Announcement and Agenda of the Workshop

Introduction

2.

Research issues on Human centred design for safety critical transport systems 3. Presentations

3.1

Welcome and presentation of the main objectives of the DECOMOBIL project 3.2 Transport Safety: A matter of Technology, Organisation and People

3.3

The Pervasive Copilot: How ITS could support a Shared Situation Awareness between road users ?

3.4 Road traffic accident causation and ITS: how do we choose the most effective solutions?

3.5

Vulnerable road Users safety and potential link to automation and future research priorities in the field

3.6

The contribution of resilience to sustainable transport systems

Introduction

In the framework of the DECOMOBIL project, organisation of this scientific seminar on "Human Centred Design for Safety Critical Transport Systems" aims at presenting the scientific problematic in terms of challenges and research issues linked to safety critical systems in transport, in order to discuss with external stakeholders challenges to face, process and approach to develop, methods to use, future priorities and perspectives to identify.

Speakers have been identified as experts in the area, presenting main issues, scientific perspectives and challenges, based upon their high expertises and vision in this area.

The workshop announcement was made firstly via e--mail, disseminated to the HUMANIST VCE mailing list (1100 names), a more focused dissemination was then made to European networks working in European Transport Research (ECTRI, FERSI, FEHRL & EURNEX) who disseminated the information to their member institutes and/or universities. The DECOMOBIL partners were also asked to disseminate the information to their respective networks. Finally, a announcement was also made on the project website (http://decomobil.humanist-vce.eu) and in the project newsletter 8 published in July 2014.

Research issues on Human centred design for safety critical transport systems

The title of the DECOMOBIL final workshop was initially defined as "Sustainable mobility within a resilient road transport system". However, it was decided to reflect in the workshop the conceptual and methodological evolution of the corresponding Task Force from the HUMANIST VCE. Therefore, it was decided to:

• focus on the concept of Resilience Engineering, which is a new approach to safety management in highly complex systems; • get knowledge and experience from other transport modes, particularly aviation and space, in which automation processes are accompanied by an increase in safety and security; Support action to contribute to the preparation of future Community research programme in user centred Design for ECO--multimodal MOBILity --DECOMOBIL

• highlight the increasing complexity of the road transport system and the related safety issues in the way to automation; and • highlight the increasing importance of human--centred design in this era of increasing complexity of technology--based systems. The road transport system is a very dynamic and complex system involving human--machine interaction and human--machine cooperation (in--vehicle assistive technologies), together with numerous social interactions in the traffic. Furthermore, the road transport system is totally open, in opposition to other modes of transport (railway, maritime, aviation) in which highly trained and competent professionals drive or pilot different vehicles. Within the road transport system, there are an enormous variety of road users (drivers, riders and pedestrians; novice, experienced, young, old and mobility--impaired; professionals, etc.) evolving on the road environment. Such variety, just covered by traffic laws and the corresponding supervision, as well as the diversity of behaviours in the road environment lead to an increased dynamics and complexity of the road transport system. Being safety a main concern in the frame of a sustainable mobility, a new approach based in a human--centred design integrating the users, technology and organization seemed to be the way to achieve a sustainable mobility within a resilient transport system. Therefore, it was decided to bring to the workshop this new approach, highlighting the contribution from other highly complex transport systems and the last developments in the frame of driving with an intelligent co--pilot, as well as an understanding of accidents causation and the importance of ITS to prevent from human transient factors and other risks. Then, the contribution of Resilience Engineering to the sustainability of the road transport system was stressed as a framework for the enhancement of overall system safety and efficiency, taking into account the challenges faced by transport stakeholders. Thus, under the title of "Human Centred Design for Safety Critical Transport Systems", the workshop was completed with:

• an approach related to the safety of vulnerable road users and its potential link to automation, as well as the future research priorities in the field; • an analysis of safety vs. ecomobility highlighting research priorities; Finally, Myriam Coulon--Cantuer, the EC Project Officer, presented the view of the EC on the future research challenges for ICT and transport. The pervasive technologies approach:

Presentations

• Pervasive Computing is a recent field of research (end of 90s) in Computer Sciences, Electronics & Telecommunication

• A "New Vision" on interactions between human beings and all electronic systems in the near future

• Based on "Ambient Intelligence" and "Communications" between interconnected devices (the "Every--ware" concept of Greenfield, 2006)

• Ambient intelligence refers to electronic environments that are sensitive and responsive to the presence of human (they are "aware of us" and they have to "take care of us")

The pervasive technologies approach based upon Ambient Intelligence:

The pervasive computing want to propose Human--centred Systems that are (Aarts et al. ⇒ Could be a Support for a "Shared Situation Awareness" (between road users) and "Global traffic Management" ITS

Conclusion

• Design a Pervasive Copilot seems to be complex task, however: • Multi--level scheme from immediate road user errors at top to more remote causes at bottom • Based on standard of a "reasonable road user" • Assigned to each participant in a case conference • A chain of contributory factors for a driver might be: "failure to yield --minor into major" caused by: "failed to look at all", caused by: "impairment -alcohol" and "fatigue" At the main explanatory level, the most common explanations of driver and rider failures were: At the second level, which examined behaviours that increased the risk of an accident, there were some interesting differences by age and sex:

• "Driving too fast for the situation" was more commonly coded for younger drivers and much more so for males (but only coded for 5% of drivers and riders) • "Following too close" was less common for older drivers (40+) Human make errors; systems reduce errors and protect against the consequences of error:

the latest version of the Swiss cheese model (Reason, 2008) The crash sequence: matching human error and crash protection (Tingvall, 2006) Support action to contribute to the preparation of future Community research programme in user centred Design for ECO--multimodal MOBILity --DECOMOBIL So maybe we can infer that… • Systems that increase driver compliance (e.g. Intelligent Speed Adaptation (ISA0, alcolocks, etc.) will have wider impacts than systems that focus on particular errors (e.g. FCW, LDW)

-EuroFOT estimates that FCW reduces injury accidents by approx. 4% on motorways -ISA--UK predicts up to 29% reduction in injury accidents with ISA

• Where a crash is imminent, automated intervention such as AEB can contribute (= a final system defence with the possibility of human error being eliminated)

• We perhaps need to go back to first principles and create systems that really support the driver ITERATE based on Carsten ( 2007): the goal is to keep risk of violation and error low and maintain safety margins.

