1. Testing Automated Collision Avoidance Systems for Transit Buses Jerome M. Lutin, PhD, PE, F.ITE Senior Director of Statewide & Regional Planning NJ TRANSIT (retired) Princeton SmartDrivingCars Summit Wednesday, May 17, 2017

2. Innovations Deserving Exploratory Analysis (IDEA) Project Transit -82
Funding from
Transportation Research Board
Washington State Transit Insurance Pool
Munich Re America
Alliant Insurance Services, Inc.
Government Entities Mutual, Inc.

3. Collision Avoidance – Magnitude of the Problem for Transit
This slide shows an even more serious trend, with bus casualty and liability expenses increasing at about 3% per year on average.
Transit is heavily subsidized and claims and insurance premiums are operating expenses that come right off the top.
Content/Source URL
J. M. Lutin, A. L. Kornhauser, J. Spears, L. F. Sanders, “A Research Roadmap for Substantially Improving Safety for Transit Buses through Autonomous Braking Assistance for Operators,” Paper , Compendium of Papers, Transportation Research Board Annual Conference, January 2016

4. Collision Avoidance – Magnitude of the Problem for Transit
This slide shows an even more serious trend, with bus casualty and liability expenses increasing at about 3% per year on average.
Transit is heavily subsidized and claims and insurance premiums are operating expenses that come right off the top.
Content/Source URL
J. M. Lutin, A. L. Kornhauser, J. Spears, L. F. Sanders, “A Research Roadmap for Substantially Improving Safety for Transit Buses through Autonomous Braking Assistance for Operators,” Paper , Compendium of Papers, Transportation Research Board Annual Conference, January 2016

5. Collision Avoidance – Magnitude of the Problem for Transit
Collisions, Fatalities, Injuries, Casualty and Liability Expenses for Bus and Rail Modes
Mode
Reporting Period
Collisions
Fatalities
Injuries
Total Casualty and Liability Expenses by Mode
Total Bus, Demand Responsive and
Van Pool
90,056
1,442
218,139
$6.96 Billion
Total Rail
6,526
1,453
97,243
$4.38 Billion
This table contains data from the FTA NTD. It shows the numbers of fatalities, injuries and casualty and liability expenses by mode. Bus exceeds rail by a large margin. Commuter rail collisions, injuries and fatalities are reported to FRA and are not included here. However, commuter rail casualty and liability expenses are included in the table.

6. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB)
Special Investigation Report – The Use of
Forward Collision Avoidance Systems
to Prevent and Mitigate Rear End Crashes
“currently available forward collision avoidance technologies for passenger and commercial vehicles … could reduce rear-end crash fatalities.”
Forward collisions reduced 71% for trucks with collision avoidance systems, (CAS) autonomous emergency braking, (AEB) and electronic stability control (ESC)
This report describes the common causes of rear-end crashes, considers some of the latest potential solutions and countermeasures, reiterates and reclassifies previous recommendations, and issues new recommendations aimed at reducing the number and severity of such crashes.
Specifically, the main goals of this report include the following:
Reviewing the progress of the implementation of previous recommendations related to rear-end crash mitigation,
Examining the real-world and predicted efficacy of currently available collision avoidance technologies and the potential for such technologies to mitigate or prevent rear-end crashes,
Examining current methods of assessment and rating systems for collision avoidance technologies, and
Exploring options for increasing the presence of such technologies in newly manufactured vehicles.  
Ultimately, the NTSB’s investigation found that currently available forward collision avoidance technologies for passenger and commercial vehicles still show clear benefits that could reduce rear-end crash fatalities. However, more must be done to speed up deployment of these technologies in all vehicle types. As a result of these findings, the NTSB makes six new recommendations in this report in the following areas:  
For manufacturers to install forward collision avoidance systems as standard features on all newly manufactured passenger and commercial motor vehicles,
For NHTSA to expand the New Car Assessment Program to include a graded rating to assess the performance of forward collision avoidance systems, and
For NHTSA to expand or develop protocols for the assessment of forward collision avoidance systems in passenger and commercial vehicles.

7. NTSB recommendations:
Manufacturers - install forward collision avoidance systems on all newly manufactured passenger and commercial motor vehicles
NHTSA - expand New Car Assessment Program to include graded performance rating of forward collision avoidance systems
NHTSA - expand or develop protocols for assessment of forward collision avoidance systems

8. Transit May Be Left Behind
Transit buses are a niche market – little incentive for OEM’s to invest in R&D
Agencies required to retain buses for 12 + years
Years before transit benefits from CAS and AEB on new buses
Need to retrofit existing buses with CAS and AEB
Need standards for CAS and AEB for retrofits and new buses
NTSB called for immediate action to require these systems on new vehicles
Calling for CAS and AEB on new vehicles is important. However, transit properties are required to keep their buses for a minimum of 12 years if Federal funds are used
That could delay transit agencies from seeing the benefits of CAS and AEB for many years.

