Radfahren liegt im Trend. In Kommunen, Ländern und auf Bundesebene wird das Ziel verfolgt, den Anteil des Fahrradverkehrs als ökologische Mobilitätsform weiter zu steigern. Die Förderung des Radverkehrs kann einen wesentlichen Beitrag zur Erreichung wichtiger verkehrspolitischer Ziele wie der Reduzierung der CO2-Emmissionen oder der Verringerung von innerstädtischen Verkehrsproblemen liefern. Dass vor allem in Großstädten immer mehr Menschen Rad fahren, führt allerdings auch dazu, dass es auf den vorhandenen Radverkehrsanlagen immer enger wird. Radfahren findet in der Stadt im Allgemeinen in einem gemeinsam genutzten Straßenraum statt. Dabei ist der zur Verfügung stehende Verkehrsraum in Städten begrenzt und geprägt von einer Konkurrenz zwischen Mobilitätsformen um entsprechende Verkehrsflächen. Vor diesem Hintergrund stellt eine Umverteilung von Flächen hinsichtlich z. B. der Akzeptanz aller Verkehrsteilnehmenden eine große Herausforderung dar. Es müssen daher Gesamtlösungen gefunden werden, die auf breite Zustimmung in der Bevölkerung stoßen, da sich optimale Bedingungen für alle nur schwer realisieren lassen. Hierbei ist das übergeordnete Ziel, ein rücksichtsvolles Miteinander im Straßenverkehr zu fördern. Das vorliegende Sicherheitsforschungsprogramm der Bundesanstalt für Straßenwesen (BASt) greift die Fragestellungen auf, konzentriert sich auf Forschungsaktivitäten zum sicheren Radfahren in einem gemeinsam genutzten Straßenraum und damit auf Interaktionen insbesondere zwischen Rad-, Kfz- und Fußverkehr auf innerörtlichen Straßen, um letztendlich wissenschaftlich fundierte Erkenntnisse und Maßnahmenansätze bereitstellen zu können. Hierbei stehen folgende Forschungsthemen im Fokus: • Verkehrskultur, -klima und rücksichtsvolles Miteinander • Gefahrenwahrnehmung und -bewertung • Bekanntheit und Einhaltung von Verkehrsregeln • Infrastrukturelemente entwickeln und pilothaft untersuchen • Maßnahmenumsetzung und deren Hindernisse in der Praxis • Technische Maßnahmen Das Forschungsprogramm ist in Teilen offen und dynamisch angelegt, so dass neue Erkenntnisse und Erfahrungen noch Eingang finden können. Alle Projekte sind so angelegt, dass sich die zu erwartenden Erkenntnisse am realen Bedarf in der Praxis orientieren. Bei der Umsetzung von Maßnahmen zur Förderung des Radverkehrs sehen sich die Kommunen immer wieder vor Herausforderungen gestellt, die aus örtlichen und verkehrlichen Gegebenheiten resultieren. Um in solchen Fällen trotzdem dem Rad- und Kfz-Verkehr dienliche Lösungen zu finden, werden in enger Zusammenarbeit zwischen der BASt und der Stadt Freiburg im Breisgau pilothafte Untersuchungen durchgeführt werden. Die Umsetzung des Sicherheitsforschungsprogramms mit einer Laufzeit von sechs Jahren erfolgt interdisziplinär und wird von einer abteilungsübergreifenden und interdisziplinären Arbeitsgruppe innerhalb der BASt gesteuert. Neben einem kontinuierlichen Monitoring des Programmfortschritts wird es auch Aufgabe dieser Arbeitsgruppe sein, gewonnene Erkenntnisse zu verbreiten und regelmäßig über den Programmfortschritt zu berichten. Die Ergebnisse von abgeschlossenen Teilprojekten werden u. a. in der Schriftenreihe der BASt veröffentlicht. Zum Abschluss des Programms wird durch die Arbeitsgruppe ein zusammenfassender Bericht erstellt.