Conclusions

• Systems that prevent deviation from normal (rule--compliant) driving will tend to be more effective than systems that support drivers nearer to a crash event • There is a role for systems that take over from the driver when a crash is imminent • For driver support, we need to focus on driver state and managing task demand to prevent overload and underload • We need to be wary of technology for technology's sake Support action to contribute to the preparation of future Community research programme in user centred Design for ECO--multimodal MOBILity --DECOMOBIL

Vulnerable road Users safety and potential link to automation and future research priorities in the field

Stella Nikolaou, Researcher, CERTH/HIT, Greece

Full video and slides of the presentation available at http://decomobil.humanist-vce.eu/Downloads.html

Vulnerable Road Users: the need • In Europe, 42% of the overall accident fatalities involve VRU (ERSO, 2010).

• 45% of all seriously injured persons are vulnerable road users. Within urban areas the vulnerable road users make up 67% of the seriously injured (European Commission, 2013). • Although the total number of fatalities and severe injuries due to traffic accidents is decreasing, the number of VRU that are killed and wounded in traffic tends to decrease in a much slower pace (ERTRAC, 2011).

• Vulnerable road users are benefiting less from improved road safety (IRTAD, 2014). Establish the scientific basis for realizing Vision Zero in the EU before 2050, taking into account all phases from normal, assisted or automated driving to post--crash safety.

Objective

Establish the scientific basis for realizing Vision Zero in the EU before 2050, taking into account all phases from normal, assisted or automated driving to post--crash safety.

Priorities

Safety of the Vulnerable Road User (VRU)

• Need for incident, near--miss and pre--crash data related to Vulnerable Road Users (incl. single accidents). • Development of advanced in--car systems (also specific solutions for trucks and buses) to avoid or mitigate conflicts with VRUs.

• Specificities of PTW's on application and services and their interaction with other road users. • Vehicle drivers/riders, pedestrians and cyclists may modify their behaviour based on their perception and understanding of the automated/manual driving behaviour of vehicles they encounter. • May be associated with negative safety outcomes and potential disruption of transport systems

Objectives

• Investigate road user (pedestrians, cyclists and drivers) behaviour in the context of a vehicle fleet with heterogeneous levels of vehicle automation.

• Investigate how to improve the ways in which automated vehicles can communicate their intentions to other road users so that manoeuvres are in line with human drivers' expectations (and conduct evaluation studies of proposed techniques).

• Investigate opportunities for misuse/abuse of automated vehicles that may result in unanticipated adverse consequences.

Outcomes

• Produce guidance on optimisation of road transport systems with changing heterogeneous levels of automation over time based on an understanding of road user behaviour in this context and effective, intuitive communication of automated vehicle intention.

• Development of strategies to prevent misuse/abuse of automated road transport systems by other road users.

The PROS approach project Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs (Brundtland Commission, 1987). Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development. United Nations).

Resilience engineering

The intrinsic ability of a system to adjust its functioning prior to, during or following changes and disturbances, so that it can sustain required operations under both expected and unexpected conditions (Hollnagel, E.: "Prologue: the scope of resilience engineering". Hollnagel et al. (eds.): "Resilience engineering in practice --A guidebook". Ashgate, 2011).

The challenges

Sustainability challenges are particularly prominent in transport systems, not just as a consequence of increasing energy prices, but also due to their critical economic and social function, as well as their yet considerable reliance on public funding:

• Growth of either passenger numbers or freight loads

• Numerous stakeholders (i.e. Maintenance and other service providers) that generate strong operational interdependencies

• Demands for higher energy efficiency in view of reductions in terms of environmental impacts and costs

• Demands for enhanced safety, security and overall service quality

• Demands for higher inter--modality and accessibility

• Demands for increased flexibility in transport services (costumer focused)

• Demands for higher economical and ecological sustainability (reduced reliance on public funding, reduce environmental impacts, among others)

• Transport operators and infrastructure managers must undertake a wide range of different courses of action within various management aspects (safety, security, finance, reliability, customer satisfaction, quality., business continuity...)

• Beyond the challenges that such actions pose in themselves, the coordination and integration between such a diversity of needs is rapidly becoming a critical issue for every transport stakeholder

• These management aspects can often become contradictory (i.e. the need to prevent access to restricted areas by fencing versus the need to ensure access to emergency response crews and maintenance...)

Resilience towards sustainability

Integrated approaches:

• The critical role of system interdependencies and the need for an integrated management of numerous aspects (safety, security, quality...)

• The need to take into account high variability and uncertainty factors

• Sustainability relies on a continuous ability to provide transport services whilst adapting to ever changing resource limitations and operational environments (i.e. economical and social, weather and climate...)

• Resilience engineering is based on adaptability capacities and on continuously balancing safety principles against efficiency ones (the ETTO principle)

Resilience towards sustainability

• Resilience engineering offers an adequate framework for the development of more sustainable transport systems • Through an understanding of the variability of system interactions and the overall dynamics of its interdependencies, valuable answers to research questions earlier raised may be produced • A response to current challenges and demands, transport stakeholders must be capable of seizing every opportunity to innovate and enhance efficiency, whilst ensuring high safety and quality standards • Beyond minimising the consumption of financial, human, material and energy resources, efficiency gains must consist on generating the ability to flexibly allocate available resources, in order to continuously adjust to fast pace changing operational environments.

