Human error by either rider or other vehicle driver is the primary contributing factor in crashes involving powered-two-wheelers. A human-factor-based crash analysis methodology is key to enhancing...

Objective: The number of e-bike users has increased significantly over the past few years and with it the associated safety concerns. Because e-bikes are faster than conventional bicycles and more prone to be in conflict with road users, e-bikers may need to perform avoidance maneuvers more frequently. Braking is the most common avoidance maneuver but is also a complex and critical task in emergency situations, because cyclists must reduce speed quickly without losing balance. The aim of this study is to understand the braking strategies of e-bikers in real-world traffic environments and to assess their road safety implications. This article investigates (1) how cyclists on e-bikes use front and rear brakes during routine cycling and (2) whether this behavior changes during unexpected conflicts with other road users. Methods: Naturalistic data were collected from 6 regular bicycle riders who each rode e-bikes during a period of 2 weeks, for a total of 32.5 h of data. Braking events were identified and characterized through a combined analysis of brake pressure at each wheel, velocity, and longitudinal acceleration. Furthermore, the braking patterns obtained during unexpected events were compared with braking patterns during routine cycling. Results: In the majority of braking events during routine cycling, cyclists used only one brake at a time, favoring one of the 2 brakes according to a personal pre-established pattern. However, the favored brake varied among cyclists: 66% favored the rear brake and 16% the front brake. Only 16% of the cyclists showed no clear preference, variously using rear brake, front brake, or combined braking (both brakes at the same time), suggesting that the selection of which brake to use depended on the characteristics of the specific scenario experienced by the cyclist rather than on a personal preference. In unexpected conflicts, generally requiring a larger deceleration, combined braking became more prevalent for most of the cyclists; still, when combined braking was not applied, cyclists continued to use the favored brake of routine cycling. Kinematic analysis revealed that, when larger decelerations were required, cyclists more frequently used combined braking instead of single braking. Conclusions: The results provide new insights into the behavior of cyclists on e-bikes and may provide support in the development of safety measures including guidelines and best practices for optimal brake use. The results may also inform the design of braking systems intended to reduce the complexity of the braking operation.

Autonomous Emergency Braking (AEB) was proved to be an effective and reliable technology in reducing serious consequences of road vehicles crashes. However, the feasibility in terms of end-users’ acceptability for the AEB for motorcycles (MAEB) still has to be evaluated. So far, only Automatic Braking (AB) activations in straight-line motion and decelerations up to 2 m/s² were tested with common riders.

The most common evasive maneuver among motorcycle riders and one of the most complicated to perform in emergency situations is braking. Because of the inherent instability of motorcycles, motorcycle crashes are frequently caused by loss of control performing braking as an evasive maneuver. Understanding the motion conditions that lead riders to start losing control is essential for defining countermeasures capable of minimizing the risk of this type of crashes. This paper provides predictive models to classify unsafe loss of control braking maneuvers on a straight line before becoming irreversibly unstable. We performed braking maneuver experiments in the field with motorcycle riders facing a simulated emergency scenario. The latter involved a mock-up intersection in which we generated conflict events between the motorcycle ridden by the participants and an oncoming car driven by trained research staff. The data collected comprises 165 braking trials (including 11 trials identified as loss of control) with 13 riders representing four categories of braking skill, ranging from beginner to expert. Three predictive models of loss of control events during braking trials, going from a basic model to a more advanced one, were defined using logistic regressions as supervised learning methods and using the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve as a performance indicator. The predictor variables of the models were identified among the parameters of the vehicle kinematics. The best model predicted 100% of the loss of control and 100% of the full control cases. The basic and the more advanced supervised models were adapted for loss of control identification with time series data, and the results detecting in real-time the loss of control events showed excellent performance as well as with the supervised models. The study showed that expert riders may maintain stability under dynamic conditions that normally lead less skilled riders to a loss of control or falling events. The best decision thresholds of the most relevant kinematic parameters to predict loss of control have been defined. The thresholds of parameters that typically characterize the loss of control such as the yaw rate and front-wheel lock duration were dependent on the rider skill levels. The peak-to-root-mean-square ratio of roll acceleration was the most robust parameter for identifying loss of control among all skill levels.