A flexible pedestrian legform impactor (FlexPLI) has been evaluated by a Technical Evaluation Group (Flex-TEG) of the Working Party on Passive Safety (GRSP) of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UN-ECE). It will be implemented within phase 2 of the global technical regulation (GTR 9) as well as within a new ECE regulation on pedestrian safety as a test tool for the assessment of lower extremity injuries in lateral vehicle-to-pedestrian accidents (UN-ECE 2010-1, 2010-2 and 2010-3). Due to its biofidelic properties in the knee and tibia section, the FlexPLI is found to having an improved knee and tibia injury assessment ability when being compared to the current legislative test tool, the lower legform impactor developed by the Pedestrian Safety Working Group of the European Enhanced Vehicle-safety Committee (EEVC WG 17). However, due to a lack of biofidelity in terms of kinematics and loadings in the femur part of the FlexPLI, an appropriate assessment of femur injuries is still outstanding. The study described in this paper is aimed to close this gap. Impactor tests with the FlexPLI at different impact heights on three vehicle frontends with Sedan, SUV and FFV shape are performed and compared to tests with a modified FlexPLI with upper body mass. Full scale validation tests using a modified crash test dummy with attached FlexPLI that are carried out for the first time prove the more humanlike responses of the femur section with applied upper body mass. Apart from that they also show that the impact conditions described in the current technical provisions for tests with the FlexPLI don"t necessarily compensate the missing torso mass in terms of knee and tibia loadings either. Therefore it can be concluded that an applied upper body mass will contribute to a more biofidelic overall behavior of the legform and subsequently an improved injury assessment ability of all lower extremity injuries addressed by the FlexPLI. Nevertheless, the validity of the original as well as the modified legform for tests against vehicles with extraordinary high bumpers as well as flat front vehicles still needs to be evaluated in detail. A first clue is given by the application of an additional accelerometer to the legform.

A biofidelic flexible pedestrian legform impactor (FlexPLI) has been developed from the year 2000 onwards and evaluated by a technical evaluation group (Flex-TEG) of UN-ECE GRSP. A recently established UN-ECE GRSP Informal Group on GTR9 Phase 2 is aiming at introducing the FlexPLI within world-wide regulations on pedestrian safety (Phase 2 of GTR No. 9 as well as the new UN regulation 127 on pedestrian safety) as a test tool for the assessment of lower extremity injuries in lateral vehicle-to-pedestrian accidents. Besides, the FlexPLI has already been introduced within JNCAP and is on the Euro NCAP roadmap for 2014. Despite of the biofidelic properties in the knee and tibia sections, several open issues related to the FlexPLI, like the estimation of the cost benefit, the feasibility of vehicle compliance with the threshold values, the robustness of the impactor and of the test results, the comparability between prototype and production level and the finalization of certification corridors still needed to be solved. Furthermore, discussions with stakeholders about a harmonized lower legform to bumper test area are still going on. This paper describes several studies carried out by the Federal Highway Research Institute (BASt) regarding the benefit due to the introduction of the FlexPLI within legislation for type approval, the robustness of test results, the establishment of new assembly certification corridors and a proposal for a harmonized legform to bumper test area. Furthermore, a report on vehicle tests that previously had been carried out with three prototype legforms and were now being repeated using legforms with serial production status, is given. Finally, the paper gives a status report on the ongoing simulation and testing activities with respect to the development and evaluation of an improved test procedure with upper body mass for assessing pedestrian femur injuries.

The European Research Project APROSYS has evaluated the interior headform test procedure developed by EEVC WG 13, representing the head contact in the car during a lateral impact. One important aspect within this test procedure was the selection of an appropriate impactor. The WG13 procedure currently uses the Free Motion Headform as used within the FMVSS 201. The ACEA 3.5 kg headform used in Phase 1 of the European Directive and the future European Regulation on Pedestrian Protection is still discussed as a possible alternative. This paper reports work performed by the Federal Highway Research Institute (BASt) as a part of the APROSYS Task 1.1.3. The study compares the two headform impactors according to FMVSS and ACEA, in a series of basic tests in order to evaluate their sensitivity towards different impact angles, impact accuracy, the effect of differences to impactors of the same type and the effects of the repeatability and reproducibility of the test results. The test surface consisted of a steel tube covered with PU foam and PVC, representing the car interior to be tested. Despite of the higher mass of the FMH the HIC values of this impactor were generally lower than those of the ACEA headform. The FMH showed a higher repeatability of test results but a high sensitivity on the angle of roll, the spherical ACEA impactor performed better with regards to the reproducibility. In case of the ACEA impactor-, the angle of roll had no influence.