• A shift in social and economic paradigms must be undertaken

• Whatever that may come to be, it currently requires a new approach to understanding complexity and high dynamics, and to accepting their inherent uncertainty and underspecified nature

The European Union's yearly reduction in road deaths from 2010 to 2010 was no more than 4.2% on average. To reach the set goal we should have had an annual reduction of 7.4%.

The challenges at a European level

• Continuous reduction of traffic accident fatalities, as well as focus on injuries reduction. The annual cost due to road accidents is 180 bn€. A reduction of 20% is possible.

• Only in one year, in ΕU--27, more than 1.000 children are killed in traffic accidents.

The reduction of children--victims in accidents (ages 0--15) of up to 60% is targeted by the EU for 2020.

• The accidents with motorcyclists victims constitute the 16% of the total in ΕU--25, while they constitute only 2% of the circulation. Thus, a motorcyclist has 13 times greater risk to be killed on the road than a car passenger.

• The risk of death of pedestrians is 9 times greater than the one of private vehicles passengers; whereas the risk of death of bicyclists is 7 times greater.

• 60% of the EU residents live in urban areas and although the mean speeds are low, about 2/3 of the road fatalities take place there. Thus, emphasis should be given in traffic safety within the cities and rural agglomerations.

• The differences between traffic safety level among EU countries can vary up to 500%! Transfer of best practices among countries, as well as the adoption of common policies and standards is thus highly recommended.

Traffic Safety: Putting the legos in place

• Traffic safety risk emanates from the cooperation of three main factors: driver-vehicle--traffic environment.

• Measures in order to support/improve any of these factors, may have negative side-effects to the others.

• According to the risk homeostasis theory (Wilde 2001), the enhancement of safety level of a vehicle leads sometimes drivers to change their driving profile, undertaking more risky maneuvers, in order to keep their conceived level of risk constant.

• Thus, optimal measures to improve to all three contributors or build upon the strengths and interactions between each combined environment.

• Any change in the type of vehicles and infrastructure due to environmental reasons will also impact traffic safety and vice versa.

The two pillars of Road Safety and Infrastructure:

I. Forgiving Roads

A forgiving road is defined as a road that is designed and built in such a way as to interfere with or block the development of driving errors and to avoid or mitigate negative consequences of driving errors, allowing the driver to regain control and either stop or return to the travel lane without injury or damage.

II. Self--explanatory Roads

Self--explanatory road is defined as one that is designed and constructed to evoke correct expectations from road users and elicit proper driving behaviour, thereby reducing the probability of driver errors and enhancing driving comfort.

We are living in a cooperative world so also traffic environment is cooperative: C2X and other 3G/4G communication are part of the solution. Integration of communication is very challenging into integrated and safet schemes.

Examples of Cooperative Systems :

• Speed adaptation (V2I and I2Vcommunication)

• Reversible lanes due to traffic flow (V2I and I2V)

• Local danger / hazard warning (V2V)

• Post crash warning (V2V)

• Cooperative intersection collision warning (V2V and V2I)

W L A N , D S R C

VRU Safety: Towards Integrated Safety

Although ADAS systems exist since long, the integrated safety is just beginning.

Sensors and integrated functions are needed to manage complex situations Integrated safety is part of steps towards automated driving Cooperative Systems -Potential Impacts

• Dynamic speed adaptation shows most potential (--7%) to decrease fatalities.

• The cooperative intersection collision warning and local danger warning comes next (--4%).

• The potential of injury prevention is higher for cooperative inter--section collision (--7%) followed by dynamic speed adaptation (--5%).

• The reversible lane system decreases the fatalities and injuries on the sections equipped. However, a very small part of the motorway and urban network are suitable for the system.

• The SAFESPOT impact analysis study showed considerable safety effects resulting in 7.1 % less fatalities for the V2V case, and 8.9 % for the V2I case, assuming a 100 % penetration rate of cooperative systems into the vehicle fleet (Schindhelm, 2010). The study found that pedestrian and bicyclist crashes involving both HEVs and ICE vehicles commonly occurred on roadways, in zones with low speed limits, during daytime and in clear weather, with higher incidence rates for HEVs when compared to ICE vehicles.

• Dutch research has shown that quieter trams and the use of mp3 players both lead to a slight increase in road accidents (Stoop, 2008).

Are HEV Too Quiet to Be Safe for Pedestrians? • In 11/2008, the American Society of Automotive Engineers created a special committee to examine whether hybrid cars should be made more audible for the sake of pedestrians, particularly the blind ones.

• Blindfolded subjects, who listened to recordings of cars approaching at 5 mph, could locate the hum of a Honda Accord 36 feet away and a Prius, running in electric mode, 11 feet away, without any traffic noise or other distractions (L. D. Rosenblum, 2009).

When added some realistic background noise to the recordings, Prius was mostly undetected; the Accord was detected 22 feet away.

Adding sound to HEV Sound producing devices is a viable option for increasing the auditory warning time of an electric motor powered vehicle. The engine noise was the preferred sound as an auditory warning for the vehicle (Goodes et al, 2009).

Lotus Engineering has developed a system to synthesize external sound from electric and hybrid vehicles.

Adding sounds to vehicles might seem counterintuitive, particularly since there are also concerns about noise pollution, especially in urban environments

Related research on battery recharge

• Project: Magnetic slots car: This research is about transferring power from the road, but taking the motor itself outside of the vehicle and using a linear motor.

• Project: Korean OLEV: Cars with no batteries use power from inductive lines.

Volvo considerations:

• In normal driving an advanced monitoring system is required to regulate cooling so that each battery cell maintains optimum operation and if overheating does occur to shut down the battery to prevent fire risks.

• Determination of technical upgrades that will be required to safety features like chassis architecture, Dynamic Stability and Traction Control systems to cope with the extra weight of battery packs in electric vehicles and the optimum location for those packs.

