Discussion on Session 7 „ITS“
PAPER
SAFESTRIP: Hardware in the Loop motorcycle simulator experiment for C-ITS applications
SAFESTRIP: Hardware-in-the-Loop-Motorradsimulator-Experiment für C-ITS-Applikationen
Question
How much hardware must be installed on the roads? And, can the safe strips be placed anywhere?
Answer by Ioannis Symeonidis
Thank you for the important question about installation costs. In SAFESTRIP project there are two types of strips one for pedestrians that is placed on the sidewalk before the crossing parallel to the zebra lines, and one for the cars that is placed on the road vertical to its direction. For the road two strips are required per lane and also three pairs of strips must be placed in incremental distances from the road junctions. The strips can be attached over the road surface with minimal work.
Question
What are the plans for the first field trial?
Answer by Ioannis Symeonidis
Thank you for your question, simulators were used as a first stage test in order to assess the hardware function before moving to the field tests. The field tests have succesfully taken place in Italy, Spain and Greece with both cars and motorcycles in similar scenarios as the ones presented. The data collected is currently analyzed.
Question
Thank you for addressing such an interesting topic. I have one question regarding the rider’s reaction to the warning displayed:
It is regularly an issue which time period between warning issued and rider reaction is acceptable to interpret the rider’s reaction as consequence to the warning. As far as I understood, you use a threshold of 3 seconds and I would like to know where the 3 seconds come from (statistical criteria coming from distributions of reaction times, literature, intelligent guess etc.)
Answer by Ioannis Symeonidis
Dear Sebastian thank you for your question,
The warning had three different levels, an informatory warning, a cautionary warning and an imminent risk warning. In the analysis we were interested to measure the reaction time and the rider compliance to the informatory warning. Based on the distance from the critical event and the initial participant travel speed, 50 km/h in the urban area and 100 km/h in the highway, around 3s was the time the participants started to receive the 2nd warning level and for this reason we set the cutoff reaction time to 3s.
Question
Dear Ioannis,
while listening to your presentation, a second and third question came to my mind. Motorcycle visual warning design is still “at the beginning” and there is especially no standard for visual warnings for C-ITS applications. Therefore I was quite interested in what you used and got a little bit confused. Your presentation shows colored boxes with quite some text and symbols. Below that there is a shoe with a scale between 0 and 2 as well as a car stop sign. My questions are:
1. Did the riders see the colored boxes only or the shoe/ stop sign depending on the criticality as well?
2. Did you display the passenger car warnings (a shoe with probably an accelerator pedal (because in a more critical situation (cautionary) there is less pedal press?) to the motorcyclists or did you use motorcycle-specific designs with throttle twist grip, brake lever etc.?
Answer by Ioannis Symeonidis
Dear Sebastian thank you again for the clarifing questions that I have not addressed during the presentation,
I agree that there is no standard for the motorcycle HMI, an effort was made during the SAFERIDER project to create such a standard by adapting existing standards for other vehicles but still there is a long way to go with experimental studies.
The smartphone application developed in the SAFESTRIP project was adapted to run on smartphones for motorcycles and tablets and infortainment systems for cars. The HMI had target to be intuitive and selfexplainatory. The application for the car and the motorcycle were the same. The participants were shown both parts in the smartphone display as presented in the images in the presentation.
Before this experiment another experiment with motorcycle riders took place to iterativly improve the HMI design. Also to my suprise most of the riders did not commented negatively the presentation of the brake pedal that refers to a car brake, even though I have specificaly asked them about it, maybe they considered it as the motorcycle rear brake. However an important outcome of this experiment was that the audio message that described the action required to improve safety, was more important on the motorcycle riders, than the visual message which mostly had an explicatory funcion.
Bis bald!
Ioannis
PAPER