For a number of EU regulatory acts Virtual Testing (VT) is already allowed for type approval (see Commission Regulation No. 371/2010 of 16 April 2010 amending the Framework Directive 2007/46/EC). However, only a very general procedure on how to apply VT for type approval is provided. Technical details for specific regulatory acts are not given yet. The main objective of the European project IMVITER (IMplementation of VIrtual TEsting in Safety Regulations) was to promote the implementation of VT in safety regulations. When proposing VT procedures the new regulation was taken into account, in particular, addressing open issues. Special attention was paid to pedestrian protection as pilot cases. A key aspect for VT implementation is to demonstrate that the employed simulation models are reliable. This paper describes how the Verification and Validation (V&V) method defined by the American Society of Mechanical Engineers was adapted for pedestrian protection VT based assessment. or the certification of headform impactors an extensive study was performed at two laboratories to assess the variability in calibration tests and equivalent results from a set of simulation models. Based on these results a methodology is defined for certification of headform impactor simulation models. A similar study was also performed with one vehicle in the type approval test setup. Its bonnet was highly instrumented and subjected to 45 impacts in five different positions at two laboratories in order to obtain an estimation of the variability in the physical tests. An equivalent study was performed using stochastic simulation with a metamodel fed with observed variability in impact conditions of physical headforms. An estimation of the test method uncertainty was obtained and used in the definition of a validation corridor for simulation models. Validation metric and criteria were defined in cooperation with the ISO TC22 SC10 and SC12 WG4 "Virtual Testing". A complete validation procedure including different test setups, physical magnitudes and evaluation criteria is provided. A detailed procedural flowchart is developed for VT implementation in EC Regulation No 78/2009 based on a so called "Hybrid VT" approach, which combines real hardware based head impact tests and simulations. This detailed flowchart is shown and explained within this paper. Another important point within the virtual testing based procedures is the documentation of relevant information resulting from the verification and validation process of the numerical models used. For this purpose report templates were developed within the project. The proposed procedure fixes minimum V&V requirements for numerical models to be confidently used within the type-approval process. It is not intended to be a thorough guide on how to build such reliable models. Different modeling methodologies are therefore possible, according to particular OEM know-how. These requirements respond to a balance amongst the type-approval stakeholders interests. A cost-benefit analysis, which was also performed within the IMVITER project, supports this approach, showing the conditions in which VT implementation is beneficial. Based on the experience gained in the project and the background of the experts involved an outlook is given as a roadmap of VT implementation, identifying the most important milestones to be reached along the way to a future vehicle type approval procedure supported by VT. The results presented in this paper show an important step addressing open questions and fostering the future acceptance of virtual testing in pedestrian protection type approval procedures.

A series of drop tests and vehicle tests with the adult head impactor according to Regulation (EC) 631/2009 and drop tests with the phantom head impactor according to UN Regulation No. 43 have been carried out by the German Federal Highway Research Institute (BASt) on behalf of the German Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Development (BMVBS). Aim of the test series was to study the injury risk for vulnerable road users, especially pedestrians, in case of being impacted by a motor vehicle in a way described within the European Regulations (EC) 78/2009 and (EC) 631/2009. Furthermore, the applicability of the phantom head drop test described in UN Regulation No. 43 for plastic glazing should be investigated. In total, 30 drop tests, thereof 18 with the adult head impactor and 12 with the phantom head impactor, and 49 vehicle tests with the adult head impactor were carried out on panes of laminated safety glass (VSG), polycarbonate (PC) and laminated polycarbonate (L-PC). The influence of parameters such as the particular material properties, test point locations, fixations, ambient conditions (temperature and impact angle) was investigated in detail. In general, higher values of the Head Injury Criterion (HIC) were observed in tests on polycarbonate glazing. As the HIC is the current criterion for the assessment of head injury risk, polycarbonate glazing has to be seen as more injurious in terms of vulnerable road user protection. In addition, the significantly higher rebound of the head observed in tests with polycarbonate glazing is suspected to lead to higher neck loads and may also cause higher injury risks in secondary impacts of vulnerable road users. However, as in all tests with PC glazing no damage of the panes was observed, the risk of skin cut injuries may be expected to be reduced significantly. The performed test series give no indication for the test procedure prescribed in UN Regulation No. 43 as a methodology to approve glass windscreen not being feasible for polycarbonate glazing, as all PC panes tested fulfilled the UN R 43 requirements. The performance of the windscreen area will not be relevant for vehicle type approval according to the upcoming UN Regulation for pedestrian protection. However, it is recommended that pedestrian protection being considered for plastic windscreens to ensure at least the same level of protection as glass windscreens.