• Development of avoidance systems such as Collision Warning with Full Auto Brake and/or City Safety so they can be powered by electric vehicles regardless of the condition of the batteries (for example so their performance does not deteriorate if the batteries are low on power).

• In the event of a crash, protecting the batteries and isolating them from the passenger crumple zones so occupants are protected should the heavy batteries move, shutting off the batteries after the collision to prevent the risk of a short circuit and venting any gas that may leak from a shattered battery.

• A security cut--out (like a home circuit--breaker) that shuts down and isolates the batteries in a collision if the current travels in the wrong direction (such as when two wires are crushed together in an impact).

And vice versa…safety gaps may doom the environment…

• Large quantities of dangerous goods (DG) are daily being transported in an uncontrolled environment (transportation network)

• DG represent about 5% of all goods transported on roads -more than half of this share being attributable to flammable liquids.

• Accident consequences of simple collisions can lead to further undesirable scenarios like:

• Fires (jet fire, pool fire, flash fire)

• Explosions (Boiling Liquid Expanding Vapour Explosion -BLEVE, Vapour Cloud Explosion -VCE)

• Gas Cloud Formation (toxic release)

Support action to contribute to the preparation of future Community research programme in user centred Design for ECO--multimodal MOBILity --DECOMOBIL

• Risk for the driver, the surrounding population, the other road users and the infrastructure

• DG transport -Beyond accidents

• Environmental damage due to traffic pollution in queues, noise pollution and wasted energy (fuel) during queuing.

• As a result of accidents, traffic jams but also road works and other unexpected events but also due to the different national regulations and individual infrastructure policies (i.e. DG vehicles are not allowed in Gotthard tunnel), truck drivers are often forced to follow secondary roads and alternative routes.

• The actual accident risk and impact when using secondary roads or other alternative ways is not calculated.

• No particular guidance on the safest alternative when drivers need to re--route.

• The business chain is not notified about routes and incidents; so, unable to react when needed.

• Big delays in infrastructures -no passage priority (creating more delays…).

• No automatic check of vehicles, cargo and driver (more delays, frequently reason for non--passage)

Technological Responses to Priorities

• Routing: use of a multiparametric decision support system to obtain optimum routes (also in case of re--routing)

-Weighted Criteria: Safety (Individual/Societal), Security, Cost, Environmental Damage -Taking into account local rules & restrictions, traffic and environmental data, vehicle and cargo status

• Monitoring: use of advanced telematics to monitor dangerous goods movements.

• Logistics Chain Notification: notify all involved actors of the Logistics Chain what they should be aware of in case of an incident -fast reaction and guidance

• Enforcement/emergency through telematic solution.

• Automatic (pre--trip) Passage Priority to reduce delays (critical also for Vulnerable Goods transport).

Towards a real safe and environmental friendly driving environment…. Following the above--referred presentations, it was intended to give rise to discussions among presenters and the audience. Debate was initiated around the notion that technology does not provide in itself the means for heightened systems safety and efficiency. While the idea that it has such potential often prevails, the experience of aeronautics and space industries provides many examples that the continuous adding of more layers of technology has more than anything else contributed for the shift of systems control towards higher and more complex levels. Discussion was led by issues and challenges regarding the implementation of a more adequate approach and how the necessary changes in practices, processes and structures could be brought about. Following a few questions raised by the chairman, the discussion started focusing mainly on:

View of the EC on the future research challenges for ICT and transport

1. The road transport system and its complexity highlighting the great variability of road users and their behaviour; Road users under major concern (VRU) were specially addressed, particularly in what regards ITS relevant functions; 2. Inputs from aviation and space onto the road transport system, particularly in what concerns the undertaken automation of driving; the novel conceptual approach to HCD was raised as an important framework for the research on automated driving;

3. The Resilience Engineering approach and its view towards a tolerant transport environment instead of basing safety and accident prevention in what already happened; a better understanding of the system components (people, organisation and technology) on their reciprocal influences could represent an interesting contribution to the approach; 4. ITS and their different functions, focusing at technologies developed to act as a co-pilot and their potential contribution to improve safety; pros and cons of some in-vehicle technologies were also raised;

Following an interesting discussion, the round table was closed.

Conclusion and future priorities

From left to right: Lucile Mendoza, Annie Pauzié, Anabela Simoes.

The DECOMOBIL final workshop through presentations and discussions highlighted the increasing complexity of the road transport system and the related safety, security and sustainability concerns in an era dominated by a fast technologic development. The Human Centred Design approach directed to the set composed by technology, organization and people, represents a theoretical and conceptual framework for further research fitting the present H2020 challenges in the field of mobility and the European targets in the transport sector for 2020--2050.

The following research priorities were identified in the frame of the DECOMOBIL road map stressing the importance of electromobility. However, some additional and specific research needs raised from the final workshop, being some of them very close to the ones defined in the project:

