FOR FATAL AND SERIOS, 10% FOR MINOR. NIL FOR PROPERTY.
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
3%
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
3%
3%
3%
20%
20%
10%
0%
$0.85
$1.51
$0.41
$0.00
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$2.77
$2.77
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.19
MINOR
HI*: 0.19
NET SAVINGS/YR
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
P12
Q03
Q04
Australian bus safety standards
A searchable transportation fire safety bibliography
Field data improvements for fire safety research
Q07
A case study of 214 fatal crashes involving fire
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C38
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
HAZ_ACT
POST-CRASH FACTORS (RESCUE)
CATEGORY
HAZARD LIGHT ACTIVATE IN SEVERE CRASH
ACCEPTANCE GOOD
HARVEST
NET COST (1 OFF)
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$50.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: RELATIVELY SIMPLE SWITCHING MECHANISM IF TRIGGERED BY AIRBAG SYSTEM.
(Also see references ESTIMATED COST OF RELAY AND WIRING HARNESS.
CRASH INFLUENCE: SEVERE CRASHES (SERIOUS OR FATAL)
EFFECTIVENESS: REDUCES DANGER FROM OTHER VEHICLES. PROBABLY VERY SMALL REDUCTION PERHAPS 2%.
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
100%
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
100%
0%
0%
2%
2%
0%
0%
$2.84
$5.04
$0.00
$0.00
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$7.88
NET SAVINGS/YR
$7.88
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 1.11
MINOR
HI*: 1.11
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
K54
Q05
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
Road safety strategy: current problems and future options
Relationship between crash casualties and crash attributes
MAYDAY
POST-CRASH FACTORS (RESCUE)
CATEGORY
MAYDAY DISTRESS CALL IN SEVERE CRASH
ACCEPTANCE MODERATE
START-UP
NET COST (1 OFF)
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$500.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: PROTOTYPES ONLY AT THIS STAGE. NOMINAL COST BASED ON SIMILAR ELECTRONIC
(Also see references EQUIP SUCH AS GPS.
CRASH INFLUENCE: ALL SEVERE AND SERIOUS CRASHES.
EFFECTIVENESS: UK DETR ESTIMATES 17% OF FATALS PREVENTABLE BY MORE TIMELY TREATMENT.
ASSUME MAYDAY HALF AS EFFECTIVE AND HALF AGAIN FOR SERIOUS INJURIES.
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
FATALS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
100%
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
100%
0%
0%
8%
4%
0%
0%
$11.36
$10.08
$0.00
$0.00
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$21.44
$21.44
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.30
MINOR
HI*: 0.30
NET SAVINGS/YR
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
K54
Q01
Q05
Road safety strategy: current problems and future options
Design and implementation of an automobile collision notification system
Relationship between crash casualties and crash attributes
Q08
Q09
ENHANCING POST-CRASH SAFETY THROUGH AUTOMATIC COLLISION NOT.
AUTOMATED CRASH NOTIFICATION: DESIGN AND VALIDATION
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C39
SAFETY FEATURE ANALYSIS
FEATURE CODE
DESCRIPTION
READINESS
PHONE
POST-CRASH FACTORS (RESCUE)
CATEGORY
MOBILE PHONE AVAILABLE IN EVENT OF ACCIDENT
ACCEPTANCE GOOD
HARVEST
NET COST (1 OFF)
MAINTENANCE/YR:
$200.00
$0.00
COST NOTE: COST OF HANDS-FREE KIT ONLY.
(Also see references
CRASH INFLUENCE: ALL SERIOUS ACCIDENTS WHERE A NORMAL PHONE IS NOT READILY AVAILABLE.
ASSUME 100%.
IGNORE SAFETY HAZARDS DUE TO HAVING PHONE IN VEHICLE.
EFFECTIVENESS: UK DETR ESTIMATES 17% OF FATALITIES COULD BE PREVENTED BY MORE TIMELY
TREATMENT. ASSUME MOBILE PHONE ONE QUARTER OF THESE AND SERIOUS
INJURIES HALF AGAIN.
