This content is not included in
your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.
Empirical Study of the Braking Performance of Pedestrian Autonomous Emergency Braking (P-AEB)
Technical Paper
2020-01-0878
ISSN: 0148-7191, e-ISSN: 2688-3627
This content contains downloadable datasets
Annotation ability available
Sector:
Language:
English
Abstract
Vehicle manufacturers are beginning to improve existing autonomous emergency braking (AEB) algorithms by adding pedestrian identification and avoidance capability. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) has performed tests on eleven such vehicles; data are publicly available and were analyzed for this study. The first objective of this study was to compare Forward Collision Warning (FCW) engagement distance to target, pedestrian automatic emergency braking (P-AEB) brake application time, and incidences of impact across different manufacturers. It was observed that there exists a wide variation in FCW and AEB performance across manufacturers. FCW engagement distance tended to increase with test speed. Time from FCW engagement to AEB engagement was usually less than one second, with some manufacturer-specific variation. Incidences of impact tended to increase with travel speed, although some vehicles tested maintained constant number of incidences of impacts at all speeds tested. FCW tended to engage when the vehicle was farther from the target dummy as test speed increased, although the extent of that variation was vehicle specific. The second objective was to analyze the brake application characteristics of P-AEB, and how it varies across the different vehicles tested. A previous study of IIHS vehicle-to-vehicle AEB test data concluded that the algorithms generally employ a strategy of phased braking, wherein an initial phase of gradually ramping braking force (Phase 1) is followed by a period of steady-state braking (Phase 2). In this paper, the extent to which each P-AEB algorithm exhibits this 2-phase behavior was analyzed, and any unusual behavior was explained. It was observed that Phase 1 peak values and Phase 2 steady-state magnitudes were not strongly correlated to test speed for most vehicles tested, although there were some exceptions. Many test vehicles did not use the full theoretical maximum braking effort in Phase 1 or in Phase 2.
Authors
Topic
Citation
Siddiqui, O., Famiglietti, N., Nguyen, B., Hoang, R. et al., "Empirical Study of the Braking Performance of Pedestrian Autonomous Emergency Braking (P-AEB)," SAE Technical Paper 2020-01-0878, 2020, https://doi.org/10.4271/2020-01-0878.Data Sets - Support Documents
Title | Description | Download |
---|---|---|
Unnamed Dataset 1 | ||
Unnamed Dataset 2 | ||
Unnamed Dataset 3 | ||
Unnamed Dataset 4 | ||
Unnamed Dataset 5 | ||
Unnamed Dataset 6 | ||
Unnamed Dataset 7 | ||
Unnamed Dataset 8 | ||
Unnamed Dataset 9 | ||
Unnamed Dataset 10 | ||
Unnamed Dataset 11 | ||
Unnamed Dataset 12 | ||
Unnamed Dataset 13 | ||
Unnamed Dataset 14 | ||
Unnamed Dataset 15 | ||
Unnamed Dataset 16 | ||
Unnamed Dataset 17 |
Also In
References
- National Highway Traffic Safety Administration https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/nhtsa-iihs-announcement-aeb 2019
- Miholjcic , D. , Fabbroni , M. , and Robinson , R. A Study of the Performance of Automatic Emergency Braking (AEB) Systems Equipped on Passenger Vehicles for Model Years 2013 to 2018 SAE Technical Paper 2019-01-0416 2019 https://doi.org/10.4271/2019-01-0416
- Insurance Institute for Highway Safety February 2019
- Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, Highway Loss Data Institute February 21, 2019
- International Organization for Standardization https://www.iso.org/standard/64111.html 2017
- Insurance Institute for Highway Safety https://techdata.iihs.org 2019
- Cliff , W. and Bowler , J. The Measured Rolling Resistance of Vehicles for Accident Reconstruction SAE Technical Paper 980368 1998 https://doi.org/10.4271/980368