• A safe and sustainable mobility of people and goods addressing environmental,

3. 1

 1 Welcome and presentation of the main objectives of the DECOMOBIL project Anabela Simoes, Professor, CIGEST & Annie Pauzié, Research Director, Ifsttar After welcoming the participants to the University of ISG/Business & Ecnomics School, in Lisbon, the main purposes of the DECOMOBIL project have been presented to the audience. Support action to contribute to the preparation of future Community research programme in user centred Design for ECO--multimodal MOBILity --DECOMOBIL 3.2 Transport Safety: A matter of Technology, Organisation and People Dr. Guy Boy, University Professor, Director, Human--Centered Design institute, Florida Institute of technology; IPA Chief Scientist, Human--Centered Design, NASA Kennedy Space Center, Fellow of the Air and Space Academy, USA. Full video and slides of the presentation available at http://decomobil.humanist-vce.eu/Downloads.html Previous process of automation was from Hardware to Software, corresponding to the accumulation of artificial functions to mechanical structure: Nowadays and in the future, modeling, simulation, connectivity support the process of developing Tangible Interactive Objects (TIO) and going then from software to hardware. The smartphone: an example of Tangible Interactive Objects. 3.3 The Pervasive Copilot: How ITS could support a Shared Situation Awareness between road users ? Dr. Thierry Bellet, Researcher, Ifsttar--LESCOT (Ergonomics and Cognitive Science Laboratory), France. Full video and slides of the presentation available at http://decomobil.humanist-vce.eu/Downloads.html 1) The Situational Awareness issue 2) How driving aids can support Drivers' Situational Awareness? 3) How future ITS based on Pervasive Technologies could support a "Shared Situation Awareness" between road users ? ⇒ The "Pervasive Copilot" Situation awareness: a central process to drive a car: Example of erroneous situation awareness due to a misperception (visual distraction) How to support Driver' Situation Awareness during driving ? • Benefits : ü Can support and increase Situation Awareness ü Can avoid (e.g. warn the driver) local risks • Limits : ü A set of Individual Systems => "local SA support" ü Individually designed and can be in conflict ü Not always adapted to specific needs of the driver ü Towards the Adaptive and Integrative Copilot --the "Integrative & Adaptative" co--pilot: The "Adaptative Copilot": • Based on Real--Time Analysis (Monitoring) of : o The Driving Situation o The Driver's Behaviour • In order to Automatically Assess in real time if: o It is or not necessary to assist the driver in the current situation ? o If Yes, Which kind of help is needed (Type & Mode of assistance)? • To Provide an assistance specifically adapted to THIS driver in THIS driving situation Towards the "Pervasive Copilot"

  2001): • Embedded and Interconnected: networked devices are integrated into the environment and communicate • Context--Aware: Pervasive device can recognize the user and the situational context of device use • Personalized: they can be tailored to users • Adaptive: they can change their response accordingly user needs and context • Cooperative and Anticipatory: they can anticipate user needs and collaborate without any explicit demand The Problem of "Un--Shared Situation Awareness The driver point of view The motorcyclist point of view Future challenge: The Pervasive COPILOT ITS based on "Ambient Intelligence" Support Technologies ü Embedded Sensors in Vehicles (V--V) & Telecommunications ü Interconnected Road Infrastructure (V--Infrastructure)

  Vulnerable road users fatalities in 2010: VRU iMobility Working group main obectives: • Analyse the know--how, background data and current market & near--market solutions/ trends • Analyse the most significant studies, researches, projects and field studies involving new concepts on VRU safety • Identify research gaps and priorities for future research initiatives • Promote the identified solutions, and contribute to the objectives and targets related to VRU safety in the "Horizon 2020" work--programmes • Support European research initiatives in the field of VRU safety VRUITS Main Objectives: 1. Assess societal impacts of selected ITS, and provide recommendations for policy and industry regarding ITS in order to improve the safety and mobility of VRUs; 2. Provide evidence--based recommended practices on how VRU can be integrated in Intelligent Transport Systems and on how HMI designs can be adapted to meet the needs of VRUs, and test these recommendations in field trials. ITS applications selected for assessment: Integration of VRUs in cooperative traffic systems 1. Device, which is detected by interrogators in vehicles and/or infrastructure, sending none or limited data a) "tag"--like device b) Smartphone (use of Bluetooth or WiFi signals) • Problem: no standardised wireless protocol available, providing low latency and reliable location detection in dense dynamic environments 2. Device, supporting standardised cooperative applications a) Uni--directional (only transmission of messages) b) Bi--directional, allowing warning of VRUs • Requires, a/o Support action to contribute to the preparation of future Community research programme in user centred Design for ECO--multimodal MOBILity --DECOMOBIL • Miniaturisation and power optimisation • on--device intelligence and in--vehicle fusion with other sensors • New HMI concepts for warning VRUs • Integration in C--ITS standards Cooperative VRU Protection Concept EuroNCAP 2018: Scenarios comprehend pedestrians in intersections, in a curve road, in good and bad visibility conditions, as well as cyclists. VRU WG Research Priorities (2013--2014) -Mapping to H2020 Transport WP 2013--14 § In--depth accident analysis for VRU's (Reflected in MG3.4) § Large--Scale Field Operational Tests on Vulnerable Road Users (Not reflected in the 2014--2015 WP -Consideration for 2016--2017 WP?) § Cooperative Systems for PTWs safety enhancement (Reflected in MG3.4) § ICT--based advanced in--vehicle and infrastructure--based technologies and smart applications to protect VRU's (Reflected in MG3.4) § Advanced ITS technologies for the enhancement of children safety in road transport (Reflected in MG3.4) § Methodologies for assessment of Intelligent Transport Systems on Vulnerable Road Users safety (Reflected in MG3.4) § Sustainable riders' training aiming at safe and cost efficient behaviour (not directly addressed in MG3.4) § Interaction of future automated vehicles with compatible vehicles and Vulnerable Road Users (Issue for MG3.6!) VRU WG --Recommendations & Priorities 2015--16 § Large--Scale Field Operational Tests for Vulnerable Road Users § Specificities of PTW's on application and services and their interaction with other road users § Integrated safety for children, elderly and persons with reduced mobility as pedestrians, cyclists and Ebike users. § Interaction of VRU's with automated and non--automated vehicles (promoted in cooperation with the Human Factors Subgroup of the Automation WG) Research & Innovation (R&I) WG --Research Priorities 2015--16 -Road Safety Objective