FATALS
$142.00
SERIOUS
$252.00
% OF CRASHES INFLUENCED
100%
% EFFECTIVENESS
$ SAVED PER VEHICLE/YEAR
4%
$5.68
CRASH SAVING ANALYSIS
CRASH COST/VEHICLE/YEAR
DISCOUNT RATE
7.00% (OVER 10 YEARS)
BENEFIT/COST RATIO: 0.38
HI*: 0.38
MINOR
$136.00
PROPERTY
$143.00
100%
0%
0%
2%
$5.04
0%
0%
$0.00
$0.00
TOTAL SAVINGS/YR
$10.72
NET SAVINGS/YR
$10.72
(Total savings - Maintenance)
MAIN REFERENCES FOR THIS SAFETY FEATURE
CODE
TITLE
K54
Q08
Q09
Road safety strategy: current problems and future options
ENHANCING POST-CRASH SAFETY THROUGH AUTOMATIC COLLISION NOT.
AUTOMATED CRASH NOTIFICATION: DESIGN AND VALIDATION
* "HI" benefit cost value assumes above average exposure, where applicable
C40
Appendix D - Derivation of cost estimates
ESTIMATED COST OF SAFETY FEATURES
AB_BONNET
BONNET AIRBAG FOR PEDESTRIAN PROTECTION
OE COST:
$500.00
$0.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
NOT IN PRODUCTION. COST BASED ON PASSENGER AIRBAG, ASSUMING VOLUME
PRODUCTION IN LONG TERM.
AB_SMART
SMART AIRBAG SYSTEM
OE COST:
$500.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
NOMINAL COST BASED ON AUTOLIV PAPER.
ABS
ABS BRAKES
OE COST:
$1,000.00
GLASS'S GUIDE TYPICAL VALUE.
AIR_COND
AIR CONDITIONING/CLIMATE CONTROL
OE COST:
$2,000.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$40.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
GLASS' SGUIDE AND SURVEY OF DEALERS
AIRBAG_D
DRIVER AIRBAG
OE COST:
$1,000.00
GLASS'S GUIDE AND DATA GATHERED FOR ANCAP.
AIRBAG_P
FRONT PASSENGER AIRBAG
OE COST:
$550.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
GLASS'S GUIDE AND SURVEY OF DEALERS.
ALC_LOCK
ALCOHOL/DRUG INTERLOCK
OE COST:
$200.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
PROTOTYPES ONLY AT THIS STAGE. BASED ON COST OF SIMILAR GADGETS SUCH AS
HEADLIGHT ALERT.
AUTO_TRANS
AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION
OE COST:
$1,100.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
GLASS'S GUIDE.
BDY_COL
CONSPICUOUS BODY COLOUR
OE COST:
$100.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
NOMINAL COST. COULD BE NIL COST FOR SOME COLOURS. FOR COMPARISON
"METALLIC" PAINT TYPICALLY COSTS ABOUT $200-$300.
CARGO_BAR
CARGO BARRIER
OE COST:
$300.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
SURVEY OF DEALERS FOR COST AS OPTIONAL EQUIPMENT.
CR_INT
CHILD SEAT INTEGRATED
OE COST:
$500.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
NOMINAL COST BASED ON SEAT COSTS AND UPMARKET CHILD RESTRAINTS.
D1
CRASH_REC
CRASH RECORDER
OE COST:
$500.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
BASED ON RTA SPEED CONTROL STUDY.
CRUISE
CRUISE CONTROL
OE COST:
$450.00
SURVEY OF DEALERS AND GLASS'S GUIDE
DRL
DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS
OE COST:
$50.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$2.00
OE COSTS AND ANNUAL MAINTENANCE BASED ON DUTCH AND CANADIAN ESTIMATES.
AFTERMARKET COST ABOUT $200 BASED ON DISCUSSIONS WITH AUTO-ELECTRICIANS.
DRV_LIGHTS
DRIVING LIGHTS
OE COST:
$100.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$5.00
RETAIL PRICE OF BASIC SYSTEMS. MAINTENANCE COST ASSUMES GLOBE FAILURE
EVERY 3 YEARS.
