The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) conducted an interesting experiment in 2009 that tested the effectiveness of various in-vehicle monitoring systems on teen drivers. The study monitored the driving habits of 84 teen drivers with different types of in-vehicle technology to determine which ones had the greatest effect on both the teen drivers and their parents.

IIHS installed their own monitoring equipment in the study vehicles that recorded when drivers braked sharply or accelerated suddenly, didn’t use belts, and exceeded speed limits. The monitors used GPS and a satellite modem to transmit the data to a central processing facility and the data was made available for parents to review. In addition to its own monitoring systems, IIHS also installed different types of in-vehicle monitoring that are commercially available to parents of teen drivers. The 84 subjects were randomly assigned into four groups:

"Drivers in groups 1 and 2 heard audible alerts for risky maneuvers. A short, low-pitched buzz sounded for sudden braking and acceleration. A continuous low-pitched buzz sounded when the belt wasn’t buckled and stopped only when it was fastened. Speeding triggered a single beep at 2.5 mph over the posted limit, followed by continuous beeps at increasing pitch and frequency when the teenage drivers exceeded the limit by more than 10 mph.” For drivers in group 1, the information was immediately recorded and transmitted to the parents for review. The drivers in group 2 had the opportunity to correct their behavior and, if corrected within 20 seconds, prevent a report from being sent to their parents.

There were no in-vehicle alerts for drivers in group 3, just website notification. Group 4, the control group, was monitored but had no alerts or web notification.

The different types of monitoring systems included:

• Basic systems: CarChip Pro – http://www.carchip.com/Products/8226.asp, CarChipPro is essentially a black box that plugs into the car’s diagnostic recorder. The system can record speed, mileage, and other data. Once the information is downloaded, it provides parents with a history of the teen's driving. The system may also be set to turn into an alarm if certain speeds are reached or if the driver is braking too hard. The system is a tool to help discuss a teen's driving habits by allowing parents to show them the facts, and how to correct their driving behavior.



• GPS-based systems: Inthinc’s Tiwi - http://www.inthinc.com/products/tiwifamily This system monitors drivers in real-time by providing in-vehicle, verbal feedback to the driver when they are speeding, not wearing their seat belt or driving aggressively. Also, parents can be notified immediately of unsafe driving behavior (through text, voicemail or email) and all info is reported through an Internet-based portal for later review and discussion between parent and teen. This system gives teens a chance to correct their behavior before their parents are notified.



• Video systems: DriveCam: Teen Safe Driver Program package – http://www.drivecam.com/, This in-car camera system records "risky driving behavior" and sends them to DriveCam for third-party assessment of a teen driver's skills. The reports are then sent to parents, who can discuss the driving behavior with their teen.



• Smart keys: MyKey – http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=29172, First seen on the 2010 Ford Focus, the MyKey system is designed to help parents set certain limitations on their Ford vehicles for when their teens are driving. With the configurable key, this system is designed for parents who share their cars with teen drivers. Ford has announced that this technology will be available in all Ford vehicles beginning in 2012. The key features are:
  
  
  
  • Do Not Disturb, prevents use of cell phone and texting while the car is in motion.
  
  
  • Speed Control, limiting the top speed of the Ford vehicle to 80 mph.
  
  
  • Volume control, which allows parents to set a maximum volume level for the car's radio.
  
  
  • Beltminder, an alarm system that mutes the radio and plays a chime every 6 seconds, every minute or every 5 minutes when the seatbelt is unbuckled.
  
  
  • Fuel reminder: alerts the teen that they need to refuel, when fuel is low.
  
  
  
  

The results of the study were as follows:

• Seat belts – Seat belt use was already at a 94% level when the study began but increased among all four groups when the drivers were faced with a continuous buzzing or chiming noise. This has been found to be effective among all age groups.



• Stops and starts – Sudden braking and rapid starts can indicate aggressive driving or inattention to the driving environment. Sudden stops and starts fell in all groups relative to the control group but was especially significant group 1 with immediate web notification to their parents. The effects were even greater among those whose parents received periodic report cards.



• Speeding – Speeding was the most prevalent risky behavior noted among all groups. Speeding up to ten mph over the posted speed limit fell among the groups with alerts in their vehicles but then started to rise over time. Speeding was only significantly reduced among the groups whose parents were notified or those who had a chance to correct the problem before parental notification.



• All risky behaviors – Risky behaviors declined most among the two groups with parental notification but were most noticeable among group 2, the ones who had a chance to correct their behavior before parental notification. Risky behavior was somewhat higher in group 1, apparently because it was too late to correct the behavior and their parents were going to be notified anyway.