  Support action to contribute to the preparation of future Community research programme in user centred Design for ECO--multimodal MOBILity --DECOMOBIL• Integrated safety for children, elderly and persons with reduced mobility as pedestrians, cyclists and ebike users.• Interaction of VRU's with automated and non--automated vehicles with various uptake rates Large--Scale Field Operational Tests for VRUs• Investigation and refocus of FOT methodologies, equipment and systems used in the automotive FOTs and their adaptation to VRU--specific applicability • Adaptation and design of proper data handling procedures and data analysis, matching the needs of VRU accident causation • Naturalistic riding conditions cast an additional requirement on ITS for VRU development and availability due to issues such as cost, space, powering and HMI element and safe use Vehicle technology for 2--wheeler safety (PTW, bicycles, pedelecs)• Active safety systems for two--wheelers to avoid or mitigate collisions. Systems can be cooperative (e.g. ITS systems) or non--cooperative. • Passive safety systems to make a crash as forgiving as possible. Stand--alone and combined in--vehicle systems and personal equipment (e.g. garment and helmet).• Visual (e.g. lighting) and/or digital (e.g. cooperative systems) conspicuity enhancement should improve visibility and detectability of vehicles and anticipate potential critical or hazardous situations.• Adaptive HMI and decision support systems to properly communicate prioritised information from all ARAS and OBIS and other ITS systems to the VRU.• Safety solutions dedicated to particular user categories such as elderly riders, impaired persons (e.g. mobility scooters), novice and returning riders. Automation WG -Human Factors SG, Investigating road user behaviour in the context of automation heterogeneity across the vehicle fleet Background • For the next fifty years the road vehicle fleet will comprise of vehicles with different automation.

  Priorities in Road Safety Research -Human § Behaviour in traffic -Making us safer road users § Improving protection in crashes -Counteracting our fragility Priorities in Road Safety Research -Vehicle § Technological leadership in safe future vehicles -From assisted to automated driving § Technological leadership in safe future vehicles -Improving protection in crashes § Vehicle technology for two--wheeler safety Priorities in Road Safety Research -Infrastructure & Traffic System § Safe roads design -Making them self--explaining, forgiving and interactive to the benefit of all road users § Advanced road maintenance concepts for safety § Innovation in ITS infrastructure for safety -Making use of the connected world § Traffic management for road safety Priorities in Road Safety Research -Traffic Safety Analysis & Assessment § Understanding what is happening on the road and linking it to measures § Evaluating systems VRU safety --Roadmap Support action to contribute to the preparation of future Community research programme in user centred Design for ECO--multimodal MOBILity --DECOMOBIL 3.6 The contribution of resilience to sustainable transport systems Pedro--Ferreira, Researcher, ISG/DREAMS Full video and slides of the presentation available at http://decomobil.humanist-vce.eu/Downloads.html 1. Sustainability

•••

  Relief from small errors* • Economical utilization of machines • Precision in the handling of routine tasks* Increased Increase in mental workload due to additional monitoring of systems* • Over--reliance, complacency; willing to accept results without scrutinizing them first* • Silent failures • Reduced alertness of operator, by offering a false sense of security* * Human related NEW TYPES OF ACCIDENTS! Road Automation & Safety: Considerations • Human--centered definitions of levels of automation • Definition of hand--off processes between driver and system and how to test them • Vehicles with different levels of automation ð Challenges in HMI design • Secondary tasks and influences on cockpit design • Can disengaged driver be brought back to attention, and how soon? • Matching driver mental model to actual system concept of operations Support action to contribute to the preparation of future Community research programme in user centred Design for ECO--multimodal MOBILity --DECOMOBIL Vehicles are changing too: Are electric powered vehicles more dangerous than conventional ones? • NHTSA Technical Report: Incidence of Pedestrian and Bicyclist Crashes by Hybrid Electric Passenger Vehicles (09--2009).

•

  others Panel of speakers from left to right: Guy Boy, Oliver Carsten, Stella Nikolaou, Angelos bekiaris, Pedro Ferreira, Thierry Bellet (The previewed roundtable was finally chaired by Pedro Ferreira instead of Prof. Guy Boy, due to last minutes constraints).

  economic and efficiency issues • A full automated road transport infrastructure allowing for communication, localization and control (Cooperative ITS) • Study of the automated driving addressing specific conditions and transition behaviour • Safety and security issues in the field of transport (different modes) • Variability of road users and safety issues, addressing particularly VRU

  View of the EC on the future research challenges for ICT and transport

	4.	Discussion at the round table
	5.	Conclusion and future priorities
	ANNEX 1: List of participants
	ANNEX 2: Evaluation of the workshop
	ANNEX 3: Full presentations of the workshop

3.7 Safety vs Ecomobility, Setting priorities right

3.8

3.4 Road traffic accident causation and ITS: how do we choose the most effective solutions? Prof. Oliver Carsten , Institute for Transport Studies , University of Leeds, UK Full video and slides of the presentation available at http

  Young drivers are over--involved in loss of control crashes • Elderly drivers are over--involved in intersection crashes In--depth study aiming at looking at the causation of urban road accidents with particular emphasis on the role of human factors (Study cases: 1254 accidents in north Leeds in 1988, Total of 2454 immediate participants).

	Contributing factors :
	• Several support technologies already exist:
	o Embedded sensors (for both Car and Road Infrastructure) ://decomobil.humanist--
	o Driving Aids (to be better integrated) vce.eu/Downloads.html
	o Traffic Controls Services, Organization and Supports for ITS
	o Interconnected Nomadic Devices Typical alternatives are to:
	1. • Main missing components of the functional architecture: Learn from accidents 2. Look at current technologies and see how they might assist road users
	o The "Global Situation Awareness" approach
	o The "Centralized Manager" to monitor driving aids as an "Integrated Device" We can look at accidents and identify clusters. Thus Carsten and Draskóczy, 1995 drew on
	previous work (e.g. Hydén and Draskóczy, 1992) to identify the major safety problems in o Ambient Intelligence & Pervasive technologies adaptation to the specific Europe as: single vehicle accidents on motorways constraints of car safety / ITS applications • rear--end collisions on motorways • single vehicle accidents on rural roads • head--on collisions on rural roads

• crossing collisions at rural intersections • crossing collisions at urban intersections • pedestrian and bicyclist accidents in urban areas We can also observe the role of individual factors in traffic accidents: •

Workprogramme 2016--2017 in preparation…

  We do not target research to build another Google car or a Mars rover -this technology exists • The automated vehicle conceived within a cooperative systems environment: o Equipped with sensors and functions to travel around with minimum or no effort by the driver o Communicate and coordinate with other vehicles, the roadside infrastructure, and the transport cloud o New services enabled by connected automated car Test methodologies and procedures to evaluate the functional safety, reliability and lifetime of battery systems. • In--vehicle integration of the overall cycle of EV energy management into a comprehensive EV battery and ICT--based re--charging system management o providing ergonomic and seamless user support.