ENG_IMMOB
ENGINE IMMOBILISER
OE COST:
$300.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$5.00
GLASS'S GUIDE.
FOG_LAMPS
FOG LAMPS
OE COST:
$100.00
RETAIL PRICE OF BASIC SYSTEMS. MAINTENANCE COST ASSUMES GLOBE FAILURE
EVERY 3 YEARS.
FOOT_PROT
IMPROVED FOOT PROTECTION
OE COST:
$100.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
NOMINAL COST. IMPROVED DESIGNS SHOULD NOT COST MORE IN LONG TERM.
FUEL_CUT
FUEL AND ENGINE CUT-OFF IN SEVERE CRASH
OE COST:
$100.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
NOMINAL COST BASED ON SIMILAR KITS SUCH AS HEADLIGHT ALERT.
GLASS_LAM
LAMINATED OR SHATTER-PROOF GLAZING FOR ALL WINDOWS
OE COST:
$100.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
ASSUMES THAT WINDSCREENS ARE ALREADY LAMINATED. COST BASED ON ESTIMATED
COST DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LAMINATED AND TEMPERED WINDSCREEN,
EXTRAPOLATED TO REMAINING GLAZING.
HAZ_ACT
HAZARD LIGHT ACTIVATE IN SEVERE CRASH
OE COST:
$50.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
RELATIVELY SIMPLE SWITCHING MECHANISM IF TRIGGERED BY AIRBAG SYSTEM.
ESTIMATED COST OF RELAY AND WIRING HARNESS.
HEAD_PAD
HEAD PROTECTION PADDING
OE COST:
$200.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
NOMINAL COST BASED ON PAPERS FROM 16TH ESV.
D2
HEADL_ON
HEADLIGHTS ON WARNING/AUTO
$50.00
OE COST:
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$20.00
OE COSTS AND ANNUAL MAINTENANCE BASED ON DUTCH AND CANADIAN ESTIMATES.
AFTERMARKET COST ABOUT $150 BASED ON DISCUSSIONS WITH AUTO-ELECTRICIANS.
HEADWAY
HEADWAY RADAR FOR EXCESSIVE CLOSING SPEEDS
OE COST:
$800.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
PROTOTYPES ONLY AT THIS STAGE. BASED ON SIMILAR ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS SUCH AS
CD PLAYER.
HELMET
HELMETS/HEAD BANDS FOR OCCUPANTS
$30.00
OE COST:
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$10.00
BASED ON A LOW COST BICYCLE HELMET (RETAIL VALUE)
HI_GLASS
HIGH TRANSMITTANCE GLAZING
$50.00
OE COST:
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
COULD BE NIL COST IN THE LONG TERMN BUTR ASSUME THE IMPROVED GALZING
TECHNOLOGY IS NEEDED TO CUT HEAT TRANSMISSION WHILE LETTING VISIBLE LIGHT
THROUGH. NOMINAL COST OF $50.
HR_ADJ
ADJUSTABLE HEAD RESTRAINT
OE COST:
$100.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
NOMINAL COST FOR ALL SEATS.
HR_RA
HEAD RESTRAINTS FOR ALL REAR SEATS
OE COST:
$120.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
NOMINAL COST BASED ON 15% OF SEAT COST
HR_RO
HEAD RESTRAINTS FOR REAR OUTBOARD SEATS
$80.00
OE COST:
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
NOMINAL COST BASED ON 15% OF SEAT COST
IRS
INDEPENDENT REAR SUSPENSION
OE COST:
$300.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
GLASS'S GUIDE
ISA
INTELLIGENT SPEED ADAPTION
OE COST:
$800.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
BASED MAINLY ON A COMPREHENSIVE REPORT BY UNI OF LEEDS. COST SUBSTANTIALLY
LESS IF PIGGY-BACKED ON A NAVIGATION SYSTEM.
KNEE_PAD
KNEE BOLSTER/PADDING
OE COST:
$100.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
BASED ON MUARC REPORT CR100.