9. August 19, 2016 Newark, NJ

10. Driver killed, 18 injured after 2 NJ Transit buses crash in Newark
Newark bus crash victims to sue for at least $115M for 'catastrophic' injuries

11. Innovations Deserving Exploratory Analysis (IDEA)
Washington State Transit Insurance Pool Safety Pilot
Innovations Deserving Exploratory Analysis (IDEA)
TRB grant and funding from insurance companies
Equipped 35 transit buses at seven member agencies and three buses at King County Metro with CAS
Comprehensive examination of total costs for most severe and costly types of collisions
Evaluate potential for CAS to reduce the frequency and severity of collisions, and reduce casualty and liability expenses
Does not include autonomous braking in this phase
Innovations Deserving Exploratory Analysis (IDEA) grant awarded by TRB with additional funding from insurance companies
Equipped 35 transit buses at seven member agencies and three buses at King County Metro with CAS
Comprehensive examination of total costs for most severe and costly types of collisions
Evaluate potential for CAS to reduce the frequency and severity of collisions, and reduce casualty and liability expenses
Does not include autonomous braking in this phase

12. Participating Transit Agencies
Washington State Transit Insurance Pool Safety Pilot
Participating Transit Agencies
Ben Franklin Transit, Richland, WA
Community Transit, Everett, WA
C-Tran, Vancouver, WA
InterCity Transit, Olympia, WA
King County Metro, Seattle, WA
Kitsap Transit, Bremerton, WA
Pierce Transit, Tacoma, WA
Spokane Transit, Spokane, WA

13. Rosco/Mobileye Shield+ system collision avoidance warning system (CAWS) specifically designed for transit buses
Provides alerts and warnings for events that could lead to a collision:
changing lanes without activating a turn signal
exceeding posted speed limit
closing with vehicle in front of the bus
closing with pedestrian or bicyclist in front of, or alongside the bus
Alerts and warnings
visual indicators on windshield and front pillars
Audible warnings issued when collisions are imminent

14. Shield+ system being installed on Gillig bus at C-TRAN in Vancouver, WA
6 different types of transit buses produced by three mfrs.
high floor, low floor, Diesel, hybrid, and electric trolley buses
2-person team complete one bus installation in 8 hour period

15. Center indicator illuminates as pedestrian crosses in front of moving bus during testing

16. Washington State Transit Insurance Pool Safety Pilot
System Configuration
This diagram shows the system that was installed in each of the 38 buses in the WSTIP pilot.
The Rosco/Mobileye Shield+ system includes the following components:
Forward-facing center camera detects vulnerable road users (VRU’s) which are pedestrians and bicyclists, reads speed limit signs, reads lane markings an measures distance to vehicles ahead of bus
Forward left camera detects pedestrians in blind area behind left front pillar when bus s turning
Rear right and left side cameras detect VRU’s in blind spots behind driver
Three VRU warning displays are located in view of the driver on the left, center and right interior windshield and pillars/
Content/Source URL
ROSCO, Inc.

17. System Configuration - Alerts and Warning Displays
Washington State Transit Insurance Pool Safety Pilot
System Configuration - Alerts and Warning Displays
This slide shows the reference guide for all the warnings that can be generated from the CAS we tested. It was provided to all the drivers by the vendor.
Source: ROSCO, Inc.

18. System Configuration - Alerts and Warning Displays
Washington State Transit Insurance Pool Safety Pilot
System Configuration - Alerts and Warning Displays
This graphic shows the different warnings for the center display.
This indicator will illuminate with a yellow image if a pedestrian had been detected in front of or is moving toward the bus
The indicator will illuminate with a flashing red image and beep if there is an imminent risk of a collision with a pedestrian
The circular display above the pedestrian warning indicator contains the “Eyewatch” displays which show
Lane departure warning
Speed limit
Headway monitoring
Forward collision warning

19. Telematics - Monitoring System Performance
Washington State Transit Insurance Pool Safety Pilot
Telematics - Monitoring System Performance
The CAS does not record video
Additional cameras record video of events
Additional technology is used to generate data that can be used to evaluate the systems’ effectiveness
Telematics unit captures and transmits data
Each Bus Equipped with a CAS also is equipped with video monitoring and recording and telematics
A Dual Vision camera with both inward and outward facing lenses is mounted on the windshield
Additional cameras are mounted under each of the side mounted VRU detection cameras
A telematics unit time-stamps and logs the bus position, alerts and warnings generated by the CAS, and G-forces
Video can be downloaded at the garage if the transit agency has Wi-Fi; otherwise the video is stored in removable SD cards.
The telematics unit uses 3G cellular technology to transmit data back to the telematics provider.
A variety of data and performance indicators are available

20. Monitoring System Performance with Telematics and Video
Washington State Transit Insurance Pool Safety Pilot
Monitoring System Performance with Telematics and Video
This graphic shows a frame from a video clip generated by an event triggered by the CAS. The pedestrian in the video was crossing in front of the bus. The system would have issued both a visible and audible alert to the driver.
Note that the bus speed is zero on the video, indicating that the driver was able to stop in time to avoid hitting the pedestrian