Autonomous Emergency Braking (AEB) systems for pedestrians have been predicted to offer substantial benefit. On this basis, consumer rating programmes, e.g. Euro NCAP, are developing rating schemes to encourage fitment of these systems. One of the questions that needs to be answered to do this fully, is to determine how the assessment of the speed reduction offered by the AEB is integrated with the current assessment of the passive safety for mitigation of pedestrian injury. Ideally, this should be done on a benefit related basis. The objective of this research was to develop a benefit based methodology for assessment of integrated pedestrian protection systems with pre-crash braking and passive safety components. A methodology has been developed which calculates the cost of pedestrian injury expected, assuming all pedestrians in the target population (i.e. pedestrians impacted by the front of a passenger car) are impacted by the car being assessed, taking into account the impact speed reduction offered by the car’s AEB (if fitted) and the passive safety protection offered by the car’s frontal structure. For rating purposes, this cost can be normalised by comparing it to the cost calculated for selected cars. The methodology uses the speed reductions measured in AEB tests to determine the speed at which each casualty in the target population will be impacted. The injury to each casualty is then calculated using the results from standard Euro NCAP pedestrian impactor tests and injury risk curves. This injury is converted into cost using ‘Harm’ type costs for the body regions tested. These costs are weighted and summed. Weighting factors were determined using accident data from Germany and GB and the results of a benefit analysis performed by the EU FP7 AsPeCSS project. This resulted in German and GB versions of the methodology. The methodology was used to assess cars with good, average and poor Euro NCAP pedestrian ratings, with and without a current AEB system fitted. It was found that the decrease in casualty injury cost achieved by fitting an AEB system was approximately equivalent to that achieved by increasing the passive safety rating from poor to average. Also, it was found that the assessment was influenced strongly by the level of head protection offered in the scuttle and windscreen area because this is where head impact occurs for a large proportion of casualties. The major limitation within the methodology is the assumption used implicitly during weighting. This is that the cost of casualty injuries to body areas, such as the thorax, not assessed by the headform and legform impactors, and other casualty injuries such as those caused by ground impact, are related linearly to the cost of casualty injuries assessed by the impactors. A methodology for assessment of integrated pedestrian protection systems was developed. This methodology is of interest to consumer rating programmes which wish to include assessment of these systems. It also raises the interesting issue if the head impact test area should be weighted to reflect better real-world benefit.

Supported by field accident data and monitoring results of European Regulation (EC) No. 78/2009, recent plans of the European Commission regarding a way forward to improve passive safety of vulnerable road users include, amongst other things, an extension of the head test area. The inclusion of passive cyclist safety is also being considered by Euro NCAP. Although passenger car to cyclist collisions are often severe and have a significant share within the accident statistics, cyclists are neither considered sufficiently in the legislative nor in the consumer ratings tests. Therefore, a test procedure to assess the protection potential of vehicle fronts in a collision with cyclists has been developed within a current research project. For this purpose, the existing pedestrian head impact test procedures were modified in order to include boundary conditions relevant for cyclists as the second big group of vulnerable road users. Based on an in-depth analysis of passenger car to cyclist accidents in Germany the three most representative accident constellations have been initially defined. The development of the test procedure itself was based on corresponding simulations with representative vehicle and bicycle models. In addition to different cyclist heights, reaching from a 6-year-old child to a 95%-male, also four pedal positions were considered. By reconstruction of a real accident the defined simulation parameters could be validated in advance. The conducted accident kinematics analysis shows for a large portion of the constellations an increased head impact area, which can reach beyond the roof leading edge, as well as high average values for head impact velocity and angle. Based on the simulation data obtained for the different vehicle models, cyclist-specific test parameters for impactor tests have been derived, which have been further examined in the course of head and leg impact tests. In order to study the cyclist accident kinematics under real test conditions, different full scale tests with a Polar-II dummy positioned on a bicycle have been conducted. Overall, the tests showed a good correlation with the simulations and support the defined boundary test conditions. Typical accident scenarios and simulations reveal higher head impact locations, angles and velocities. An extended head impact area with modified test parameters will contribute to an improved protection of vulnerable road users including cyclists. However, due to significantly differing impact kinematics and postures between the lower extremities of pedestrians and cyclists, these injuries cannot be addressed by the means of current test tools such as the flexible pedestrian legform impactor FlexPLI. Based on the findings obtained within the project as well as the existing pedestrian protection requirements a cyclist protection test procedure for use in legislation and consumer test programmes has been developed, whose requirements have been transferred into a corresponding test specification. This specification provides common head test boundary conditions for pedestrians and cyclists, whereby the existing requirements are modified and two parallel test procedures are avoided.

Recent accident statistics from the German national database state bicyclists being the second endangered group of vulnerable road users besides pedestrians. With 399 fatalities, more than 14.000 seriously injured and more than 61.000 slightly injured persons on german roads in the year 2011, the group of bicyclists is ranked second of all road user groups (Statistisches Bundesamt, 2012). While the overall bicycle helmet usage frequency in Germany is very low, evidence is given that its usage leads to a significant reduction of severe head injuries. After an estimation of the benefit of bicycle helmet usage as well as an appropriate test procedure for bicyclists, this paper describes two different approaches for the improvement of bicyclist safety. While the first one is focusing on the assessment of the vehicle based protection potential for bicyclists, the second one is concentrating on the safety assessment of bicycle helmets. Within the first part of the study the possible revision of the existing pedestrian testing protocols is being examined, using in depth accident data, full scale simulation and hardware testing. Within the second part of the study, the results of tests according to supplemental test procedures for the safety assessment of bicycle helmets developed by the German Federal Highway Research Institute (BASt) are presented. An additional full scale test performed at reduced impact speed proves that measures of active vehicle safety as e.g. braking before the collision event do not necessarily always lead to a reduction of injury severity.