Parents will want to consider the results of this study when choosing an in-vehicle monitoring device for their teen driver. More information on the study can be found at: http://www.iihs.org/externaldata/srdata/docs/sr4405.pdf

Labels: gps devices, in-vehicle technology, safe teen drivers, teen driver

New technology that is already showing up in some luxury model cars will be showing up in lower priced models in the next few years. While seemingly futuristic, most of the technology utilizes off-the-shelf technology that is being adapted for new purposes. While offering great hope for preventing collisions, they are also creating some concerns.

In January of 2011, Google announced that a fleet of autonomous Toyota Priuses had been driving the roads and highways of California for more than a year. These vehicles had a human driver to monitor the systems and take over in case of a failure but otherwise were totally autonomous. The only recorded collision with one of the vehicles involved another driver who rear-ended one of the Priuses. Sanford University developed an autonomous Audi that climbed Pikes Peak in Colorado without human control. As a result of these developments, the State of Nevada passed legislation to develop regulations for autonomous vehicles.

Some of the concepts that are already in use or being developed for use in the near future are:

1. Adaptive Cruise Control (ACC) – BMW, Toyota, and Ford all have some form of ACC. This system allows the driver to set a particular speed and then all the driver has to do is steer. The ACC uses radar to determine the speed of vehicles ahead and, if the vehicles get too close, the ACC either warns the driver to slow down or takes over and slows to maintain a safe distance and prevent a collision.

2. Driver Assist System (DAS) – The DAS uses cameras and works with the ACC to keep the vehicle within the proper lane. Again, the system can warn the driver of a lane departure or it can take over, using adaptive braking and steering to keep the vehicle in the proper lane. More complex forms of the system can also recognize street signs and announce information the driver should know or, in the case of speed limits, adjust the speed accordingly.

3. Internet Connectivity – The University of Michigan received a grant to start development of wireless traffic control in Ann Arbor Michigan. Eventually, the program will equip 3,000 cars with short range radio receivers that, along with GPS, will announce their position to other similarly equipped cars. Radio controlled infrastructure, traffic lights, street signs, etc. will also communicate with the vehicles. The goal is to establish a national standard for wireless technology to monitor a vehicle’s position in relation to other vehicles on the road and prevent collisions.

4. Biometric Monitoring Systems-These systems can use cameras to monitor a driver’s attention and sound an alarm if it appears that the driver is distracted or is becoming drowsy. Other elements of these systems can monitor the driver’s heart rate and respiration through sensors in the steering wheel and, if the driver should suffer a heart attack or a stroke, can slow the vehicle and steer it to the edge of the road while calling 911 for help.

5. Alcohol Detection- This system will use respiration monitors either in the headrest or the steering wheel to detect a driver’s blood alcohol content and, if the driver registers the legal limit of .08 BAC, will not allow the car to start. Congress is watching development of this system and may mandate its use in cars as early as 2018.

These systems offer the promise of drastically reducing the current rate of more than five million collisions a year to a fraction of that amount. At the same time, since cars will always know where they are in relation to the other vehicles on the road and can stay in the lane and prevent rear-end collisions, traffic will move a lot faster and more smoothly without the need to build new highways.

There are some concerns about these systems. What happens if there is a failure in the system? The results could be chaotic and possibly tragic. Some have raised the concern of the wireless communication systems being hacked resulting in chaos.

If drivers become reliant on the automatic systems, will they be able to react quickly and properly in the event of a system failure? Some in the aviation industry have recently wondered if pilots are becoming too reliant on automatic flight control systems and have forgotten how to react correctly in an emergency. Their concerns are based on the actions of pilots in crashes in Buffalo NY and an Air France crash over the middle of the Atlantic Ocean. In both cases, once the aircraft left controlled flight, the pilots not only took the wrong actions but actually did the exact opposite of what they should have done.

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood has expressed concerns about the transition period from the current vehicle models to the autonomous vehicles. Once a standard is set and the systems are mandated in new vehicles, there will still be a ten to twenty year period before the older models are taken off the road. There may have to be lanes dedicated to autonomous vehicles, somewhat like the High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes in some cities.

If vehicles are connected wirelessly and autonomous, how will new drivers learn how to drive? We may need to consider new driver training programs for teens and take new drivers out to remote rural areas to learn how to physically drive a car. Without that type of driver training, they won't know how to react properly if the need arises to take over control of the vehicle in an emergency.

Labels: adaptive cruise control, alcohol detection systems, automotive technology, gps devices, wireless traffic control

A new rule was adopted in April by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) that will require installation of Electronic Onboard Recorders (EOBRs) most interstate commercial vehicles by June of 2015. EOBRs are designed to electronically monitor compliance with Hours of Service (HOS) rules by commercial drivers.

