With the upcoming new legislative rules in the EU on Event Data Recorder beginning 2022 the question is whether the discussed data base is sufficient for the needs of clarifying accidents involving automated vehicles. Based on the reconstruction of real accidents including vehicles with ADAS combined with specially designed crash tests a broader data base than US EDR regulation (NHTSA 49 CFR Part 563.7) is proposed. The working group AHEAD, to which the authors contribute, has already elaborated a data model that fits the needs of automated driving. The structure of this data model is shown. Moreover, the special benefits of storing internal video or photo feeds form the vehicle camera systems combined with object data is illustrated. When using a sophisticate 3D measurement method of the accident scene the videos or photos can also serve as a control instance for the stored vehicle data. The AHEAD Data Model enhanced with the storage of the video and photo feeds should be considered in the planned roadmap of the Informal Working Group (IWG) on EDR/ DSSAD (Data Storage System for Automated Driving) reporting to UNECE WP29. Also, a data access over the air using technology already applied in China for electric vehicles called Real Time Monitoring would allow a quantum leap in forensic accident reconstruction.

Cooperative intelligent transport systems (C-ITSs) are mass-produced and sold in Europe, promising enhanced safety and comfort. Direct vehicle communication, known as vehicle-to-everything (V2X) communication, is crucial in this context. Drivers receive warnings about potential hazards by exchanging vehicle status and environmental data with other communication-enabled vehicles. However, the impact of these warnings on drivers and their inclusion in accident reconstruction remains uncertain. Unlike sensor-based warnings, V2X warnings may not provide a visible reason for the alert, potentially affecting reaction times and behavior. In this work, a simulator study on V2X warnings was conducted with 32 participants to generate findings on reaction times and behavior for accident reconstruction in connection with these systems. Two scenarios from the Car-2-Car Communication Consortium were implemented: “Stationary Vehicle Warning—Broken-Down Vehicle” and “Dangerous Situation—Electronic Emergency Brake Lights”. Volkswagen’s warning concept was utilized, as they are the sole provider of cooperative vehicles in Europe. Results show that V2X warnings without visible reasons did not negatively impact reaction times or behavior, with average reaction times between 0.58 s (steering) and 0.69 s (braking). No significant distraction or search for warning reasons was observed. However, additional information in the warnings caused confusion and was seldom noticed by subjects. In this study, participants responded correctly and appropriately to the shown false-positive warnings. A wrong reaction triggering an accident is possible but unlikely. Overall, V2X warnings showed no negative impacts compared with sensor-based systems. This means that there are no differences in accident reconstruction regarding the source of the warning (sensors or communication). However, it is important that it is known that there was a warning, which is why the occurrence of V2X warnings should also be saved in the EDR in the future.

Partially automated driving functions (SAE Level 2) can control a vehicle’s longitudinal and lateral movements. However, taking over the driving task involves automation risks that the driver must manage. In severe accidents, the driver’s ability to avoid a collision must be assessed, considering their expected reaction behavior. The primary goal of this study is to generate essential data on driver reaction behavior in case of malfunctions in partially automated driving functions for use in legal affairs. A simulator study with two scenarios involving 32 subjects was conducted for this purpose. The first scenario investigated driver reactions to system limitations during cornering. The results show that none of the subjects could avoid leaving their lane and moving into the oncoming lane and, therefore, could not control the situation safely. Due to partial automation, we could also identify a new part of the reaction time, the hands-on time, which leads to increased steering reaction times of 1.18 to 1.74 s. The second scenario examined driver responses to phantom braking caused by AEBS. We found that 25 of the 32 subjects could not override the phantom braking by pressing the accelerator pedal, although 16 subjects were informed about the system analog to the actual vehicle manuals. Overall, the study suggests that the current legal perspective on vehicle control and the expected driver reaction behavior for accident avoidance should be reconsidered.

Accidents between right-turning commercial vehicles and crossing vulnerable road users (VRUs) in urban environments often lead to serious or fatal injuries and therefore play a significant role in forensic accident analysis. To reduce the risk of accidents, blind spot assistance systems have been installed in commercial vehicles for several years, among other things, to detect VRUs and warn the driver in time. However, since such systems cannot reliably prevent all turning accidents, an investigation by experts must clarify how the accident occurred and to what extent the blind spot assistance system influenced the course of the accident. The occurrence of the acoustic warning message can be defined as an objective reaction prompt for the driver, so that the blind spot assistance system can significantly influence the avoidability assessment. In order to be able to integrate the system into forensic accident analysis, a precise knowledge of how the system works and its limitations is required. For this purpose, tests with different systems and accident constellations were conducted and evaluated. It was found that the type of sensor used for the assistance systems has a great influence on the system’s performance. The lateral distance between the right side of the commercial vehicle and the VRU, as well as obstacles between them, along with the speed difference can have great influence on the reliability of the assistance system. Depending on the concrete time of the system’s warning signal, the accident can be avoided or not by the driver when reacting to this signal.

The derivation of real accident scenarios from accident databases represents an important task within vehicle safety research. Simulations are increasingly used for this purpose. Depending on the research interest, a wide range of accident databases exists worldwide, which differ mainly in the number of recorded data per accident and availability. This work aims to identify critical vehicle-to-vehicle accidents based on freely available accident databases to derive concrete scenarios for a subsequent simulation. For this purpose, the method of the pre-crash matrix is applied using the example of the freely available Crash Investigation Sampling System database of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. An analysis of existing databases worldwide shows that this is the most detailed, freely available database. The derivation of scenarios succeeds here by a new method, whereby a center of gravity calculation is carried out based on the damages of the vehicles according to Collision Deformation Classification nomenclature. In addition, the determination of other necessary parameters, as well as the limits of the database, is shown in order to derive a scenario that can be simulated. As a result, the constellations of the five most frequent vehicle-to-vehicle accident scenarios according to the Crash Investigation Sampling System database are presented. In particular, other institutions should follow National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's example and make data freely available for accident research.

Partially automated driving functions (SAE Level 2) can control a vehicle's longitudinal and lateral movements. However, taking over the driving task involves automation risks that the driver must manage. In severe accidents, the driver's ability to avoid a collision must be assessed, considering their expected reaction behavior. The primary goal of this study is to generate essential data on driver reaction behavior in case of malfunctions in partially automated driving functions for use in legal affairs. A simulator study with two scenarios involving 32 subjects was conducted for this purpose. The first scenario investigated driver reactions to system limitations during cornering. The second scenario examined driver responses to phantom braking caused by the AEBS. As a result, the first scenario shows that none of the subjects could control the situation safely. Due to partial automation, we could also identify a new part of the reaction time, the hands-on time, which leads to increased steering reaction times of 1.18 to 1.74 seconds. In the second scenario, we found that 25 of the 32 subjects could not override the phantom braking by pressing the accelerator pedal, although 16 subjects were informed about the system analog to the actual vehicle manuals. Overall, the study suggests that the current legal perspective on vehicle control and the expected driver reaction behavior for accident avoidance should be reconsidered.