1. Event Data Recorders: The Next Generation of Safety Intelligence Jennifer Harper Ogle Georgia Institute of Technology

2. Presentation Overview Brief History of NHTSA EDR Involvement NHTSA EDR Working Group Findings Current NHTSA DRIVE Atlanta Laboratory Project Privacy Issues Future Directions

3. Early Vehicle EDR 1970 - Disc Recorder Installed in 1,100 Vehicles 26 Million Miles 23 Crashes Analyzed Limited and Expensive

4. 1995 Automatic Collision Notification Goal – To use technology to provide faster and smarter EMS response to save lives and reduce disabilities from injuries Veridian Engineering Erie County, New York 700 Instrumented Vehicles 15 Crashes Analyzed

5. 9-1-1 Dispatch Center Graphic:Veridian Engineering

6. 1997 NTSB Recommends NHTSA should pursue crash info gathering using Event Data Recorders NASA and JPL make similar recommendations later that year Graphic:Smiths Industries

7. Early 1998 NHTSA formed an EDR Working Group to pursue fact-finding effort for EDR Technology Meeting Minutes and Documents can be found at: http://dms.dot.gov/search/ Docket # 5218

8. EDR Working Group MISSION Facilitate the collection and utilization of collision avoidance and crashworthiness data from on- board Event Data Recorders

9. EDR Working Group OBJECTIVES  Status of Technology  Data to Record  Data Collection and Storage  Data Retrieval  Responsibility of Permanent Record  Privacy and Legal Issues  Customers of EDR Data  Demonstration of Technology

10. Status of Technology Current EDR’s limited primarily to GM and a few aftermarket companies More manufacturers joining in Less than ½ of new vehicles entering fleet GM stated EDR will be standard feature within a couple of years

11. Data to Record – Top Ten Longitudinal and lateral acceleration and PDF (crash pulse) Location of Crash (GPS) Seat Belt Status # of Occupants and Location Pre-crash Data – Driver Input Time of Crash Rollover sensor Yaw Sensor ABS, Traction Control, Stability Control Air Bag – Activation status, deployment time, deployment stage

12. GM Data Stored on OBD Parameter 1990 DERM 1994 SDM 1999 SDM State of Warning Indicator when event occurred (ON/OFF) Length of time the warning lamp was illuminated Crash-sensing activation times or sensing criteria met Time from vehicle impact to deployment Diagnostic Trouble Codes present at the time of the event Ignition cycle count at event time Maximum Delta-V for near-deployment event Delta-V vs. time for frontal airbag deployment event Time from vehicle impact to time of maximum Delta-V State of driver’s seat belt switch Time between near-deploy and deploy event (if within 5 seconds) Passenger's airbag enabled or disabled state Engine speed (5 sec before impact) Vehicle speed (5 sec before impact) Brake status (5 sec before impact) Throttle position (5 sec before impact) Graphic:NHTSA

13. Data Storage/Retrieval EDR Storage capability varies widely  Mfg. Systems limited  300 ms deltaV at 10ms frequency  5 snapshots of throttle, brake, engine rpm, and speed  Single point status of other items Downloading varies widely

14. Consensus NO CONSENSUS NO STANDARDS NO MANDATES

15. Limited Findings Real World Crashes Very Different from Laboratory Test Data 1998 Chevy Malibu Crash  Underride impact with Heavy Truck  WINSMASH estimate ~ 23 mph  EDR measured 50 mph Real data will help greatly in refinement of safety systems as well as determination of crash cause

16. Permanent Records Government vs. Private Industry …majority leans toward private industry following medical community model

17. 2000 NHTSA EDR Study Quantitative Properties of the Relationship Between Speeding, Aggressive Driving and Crash Risk (a.k.a. – DRIVE Atlanta Laboratory) Conducted by: Georgia Institute of Technology

18. Objective Determine extent to which drivers who engage in speeding and aggressive driving are over-involved in crashes, and the specific characteristics of these behaviors that lead to crashes.

19. DRIVE Atlanta Laboratory

20. Goal Target countermeasure programs to control speeding and aggressive driving behavior that lead to crashes.

21. DRIVE Atlanta Laboratory Scope: 1100 instrumented vehicles in field for two years Area: Atlanta, GA Research Agency: Georgia Tech Funding Partners: NHTSA and Safety Intelligence Systems Data: Driver Behavior Profiles, Crash Reconstruction Data

22. Participants Cooperative Agreement with SMARTRAQ Travel Survey Program

23. Equipment MACBOX Mounting Pan Cellular Antenna GPS Antenna Manual Speaker Microphone Wiring Harness

24. MACBOX Components 5 Accelerometers  3 axis for crash detection (+/- 50G)  2 axis for aggressive/extreme driving detection (+/- 8G) GPS Receiver (1-3 m accuracy)  Dead-Reckoning  Gyro and Veh. Speed Sensors Cellular Phone (TDMA w/ SMS) X86 Central Processing Unit  4 MB Ram  32 MB Compact Flash

25. MACBOX Components System Inputs/Hook-ups  Ignition sense  Vehicle Speed Sensor  Seatbelt Status  On-Board EDR (optional)  Brake (optional)  Video (To Be Added)  Power (12V Source, 3mA Draw)  GPS Antenna  Cellular Antenna  Hand’s Free Speaker / Microphone for (E9-1-1)

26. Data Collection Trip Level Data – Collected every second of every trip transferred once a week Extreme Driving Data – Collected only when acceleration thresholds are exceeded transferred with Trip Data Crash Data – Collected before during after crash and transferred immediately to PSAP and GA Tech

27. Trip Level Data Elements Time Date Latitude Speed Heading Longitude Longitudinal Acceleration Seatbelt Status GPS Status Indicators

28. Extreme and Crash Data Extreme  10 seconds of dual axis acceleration at up to 100 Hz  5 seconds before/5 seconds after Crash  20 seconds of dual axis acceleration at 300 Hz  10 seconds before/10 seconds after  Calculate deltaV, PDF, Rollover, etc.

29. Comprehensive Crash Site Data

30. Profile Data Collection

32. GIS – Data Analysis

33. Privacy Issues Who Owns the Data?  No Current Case Law Available  Vehicle Owner with privacy protection under Privacy Act – NHTSA  Vehicle Owner under current laws, suggest change to Mfg.- FHWA  Standard Insurance policy “[owner] authorize[s] us to obtain…other pertinent records.” – ISO, Inc.  If data permits personal identification, written consent should be received from owner - VW

34. Global Safety Data Corp. Firewall Aggregate Crash Data Personal Identifiers and Video Federal, State, Local Agencies Vehicle Manufacturers Authorized Parties Law Enforcement Insurers/Fleet owners Public Safety Agencies Academic/Research

35. Future Directions On-Board Diagnostic EDR Auto Manufacturers (GM and Others) Encrypted Video and Crash Pulse Sent Wireless to Central Database (Safety Intelligence Systems)

36. Graphic:Safety Intelligence Systems

37. More Information Contact DRIVE Atlanta Laboratory Jennifer Ogle – Director Georgia Institute of Technology School of Civil and Environmental Engineering 790 Atlantic Drive Atlanta, GA 30332-0355 404-385-0694