21. Mapping Telematics Data
Washington State Transit Insurance Pool Safety Pilot
Field Testing the CAS-
Mapping Telematics Data
In addition to the warnings provided to the individual bus drivers, the project telematics provides geographic data on where pedestrians are most at risk.
The ability to map warnings and alerts opens a new window for both automation and connectivity for transit. The top photo shows the intersection in the video clip where the pedestrian warning was generated.
The bottom phot shows the configuration of the crosswalks at the intersection. If the telematics data reveals frequent pedestrian warnings at this location, planners can identify measures to improve pedestrian safety and reduce risk.
Content/Source URL
Google Earth and Google Streetview

22. Washington State Transit Insurance Pool Safety Pilot
Field Testing the CAS
Checking System Performance in Revenue Service –
comparing real time observations with telematics data
We checked the performance of the telematics and data collection system by riding on the buses and comparing real world events with the records in the telematics database. This is a time-stamped photo taken of a pedestrian alert on King County Metro (KCM) trolley bus #4346 at _ PDT The next slide shows the data logged.

23. Washington State Transit Insurance Pool Safety Pilot
Field Testing the CAS- Logging Telematics Data
This graphic shows the telematics data recording of the pedestrian alert seen in the previous photo, on King County Metro trolley bus #4346 at on March 28, 2016 at 21:57:29 EDT = 18:57:29 PDT

24. Data Collection April 1, 2016 – June 30, 2016
352,129 operating miles
23,798 operating hours
250 driver surveys returned
178 comments received
16,600 hours of video
10,000 events logged
19 TB of video storage
No pedestrian or forward collisions

25. Active Fleet (33 buses, 344K mi)
Comparing Frequency of Alerts and Warnings with Spokane Transit Control Group
Warning Type
Warnings per 1000 miles
Control Group
(2 buses 17K mi)
Active Fleet (33 buses, 344K mi)
Active Fleet
Difference
Forward Collision
327.76
93.24
-71.55
Pedestrian Collision
61.66
34.95
-43.32

26. Video Analyses by UW Testing for False Positives and False Negatives

27. WSTIP Fixed Route Liability Claims History
Grand Total
100%
$53,159,668
Claims not Impacted by CAWS
35%
$18,585,081
Claims Impacted by Forward Vehicle CAWS
$18,593,035
Claims Impacted by Pedestrian CAWS
30%
$15,981,552
Total Claims Impacted by Forward Vehicle and Pedestrian CAWS
65%
$34,574,587

28. Research Implications – The Business Case for CAS/AEB
Bus Type
2015 Casualty & Liability Expense per Bus
Commuter Bus
$6,229
Motor Bus
$7,986
Rapid Bus (BRT)
$4,116
Trolley Bus
$11,796

29. What Next - Autonomous Braking
Autonomous Emergency– Need for Standards and Testing
What Next - Autonomous Braking
The curved line shows velocity of the bus when braking
This graphic shows a curved line representing the velocity of a bus when stopping in anticipation of a collision
The vertical axis is velocity and the horizontal axis represents time. Four phases of stopping are shown: reaction, brake latency, jerk, and deceleration
The time it takes for an operator to react to an impending collision is shown on the left as the reaction phase.
During the reaction phase, the bus is traveling at its initial velocity
When the operator removes his or her foot from the accelerator and depresses the brake pedal, the brake latency phase is a brief period in which the engine retarder can begin to slow the bus. At the same time, the brakes become charged.
The next phase is called “jerk.” Jerk is defined as the change in deceleration or braking rate as the brakes engage.
In the last phase, deceleration, the brakes are fully engaged and the bus slows to a stop at a constant rate.
A CAS may alert a driver to a pending collision when his or her attention may be focused elsewhere However, the driver and the bus will still go through all of the time phases from reaction to deceleration The distance traveled equals the velocity multiplied by the time
During the initial reaction phase, the bus can travel a considerable distance, and may not stop in time to prevent the collision
Autonomous Emergency Braking (AEB) can cut the reaction time and charge the braking system more quickly
Consequently, the entire emergency stopping process is greatly improved when CAS is coupled with AEB and the stopping distance can be significantly shortened

30. Pierce Transit - Continuing Research in Collision Avoidance
Autonomous Emergency Braking (AEB) – Need for Standards and Testing
Pierce Transit - Continuing Research in Collision Avoidance
Pierce Transit received $1.66 million grant from Federal Transit Administration (FTA) to install bus safety technology
176 buses will be equipped with Shield+ CAWS
Buses will be operated and data recorded for a full year
Some buses will also be equipped with Automated Emergency Deceleration (AED) for testing
This slide addresses some of the issues related to equipping buses with AEB
Although NTSB has recommended CAS/AEB for new vehicles, and NHTSA has gotten auto manufacturers to voluntarily agree to equip all new autos with AEB by 2022, transit is being left behind.

31. Thank You