The new rule, which was endorsed by major trucking associations, including the American Trucking Association, the National Private Truck Council, and the Truckload Carriers Association, hasn't been welcomed by all. Many independent truckers look on the rule as an unnecessary regulatory intrusion and an economic burden. Safety advocates however, view the rule as long overdue.

Onboard electronic monitoring of a trucker's speed, and time spent in motion have been around for quite some time and many trucking companies have embraced the technology. Trucking company who use the technology can better determine exactly how long a particular delivery takes and adjust their pricing and contractual delivery time more accurately. Another benefit is safety related. Through the use of GPS and engine monitoring systems, trucking companies can monitor whether or not their drivers are obeying speed limits and complying with HOS rules. The safety benefit has shown to be a great benefit to trucking companies in reduced liability for collisions due to speeding or sleep deprived drivers.

The FMCSA, which regulates interstate commercial vehicles, has been slow to adapt to the new technology, relying instead on hand written log books kept by the drivers to show they are in compliance with the mandatory HOS rules. The problem with that is that hand written logs are notoriously easy to fake and it is difficult to tell whether or not a driver has been on the road too long and is possibly sleep deprived.

A year after the federal HOS rules last changed in 2004, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) conducted a study to see if drivers were complying with the rules that limited their time on the road and required specified rest periods. The study found that 25% of the drivers admitted to driving more hours and the number of drivers who reported driving drowsy or falling asleep at the wheel within the previous month rose from 13% to 15%.

Drivers feel great pressure to meet delivery deadlines, especially when the cargo is perishable or otherwise time sensitive. Many drivers feel compelled to speed or to push on, even when they are drowsy, to meet the contracted delivery schedules. The ability to easily falsify log books, for the most part, eliminated the consequences of non-compliance, unless the speeding or drowsy driving led to a crash.

Driving drowsy is a significant danger for commercial drivers. Since most instances of a collision caused by sleep deprivation require self admission by the driver, it is difficult to come up with accurate figures on the true number of crashes caused by drowsy commercial drivers however, based on surveys and the types of crashes (swerving into adjoining lanes etc.), the IIHS determined that at least 13% (18,000) of crashes involving commercial truckers were due to driver fatigue.

The latest figures from 2009 show that there were 3,163 fatalities in crashes involving large trucks. Truck occupants made up only 14% of the fatalities. Drivers of cars and other passenger vehicles made up 70% of the fatalities with the rest made up of pedestrians, bicyclists and motorcyclists. Of those involved in two-vehicle crashes between large trucks and passenger vehicles, 98% of the deaths were the occupants of passenger vehicles.

The new rules requiring electronic monitoring will go into effect in June of 2012 with full compliance required within three years of that date. Both the federal government and trucking associations, say that the EOBR's will make operations smoother and less expensive by eliminating the inefficient paper trail and allowing an automatic download of driver records at state inspection stations. Safety advocates laud the new regulations in the hope that they will help to end instances of fatigued drivers pushing on long after federal regulations say they should have pulled off the road to rest.

Labels: commercial truck drivers, commercial vehicles, gps devices, Onboard electronic monitoring, truck safety

Last month's proposed bill for a statewide ban on texting while driving has successfully passed Texas House, by an overwhelming vote of 124-16. The bill would prohibit the reading of messages while inside the vehicle, but would still allow it if there is a red light, or if the vehicle is completely stopped.

Tests have shown that someone distracted by texting or reading emails is 20 times more likely to get involved in an accident than a drunk driver.

While it has already passed, the bill has yet to undergo a procedural House and Senate review. A motorist caught writing, reading or sending a text message or email would be given a Class C misdemeanor and may be fined from $1 to $200.

This bill excludes the operation of GPS devices and drivers are still allowed to use voice-activated devices that will allow them to send messages.

Certain points were raised, such as the number of other states that have already imposed such a ban, stories shared by legislators with texting-while-driving casualties under their jurisdiction and if this bill would limit personal freedoms.

Sixty percent of the nation already has bans, and why shouldn't Texas be equally concerned? While the bill was modified a bit before voting last Wednesday, legislators still find value that lessening that chance to be distracted while driving, even if it allows them some form of it would be enough of a reason to get this bill passed.

The final reading will be on April 8 and the upper house is expected to support it. The Senate would still have to pass the bill before the law would take into effect later this year.

Labels: avoid distracted driving, banning texting, class c misdemeanor, distracted while driving, gps devices, texas, texting and driving