LOAD_RESTR
LOAD RESTRAINT DEVICES (TETHERS)
OE COST:
$100.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
AUTHOR'S EXPERIENCE PURCHASING THESE ITEMS (RETAIL).
D3
MAYDAY
MAYDAY DISTRESS CALL IN SEVERE CRASH
OE COST:
$500.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
PROTOTYPES ONLY AT THIS STAGE. NOMINAL COST BASED ON SIMILAR ELECTRONIC
EQUIP SUCH AS GPS.
MIRR_DIM
AUTO DIMMING REAR VIEW MIRROR
OE COST:
$200.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
NOMINAL COST BASED ON SIMILAR ELECTRONIC DEVICES.
MIRR_FOG
ANTI FOGGING (HEATED) EXTERNAL MIRRORS
OE COST:
$200.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
NOMINAL COST BASED ON SIMILAR ELECTRONIC EQUIP.
MIRROR_AUTO
EXTERNAL MIRRORS ELECTRICALLY ADJUSTABLE
OE COST:
$200.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
NOMINAL COST BASED ON ETSC REPORT.
NAV_SYS
NAVIGATION SYSTEM (GPS)
OE COST:
$2,000.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
DEALER SURVEY.
PED_IMP
PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY VEHICLE FRONT
OE COST:
$500.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
COST ESTIMATE BASED ON 2 PAPERS AT 16TH ESV (LAWRENCE AND OTUBUSHIN). MID­
RANGE USE TO BALANCE GOVERNMENT AND INDUSTRY ESTIMATES.
PHONE
MOBILE PHONE AVAILABLE IN EVENT OF ACCIDENT
OE COST:
$200.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
COST OF HANDS-FREE KIT ONLY.
POWER_STR
POWER STEERING
OE COST:
$700.00
GLASS'S GUIDE
SB_BUCK
SEAT BELT BUCKLE MOUNTED ON SEAT (FRONT)
OE COST:
$50.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
MAINLY THE ESTIMATED OF COST OF STRENGTHENING SEAT. MOST VEHICLE NOW HAVE
THIS FEATURE.
SB_CR3
SEAT BELT, CENTRE REAR 3-POINT
OE COST:
$100.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
BASED ON PAPER FROM LAP BELT CONFERENCE, 1994.
SB_HARNESS
HARNESS SEAT BELT FOR ADULTS (4PT OR 6PT)
OE COST:
$400.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
NOMINAL COST BASED ON COST OF NORMAL SEAT BELTS AND ALLOWING FOR EXTRA
ANCHORAGE POINTS.
D4
SB_HT_ADJ
SEAT BELT D-RING HEIGHT ADJUSTABLE/AUTOMATIC
OE COST:
$100.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
NOMINAL COST. NEGLIGIBLE COST IN LONG TERM.
SB_ILOCK
SEAT BELT INTERLOCK
$50.00
OE COST:
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
OE COST BASED ON MUARC REPORT CR100 AND ESV15 - TURBELL. THESE ARE
RELATIVELY SIMPLE SYSTEMS.
SB_INFLATE
INFLATABLE SEAT BELT
OE COST:
$200.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
PROTOTYPE TECHNOLOGY. NOMINAL COST BASED ON PASSENGER AIRBAG (40%)
SB_LL_F
SEAT BELT LOAD LIMITERS, FRONT
$20.00
OE COST:
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
ASSUMED SIMILAR TO WEBBING CLAMPS.
SB_LL_R
SEAT BELT LOAD LIMITERS, REAR
$20.00
OE COST:
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
BASED ON MUARC REPORT CR100
SB_PT_F
SEAT BELT PRETENSIONER, FRONT
OE COST:
$100.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
BASED ON MUARC REPORTR CR100.
SB_PT_R
SEAT BELT PRETENSIONERS, REAR
OE COST:
$100.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
BASED ON MUARC REPORT CR100.
SB_WB_R
SEAT BELT WEBBING GRABBERS, REAR
$40.00
OE COST:
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
BASED ON MUARC REPORT CR100.
SB_WG_F
SEAT BELT WEBBING GRABBERS, FRONT
$40.00
OE COST:
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
BASED ON MUARC REPORT CR100.