	• dynamic maps for transport applications • Efficient components & systems
	• innovative solutions, also for heavy goods vehicles • Active & Passive Safety
	• Strategic technologies (batteries & e--motors)
	Coordination and Support Actions Connectivity (V2X)
	• standardisation • Integration into smart infrastructures (grid, cities)
	• awareness and campaigning • Efficient routing
	• Safety
	• Services
	Connected Automation
	Horizon 2020, Work Programme 2014--2015 : Objective GV.8--2015 "Electric vehicles'
	Moving towards Automated driving : Automated driving has great potential to improve significantly safety and energy efficiency enhanced performance and integration into the transport system and the grid" • EV concepts featuring a complete revision of the electric and electronic
	What does Automation in road transport stand for? • Different terminology used: autonomous, automated, driverless, semi autonomous, architecture for improved efficiency, functionality and modularity. • Novel BMS (designs with improved thermal management, power density and life
	fully autonomous … time, safety and reliability; Improved modelling and simulation tools for BMS improvement; Standards. • o build upon existing technology standards • Horizon 2020, Work Programme 2014--2015 : Objective MG. 3.6--2015 « Safe and connected automation in road transport » • R&I activities must support gradual progress towards full automation: o Dedicated supporting technologies for individual pre--emption or compensation of human errors, or even taking over the vehicle control in case Horizon 2020, Work Programme 2014--2015 : ICT cross--cutting activities • Internet of Things and platforms for Connected Smart Objects (51 M€) • Human--centric Digital Age (7 M€) • Cyber--security, Trustworthy ICT (38 M€) • Trans--national co--operation among National Contact Points (4 M€)
	of imminent collisio (ADAS to support drivers; driver condition & warn, Addressing the challenges with H2020 control or correct behavior; HMI aspects) • Workprogramme 2014--2015 o Novel transport, service & mobility concepts enabled by automated driving o Smart Cities o Cooperative ITS o Connected Automation o Electromobility • Preparing the Workprogramme 2016--2017 and connectivity, including for road freight • Coordination and Support Actions: o Dissemination and take--up of results, including the development consensus building on business models to progress towards ful automation o Liability & standardization policy & regulatory framework recommendations With input from… • SRA and position papers from stakeholders • iMobility Forum • Smart Cities European Innovation Partnership (SCC EIP) • Technology Platforms, Joint Technology Initiatives (JTIs), Public Private Partnerships
	Europe's transport sector: targets 2020--2050 • Safety (--50% by 2020. Zero fatalities by2050) • Energy Efficiency & Emissions (--80 to 95% by 2050) Electromobility Moving towards electromobility (PPP), Joint Programming Initiatives (JPI)… • Research projects, relevant CSAs… • International Cooperation
	• Accessibility for everyone What means ICT for EVs ? Electro--mobility is one of the largest opportunities to radically
	• Congestion (--2% GDP) change the transport system & make a quantum leap into the next generation of sustainable
	• Balance between transport modes mobility
	ICT within the EV

Myriam Coulon--Cantuer, European Commission, DG CONNECT, Smart Cities and Sustainability Full video and slides of the presentation available at http://decomobil.humanist-vce.eu/Downloads.html

Safety in aircraft: critical figures of accidents while switching from conventional to automated aircraft before reaching a level of technology and human maturity related to the automation: an example to consider while on the process to develop automation in road transport.

ANNEX 1

List of participants

Abbreviations Abbreviation Meaning

The V--Model becomes more complex and required Human--Systems integration: Support action to contribute to the preparation of future Community research programme in user centred Design for ECO--multimodal MOBILity --DECOMOBIL

Safety vs Ecomobility, Setting priorities right Dr. Evangelos Bekiaris, HUMANIST Virtual Center of Excellence Chairman

Full video and slides of the presentation available at http://decomobil.humanist-vce.eu/Downloads.html

Is research a matter of fashion and trend?

• Within FP6 the new concept of "Zero Vision" was introduced as the ultimate goal of the Transportation System; meaning zero deaths on the road.

• Within FP7, the same term of "Zero Vision" is to be found in relevant Calls and EC official documents; meaning zero pollution from Transport.

• Change of Policy Priorities meant a dramatic shift of Transport Research funds from Road Safety to Environmental Protection issues.

… as if the lose of life matters less… …as if we had reached our initial goals… …as if traffic safety and environmental protection can be decoupled…

Support action to contribute to the preparation of future Community research programme in user centred Design for ECO--multimodal MOBILity --DECOMOBIL

• What level and kind of driver status display is needed?

• Is an external display of automated status needed for other drivers?

• Long--term unintended consequences of increased reliance on automation?

• How to reconcile individual driver desire for convenience with need for safety?

Some ideas…

Haptic Warnings (Virtual Rumble Strips)

• Vehicle lateral and rear monitoring system (LRM)

• Lane Departure Warning / Lane keeping Systems (LDWS)

• Collision Avoidance Systems (CAS), for the lateral area, including lane change support systems. • Hybrid cars are carrying two rigid parts at the front: the combustion and the electric engine. • Hybrid cars are about 300kg heavier than an average 11ookg passenger car.

