1 / 25

Making Vehicles Safer for Older Drivers

Making Vehicles Safer for Older Drivers. Michael Perel Office of Applied Vehicle Safety Research National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. 19%. 20%. 61%. 65+. 55-64. younger. Age of New Passenger Vehicle Buyers. 65+. 55-64. Source: 2002 Wards Automotive News.

Rita
Télécharger la présentation

Making Vehicles Safer for Older Drivers

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Making Vehicles Safer for Older Drivers Michael Perel Office of Applied Vehicle Safety Research National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

  2. 19% 20% 61% 65+ 55-64 younger Age of New Passenger Vehicle Buyers 65+ 55-64 Source: 2002 Wards Automotive News

  3. Older Driver Limitations • Slower response time • Problems with glare and vision • Restricted head/neck movement • Can’t focus close • Difficulty attending to multiple tasks • More variable in performance

  4. Percent Crashes/Age Group

  5. Older Drivers Need to Pay Attention to Car Design • Seat belt comfort and ease of using • Visibility through windows • Mirror optics • Minimizing dashboard clutter and confusion • Usability of new technologies • Good headlighting (visibility and glare)

  6. Glare Complaints Sent to NHTSA • Causes annoyance and road rage • Reduces vision • Increases difficulty of using mirrors • Distracts drivers • Limits night driving • It hurts the eyes

  7. Halogen High Intensity Discharge vs Halogen • Color • Blue/white vs. Yellow • HorizontalIntensity • Wide spread vs. limited spread HID

  8. Hypotheses/Findings • HID Blue color: Novelty attracts attention • More attracted to brighter lights • HID Blue color: Eyes more sensitive • Affects discomfort not disability glare • Smaller lamps: Brighter luminance • Not a significant effect compared to intensity

  9. Hypotheses/Findings • Wider Beam Pattern: Drivers exposed to glare longer during meeting scenarios • Intensity influences object detection • Does driver exposure to intensity from different beam patterns affect their glare recovery time? • Under investigation • How good is headlamp aim? • Under investigation

  10. Positives -Allows longer object detection distances -Objects visible next to glare sources Infra-Red Night Vision Enhancement Systems Negatives • May be difficult for older drivers to shift attention between road and display while driving • May be difficult to recognize thermal images

  11. Object Detection While Driving and Using an Infrared Night Vision Enhancement System (NVES) • 14 Subjects (20-50, 66-83) asked to respond when they detected and recognized targets • heated traffic cones • pedestrians • Subjects also asked to detect speed limit signs and stay within 5 mph of speed

  12. Preliminary Findings • For Older Drivers without oncoming glare, pedestrian detection distance increased but not percent of pedestrians detected • For detecting pedestrians in the presence of oncoming glare, NVES did not help Older Drivers • Older Drivers used NVES less often than younger drivers

  13. Adaptive Forward Lighting

  14. The Effects of Driver-Side Mirror Curvature on Gap Acceptance and Vehicle Detection • NHTSA requires flat optics • Field of view limited--requires head turns or time sharing with inside mirror • Curved mirrors increase field of view but minify image and require visual accommodation

  15. Mirror Test Protocol Measured last safe gap for lane change Measured driver detection of location of approaching vehicle

  16. Smaller gaps for curved mirrors; no age effect • Improved detection of adjacent vehicle with non-planar mirrors • Older drivers made ‘better safe than sorry’ mistakes

  17. Implications • Misjudging gap may be overcome by slowing of approaching vehicle • Detection errors for nearby vehicles have immediate crash consequences • Convex mirrors, such as aspherics, may be helpful to older drivers

  18. Advanced Vehicle Crash Warning Technologies • Forward Crash Warning • Lane Change/Blind Spot Warning • Rear Object Detection Systems • Road Departure Warning • Intersection Collision Warning

  19. Advanced Information and Telematics Systems • Navigation • Email, Internet • Audio/Video entertainment • Head Up Displays • Voice controlled information

  20. Vehicle Technologies:A good prescription or a bitter pill for older drivers?

  21. 160 140 Old 120 Young 100 80 Trial Time Average (sec) 60 40 20 0 Remote Control Knob Cell Radio Voice Scrolling Menu Phone Tune (10) (AM/FM) Device Time to Complete Destination Entry While Driving on Test Track

  22. Effects on lane keeping of entering destination in different types of navigation system designs Average Number of Lane Exceedences Per Trial by Device 1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Remote Control Knob Scrollling Menu Voice Cell Phone Radio Tune (10) (AM/FM) Device

  23. Voice system challenge: Hands free, not risk free

  24. Enhancing senior driver safety with compatible vehicle design • Design features compatible with capabilities of average, not superstar seniors • Focus on aiding cognitive limitations, in addition to physical limitations • Keep headlamps aimed and clean • Test drive vehicle before buying • Learn from early adopters of new technologies • Make system reliable and understandable to drivers.

  25. Technical Reports available on www.nhtsa.dot.gov Or email: mike.perel@nhtsa.dot.gov

More Related