SEAT_ADJ
ADJUSTABLE DRIVERS SEAT (MULTI-FUNCTION)
OE COST:
$200.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
NOMINAL COST BASED ON 33% TYPICAL COST OF ENTIRE SEAT (~$600) .
SEAT_COOL
COOLED/HEATED DRIVERS SEAT
OE COST:
$200.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
PROTOTYPES ONLY AT THIS STAGE. ASSUMES AIR CONDITIONER ALREADY FITTED.
D5
SEAT_LUM
ADJUSTABLE LUMBAR SUPPORT
$50.00
OE COST:
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
NOMINAL COST ASSUMES SYSTEM CAN BE READILY INCORPORATED ON THE
PRODUCTION LINE.
SEAT_SUB
ANTI-SUBMARING SEAT DESIGN
$40.00
OE COST:
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
BASED ON MUARC REPORT CR100.
SIDE_AB_FH
SIDE AIRBAG - FRONT, HEAD-PROTECTING (CURTAIN)
OE COST:
$550.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
USUALLY PART OF SAFETY PACKAGE. NOMINAL COST BASED ON PASSENGER AIRBAG.
SIDE_AB_RH
SIDE AIRBAG, REAR, HEAD-PROTECTING
OE COST:
$550.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
NOMINAL COST BASED ON PASSENGER AIRBAG.
SIDE_AB_RT
SIDE AIRBAG, REAR, THORAX
OE COST:
$400.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
NOMINAL COST BASED ON PASSENGER AIRBAG (70%)
SIDE_ABFT
SIDE AIRBAG - FRONT SEAT, THORAX
OE COST:
$550.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
BASED ON PROPORTIONAL COST OF A TYPICAL "SAFETY PACK" THAT INCLUDES SIDE
AIRBAGS AND DATA GATHERING FOR ANCAP.
SL_ALARM
SPEED ALARM
OE COST:
$50.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
BASED ON RTA SPEED CONTROL REPORT OF 1996. AFTERMARKET COST ABOUT $100.
ASSUMED THAT OE COST ABOUT HALF OF THIS.
SL_TOP
TOP SPEED LIMITER (SET AT 120km/h
OE COST:
$1.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
ASSUMES THAT ENGINE MANAGEMENT CHIP IS RECODED TO LOWER THE MAXIMUM
SPEED (MOST ARE SET AT 250km/h+). IN THE LONG TERM THIS WILL BE NIL COST SINCE
IT IS SIMPLY AN ALTERNATIVE CHIP OF THE SAME VALUE. A NOTIONAL VALUE OF $1 PER
VEHICLE WAS ASSIGNED TO ENABLE A B/C CALCULATION. NIL MAINTENANCE.
STR_ADJ
ADJUSTABLE STEERING COLUMN
OE COST:
$100.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
NOMINAL COST BASED ON PRODUCTION LINE CHANGE. NEGLIGIBLE IN LONG TERM.
TRACTION
TRACTION CONTROL
OE COST:
$1,000.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
SURVEY OF DEALERS
TYRE_PRES
TYRE PRESSURE MONITORING
OE COST:
$400.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
PROTOTYPE TECHNOLOGY (FOR CARS). BASED ON SIMILAR ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS.
D6
TYRE_RF
RUN FLAT TYRES
OE COST:
$400.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
ASSUMES A NOMINAL $100 EXTRA PER TYRE (IE ABOUT DOUBLE THE COST OF A NORMAL
TYRE)
WIPER_AUTO
WIPERS AUTOMATIC
OE COST:
$100.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
BASED ON AFTERMARKET KITS SUCH AS HEADLIGHT ALERTS.
WIPER_SPD
SPEED SENSITIVE INTERMITTENT WIPERS
OE COST:
$100.00
ANNUAL MAINT.:
$0.00
NOMINAL COST BASED ON COST OF OTHER ELECTRONIC GADGETS. MANY LUXURY
VEHICLES NOW HAVE THIS FEATURE AS STANDARD.
D7
Was this manual useful for you? yes no
Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the work of artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Download PDF

advertisement