Potential dangers related to electricity as source of energy:

• Full Electric Vehicle running out of battery (On 21/12/2009, in one day, the German organisation ADAC received 28,654 emergency calls. 90% of those calls were battery breakdowns or empty batteries) in:

• Interurban roads where continuous long trips • large scale demonstration of replicable SCC concepts in a city context where existing technologies or very near to market technologies will be integrated in an innovative way Sustainable urban mobility: through the integration of energy/ fuelling infrastructure with vehicle fleets powered by alternative energy carriers for public and private transport, including logistics and freight--distribution.

• Implications on energy management, and impact on the electricity grid, must be assessed.

Cooperative ITS

List of participants

Evaluation of the workshop

The following questionnaire was specially prepared to assess the participants' opinion about the workshop. It was distributed at the participants' registration and collected at the end of the day.

Questionnaire to Participants

Please assess questions 1 to 7 using the 5 levels scale; questions 9 and 10 answering just Yes or No; leave your general comment in question 11 The analysis of the participants' answers to the questionnaire showed that they were globally satisfied with the workshop (average 90% of satisfaction) and the round table was found interesting (88% of the answers). Anyway, the participants also found that the interaction with the round table lecturers was quite low. Therefore, in the future a thinking will be made in order to find in which way we could increase the interaction during future workshops and round tables.

Some comments have been made:

1. The focus of the workshop was not clear/was broad: Automation/resilience/safety/inclusion/sustainability. Some further introduction would have been useful maybe. Moderators should have provoked more audience questions and/or asked questions themselves. 2. As a reviewer, I found this worshop valuable for giving some insight into the activities of the project. Interesting and stimulating presentations + discussion

ANNEX 3

Full presentations of the workshop


Ifsttar Annie Pauzié

Impact of ITS on driver's safety: positive or negative ?

Context

Ambitious objectives in Europe have been clearly stated in the European Commission White Paper (2011) dealing with a commitment at the European level to reduce drastically the number of crashes and fatalities on the road, with a perspective of concrete results. Among several complementary measures, an opportunity to reach this goal is the development and the spreading out of "Information and Communication Technologies" (ICT) aiming at supporting human behavior and efficiency in road context. These technologies, usually labeled "Intelligent Transport System" (ITS) when applied to the transport domain, cover a set of applications designed and implemented to improve transport in a broader sense, including infrastructure, private and public transport and freight. Several ITS applications have been developed in the automotive area to improve road safety such as, for example, detection and alert about safety distance with the previous vehicle, lane keeping, speed and curve warning, collision warning and avoidance, critical road event information, blind spot monitoring and vulnerable road user detection,... So, in terms of road safety, there is a hope in these ITS functions to compensate human deficiencies in terms of perception, decision taking, emergency reactions, but there is also a concern dealing with behavior adaptation and risk compensation while using these functions, and potential interference with the main driving task due to attention sharing induced by the additional task required to manage the on--board system (Matthews & all., 2003;Pauzié & all., 2010). Effective achievement of the expected benefits will depend on conditions of systems design and implementation: in particular, to which extent the system answers to drivers needs, is compatible with their functional capacities whatever their age and their experience or motivation, and satisfies the criteria of relevance, usability and acceptability taking into account the context of use and the characteristic of the individual. This is true for informative systems that are just transmitting messages to the driver, leaving them with the full manual control of their vehicle. To be used, these systems require additional visual/auditory attention from the driver that can create potential interference with the main driving task, but can also allow potential improvement in terms of decision and reaction processes by alerting the driver concerning critical events and allowing then quicker or more adapted reactions. This is also true in the case of automation technologies, where assistance systems are able to take care with more reliability of some control tasks traditionally assigned to the driver, and which brings nevertheless the problem of tasks dispatching between human and machine, as well as the choice of the logic used for the management of this control sharing, substitute or co--operative (Wilde G.J.S., 1982).

Objectives

. Based upon the specificity of the ITS applications and the characteristics of the drivers population, human factor investigations have to be conducted to evaluate if there is any benefit for the driver while putting into balance the perceptual and cognitive interference with the gain linked to the system use. This evaluation process requires to develop adapted methodologies and relevant indicators.

• assisting designers to allow quicker and more efficient design process by setting up ergonomic criteria, taking into account the wide heterogeneity of drivers' needs and requirements • evaluating safety, acceptability and usability of these devices for the drivers. In order to process a human--centred design, it is necessary to investigate deeply the drivers' needs and requirements in direct relation with the application features and their relevancy for the driving task at the operational, tactical and strategical level. For example, elderly drivers reported more navigation problems such as way finding with increasing old age and have more difficulties with maneuvers related to gap acceptance for crossing non--limited access highways, and high--speed lane changes on limited-access highways. So, this population could benefit of an easy access to clear instructions from a system, but difficulties in attention sharing between several informative sources have to be taken into consideration (Emmerson & col., 2012). The novice drivers have difficulties in self--calibration, hazard and risk perception. An adequate design of functions supporting the novice driver can induce potential positive consequences in terms of road safety, and the issue raises is the setting up of training program for these innovative functions. Some ITS functions are more devoted to entertaining the driver, such as mobile phone use, or can be developed in the context of professional use, such as connecting electronic mail. Due to the fact that they are irrelevant for the driving task itself, experimental investigations showed that these types of functions are prone to have negative impact on the road safety (McEvoy & col., 2005), and require additional attention demand in comparison with a reference--driving situation, where no system would be available.

Conclusion

To summarize, driving task is a complex activity and ITS functions have to match with the driver's expectations, needs, requirements and capacities, if potential positive impact on road safety wants to be achieved. This is really a challenge when realizing that there is a wide heterogeneity of drivers, meaning that the same product has to fit with an important range of contexts and users. The question of designers' responsibility concerning these systems is also an important aspect to consider in terms of possible misconceptions (Engströn & col., 2005).

The negative or positive impact of ITS implementation on road safety is still a crucial issue to be investigated, renewed in terms of research as technology evolved and as there is an increase widespread use among drivers population.