Paper Titles in Periodical
International Letters of Chemistry, Physics and Astronomy
Volume 52

Subscribe

Subscribe to our Newsletter and get informed about new publication regulary and special discounts for subscribers!

ILCPA > Volume 52 > Performance Capabilities and Detection Efficiency...
< Back to Volume

Performance Capabilities and Detection Efficiency of Vehicle Backup Proximity Sensors for Narrow Objects

Full Text PDF

Abstract:

This paper investigates performance capabilities and potential safety effectiveness of ultrasonic backup proximity sensors with special attention on cylindrical and cubical shaped narrow obstacles with the dimensions varies from 2.6 cm to 11.0 cm. The experiment was performed using a commercially available parking aid system consisting of two ultrasonic sensors, and a rear bumper model constructed in a laboratory environment together with a test surface divided into grids having cells of 6 cm x 6 cm. It can be observed that there are considerable differences in detection zone patterns when comparing observations for cylinders and cubes even for same dimensions. Using detection zone maps, it can be seen that, when the size of the test objects become smaller, there are large blind spot areas in the space between the sensors and also near the right and left edges of the rear bumper. In average, when reducing the obstacle dimensions from 11.0 cm to 2.6 cm, the detection efficiency changes from 62.6% to 33.1% for cylindrical objects and for cubical shaped objects it was 39.3% to 21.6%. Average detection efficiency is lower than 50% for objects less than 5 cm in dimension irrespective of the object geometry.

Info:

Periodical:
International Letters of Chemistry, Physics and Astronomy (Volume 52)
Pages:
134-146
Citation:
M. Edirisinghe et al., "Performance Capabilities and Detection Efficiency of Vehicle Backup Proximity Sensors for Narrow Objects", International Letters of Chemistry, Physics and Astronomy, Vol. 52, pp. 134-146, 2015
Online since:
Jun 2015
Export:
Distribution:
References:

[1] Paine, M., & Henderson, M. (2001). Devices to reduce the risk to young pedestrians from reversing motor vehicles. New South Wales: Motor Accidents Authority of NSW.

[2] Paine, M., Macbeth, A., & Henderson, M. (2003, May). The danger to young pedestrians from reversing motor vehicles. In 18th International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles. (Paper No. 466).

[3] Mitchell, R. (2002). Child deaths and injuries in driveways. New South Wales public health bulletin, 13(4), 82-82.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1071/nb02036

[4] Glazduri, V. (2005, June). An investigation of the potential safety benefits of vehicle backup proximity sensors. In Proceedings of the International Technical Conference on Enhanced Safety Vehicles (Vol. 1, p.2).

[5] Huey, R. W., Harpster, J. L., & Lerner, N. D. (1996). In-Vehicle Crash Avoidance Warning Systems: Human Factors Considerations (No. HS-808 531).

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/e590952009-001

[6] Harpster, J. L., Huey, R. W., Lerner, N. D., & Steinberg, G. V. (1996). Backup warning signals: Driver perception and response (No. HS-808 536).

[7] Garrott, W. R., Flick, M. A., & Mazzae, E. N. (1995). Hardware evaluation of heavy truck side and rear object detection systems (No. 951010). Washinton DC: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. SAE Technical Paper.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4271/951010
Show More Hide