Event Data Recorders: The Next Generation of Safety Intelligence

Jennifer Harper OgleGeorgia Institute of Technology

Presentation Overview

Brief History of NHTSA EDR Involvement

NHTSA EDR Working Group Findings

Current NHTSA DRIVE Atlanta Laboratory Project

Privacy Issues Future Directions

Early Vehicle EDR

1970 - Disc Recorder Installed in 1,100 Vehicles 26 Million Miles 23 Crashes Analyzed Limited and Expensive

1995 Automatic Collision Notification

Goal – To use technology to provide faster and smarter EMS response to save lives and reduce disabilities from injuries

Veridian Engineering Erie County, New York 700 Instrumented Vehicles 15 Crashes Analyzed

9-1-1 Dispatch Center

Graphic:Veridian Engineering

1997 NTSB Recommends NHTSA should pursue crash info

gathering using Event Data Recorders

NASA and JPL make similar recommendations later that year

Graphic:Smiths Industries

Early 1998

NHTSA formed an EDR Working Group to pursue fact-finding effort for EDR Technology

Meeting Minutes and Documents can be found at:

http://dms.dot.gov/search/

Docket # 5218

EDR Working Group

MISSION

Facilitate the collection and utilization of collision avoidance and crashworthiness data from on-board Event Data Recorders

EDR Working Group

OBJECTIVES Status of Technology Data to Record Data Collection and Storage Data Retrieval Responsibility of Permanent Record Privacy and Legal Issues Customers of EDR Data Demonstration of Technology

Status of Technology

Current EDR’s limited primarily to GM and a few aftermarket companies

More manufacturers joining in Less than ½ of new vehicles

entering fleet GM stated EDR will be standard

feature within a couple of years

Data to Record – Top Ten Longitudinal and lateral acceleration and PDF

(crash pulse) Location of Crash (GPS) Seat Belt Status # of Occupants and Location Pre-crash Data – Driver Input Time of Crash Rollover sensor Yaw Sensor ABS, Traction Control, Stability Control Air Bag – Activation status, deployment time,

deployment stage

GM Data Stored on OBDParameter

1990DERM

1994SDM

1999SDM

State of Warning Indicator when event occurred (ON/OFF)Length of time the warning lamp was illuminatedCrash-sensing activation times or sensing criteria metTime from vehicle impact to deploymentDiagnostic Trouble Codes present at the time of the eventIgnition cycle count at event timeMaximum Delta-V for near-deployment eventDelta-V vs. time for frontal airbag deployment eventTime from vehicle impact to time of maximum Delta-V State of driver’s seat belt switchTime between near-deploy and deploy event (if within 5 seconds)Passenger's airbag enabled or disabled stateEngine speed (5 sec before impact)Vehicle speed (5 sec before impact)Brake status (5 sec before impact)Throttle position (5 sec before impact)

Graphic:NHTSA

Data Storage/Retrieval

EDR Storage capability varies widely Mfg. Systems limited

300 ms deltaV at 10ms frequency 5 snapshots of throttle, brake,

engine rpm, and speed Single point status of other items

Downloading varies widely

Consensus

NO CONSENSUS NO STANDARDS NO MANDATES

Limited Findings

Real World Crashes Very Different from Laboratory Test Data

1998 Chevy Malibu Crash Underride impact with Heavy Truck

WINSMASH estimate ~ 23 mph EDR measured 50 mph

Real data will help greatly in refinement of safety systems as well as determination of crash cause

Permanent Records

Government vs. Private Industry

…majority leans toward private industry following medical community model

2000 NHTSA EDR Study

Quantitative Properties of the Relationship Between Speeding, Aggressive Driving and Crash Risk

(a.k.a. – DRIVE Atlanta Laboratory)

Conducted by:Georgia Institute of Technology

Objective

Determine extent to which drivers who engage in speeding and aggressive driving are over-involved in crashes, and the specific characteristics of these behaviors that lead to crashes.

DRIVE Atlanta Laboratory

Goal

Target countermeasure programs to control speeding and aggressive driving behavior that lead to crashes.

DRIVE Atlanta Laboratory

Scope: 1100 instrumented vehicles in field for two years

Area: Atlanta, GA Research Agency: Georgia Tech Funding Partners: NHTSA and

Safety Intelligence Systems Data: Driver Behavior Profiles,

Crash Reconstruction Data

Participants Cooperative Agreement with

SMARTRAQ Travel Survey Program

EquipmentMACBOX

Mounting PanCellular

Antenna

GPSAntenna

Manual

Speaker

Microphone

Wiring Harness

MACBOX Components

5 Accelerometers 3 axis for crash detection (+/- 50G) 2 axis for aggressive/extreme driving

detection (+/- 8G) GPS Receiver (1-3 m accuracy)

Dead-Reckoning Gyro and Veh. Speed Sensors

Cellular Phone (TDMA w/ SMS) X86 Central Processing Unit

4 MB Ram 32 MB Compact Flash

MACBOX Components

System Inputs/Hook-ups Ignition sense Vehicle Speed Sensor Seatbelt Status On-Board EDR (optional) Brake (optional) Video (To Be Added) Power (12V Source, 3mA Draw) GPS Antenna Cellular Antenna Hand’s Free Speaker / Microphone for (E9-

1-1)

Data Collection

Trip Level Data – Collected every second of every trip transferred once a week

Extreme Driving Data – Collected only when acceleration thresholds are exceeded transferred with Trip Data

Crash Data – Collected before during after crash and transferred immediately to PSAP and GA Tech

Trip Level Data Elements

Time Date Latitude Speed Heading Longitude Longitudinal Acceleration Seatbelt Status GPS Status Indicators

Extreme and Crash Data

Extreme 10 seconds of dual axis

acceleration at up to 100 Hz 5 seconds before/5 seconds after

Crash 20 seconds of dual axis

acceleration at 300 Hz 10 seconds before/10 seconds

after Calculate deltaV, PDF, Rollover,

etc.

0

20

40

60

80

100

30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70

Speed (mph)

Cu

mu

lati

ve F

req

uen

cy

June 15, 1998

June 22, 1998

June 29, 1998

0

20

40

60

80

100

30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70

Speed (mph)

Cu

mu

lati

ve F

req

uen

cy

June 15, 1998

June 22, 1998

June 29, 1998

Comprehensive Crash Site Data

Point#

Time(GMT)

Speed(mph)

1 22:24:46 21.5

2 22:24:47 19.7

3 22:24:48 14.2

4 22:24:49 7.9

5 22:24:50 7.3

6 22:24:51 1.5

7 22:24:52 0.0

8 22:24:53 0.0

9 22:24:54 0.06

Profile Data Collection

Profile Data Collection

GIS – Data Analysis

Privacy Issues

Who Owns the Data? No Current Case Law Available Vehicle Owner with privacy protection

under Privacy Act – NHTSA Vehicle Owner under current laws,

suggest change to Mfg.- FHWA Standard Insurance policy “[owner]

authorize[s] us to obtain…other pertinent records.” – ISO, Inc.

If data permits personal identification, written consent should be received from owner - VW

Global Safety Data Corp.

Firewall

Aggregate Crash Data

Personal Identifiers and Video

Federal, State, Local

Agencies

Vehicle Manufacturers

Authorized Parties

Law EnforcementInsurers/Fleet owners

Public Safety AgenciesAcademic/Research

Future Directions

On-Board Diagnostic EDR Auto Manufacturers (GM and Others)

Encrypted Video and Crash Pulse Sent Wireless to Central Database (Safety Intelligence Systems)

Safety Intelligence SystemsSafety Intelligence Systems

VectraOffice

HE WLETTPACKARD

Vec traOffice

HEWLETTPACKARD

VectraOffice

HEWLETTPACKARD

INTERNETINTERNET

LMS BLACK BOX

MACboxMACboxTMTM

Mobile Accident CameraMobile Accident Camera

*

PRE-ACCIDENT IMAGES

POST-ACCIDENT IMAGES

POINT OFIMPACT IMAGE

Collision of Bus with Car “triggers”the system, freezing all image data priorto and after accident occurrence

LMS WEBSERVER

SUCCESSIVE IMAGES

ENCRYPTED ACCIDENTIMAGE & MOTIONDATA UPLOAD

CELLUAR/PCS/SMR

FLEET OWNER

GOVERNMENT AGENCYINSURANCE CO. A(Adjuster views image data “immediately” after accident)

IF TELEMETRY SYSTEM FAILS, LMS AGENT DOWNLOADS DATAAND SECURES MACbox

ACCIDENT IMAGE DATA

BASE

Graphic:Safety Intelligence Systems

More Information

Contact DRIVE Atlanta Laboratory Jennifer Ogle – Director

Georgia Institute of Technology

School of Civil and Environmental Engineering

790 Atlantic Drive

Atlanta, GA 30332-0355

404-385-0694