The Case for Rear Obstacle Sensing
Systems
Attached is a new press release and photo from Rostra Precision Controls, Inc. Please respond by email for a hi-res version.
IF YOU DO NOT WISH TO RECEIVE EMAILED PRESS RELEASES:
You may reply to this email to remove yourself from our list
IF YOU PREFER TO RECEIVE OUR NEWS VIA REGULAR MAIL PLEASE INDICATE THAT AS WELL
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Mariellen Fagan
McCullough Public Relations
(330) 244-9980
mariellen@mcculloughpr.com
Detection and Prevention of Vehicle Back-Up Accidents
The Case for Rear Obstacle Sensing Systems
________________________________________________________
Introduction
Backing Crash Problem Size
Children at Risk
Real-Life Examples
What is Causing this Epidemic?
Backing Crashes Create Financial Burden
What Can be Done?
We Have the Technology
The ROSS(tm) System
References
Introduction
________________
Every 90 seconds another U.S. driver is involved in a backing accident. Most of these accidents, occurring while the vehicle is in reverse, are caused by the simple fact that the driver cannot see what is behind his car, sport utility vehicle, truck or van. Additionally, most backing accidents happen in an urban setting, where motorists are likely to be involved in multiple, quick trips that begin with backing out of a garage or driveway. Toys, bicycles, pets, poles, buildings and other vehicles can crush bumpers and bend frames, causing thousands of dollars of repair, medical and legal costs. And children, often involved in backing accidents, most tragically end up injured or worse.
According to a joint study by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and Department of Transportation (DOT), there were approximately 182,000 police-reported backing accidents in 1990 and 185 fatalities caused by accidents involving backing-up. The majority of back-up accidents occur because the operator of the vehicle did not see the obstacle (person, pole, other vehicle or any object that poses a collision), meaning those types of accidents are preventable. Further, the study concluded that with the use of a vehicle-based back-up alert system, which warns the operator of a potential collision, back up accidents can be prevented.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimates that the potential of preventing back-up accidents is better than 90 percent with a detection system.
Backing Crash Problem Size
________________________________
Though it may appear to some a minor dilemma, the incidence and consequences of backing accidents are expensive, deadly and growing. Some facts:
* In 1990, the most recent NHTSA/DOT cumulative reported data, there were more than 182,000 police-reported backing crashes.
* These accidents resulted in 185 fatalities and were also the cause of more than 22,000 associated injuries.
* Additionally, more than 300,000 non-police-reported backing crashes occur annually.
* That same year, backing crashes accounted for more than 3 percent of all police-reported crashes and more than .5 percent of all police-reported fatalities.
* The NHTSA report also found that one out of every 10 vehicles would be involved in a backing crash accident during its operational life.
Children at Risk
_____________________
Perhaps the most shocking part of this public problem is that the death rate of children is growing as the number of backing accidents increases. In the early 1990s, the number of child back-up deaths in the United States was less than 10. There were 38 cases in 2000 and 69 in 2001.
In June 2002, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) issued a report stating between July 1, 2000, and June 30, 2001, an estimated 9,160 children were injured in and around motor vehicles not in traffic. The CDC reported that being run over or backed over by a motor vehicle accounts for 30 percent of these injuries. In addition, at least 78 children were killed by vehicles that were not in traffic, and 27 percent of those deaths resulted from being backed over by a motor vehicle.
Real-Life Examples
________________________
PRINCETON, Minn. - A 15-month-old boy died after his mother accidentally backed her minivan over him in Baldwin Township, authorities said. Leslie Lindley thought her son, Trevor, was in his car seat when she started to back out of a garage around 9 a.m., according to the Sherburne County Sheriff's Department. Lindley said she paused when she heard a noise underneath the vehicle as she was backing out. She assumed she had ran over a toy, but then found her son beneath the van, according to a sheriff's report.
Associated Press, December 6, 2001
SALT LAKE CITY - A 1-year-old boy was run over by a visitor at his Kearns home. Salt Lake County sheriff's investigators said the baby's parents lost track of their child as they were walking a friend from their porch to the car. As the friend backed out of the driveway, the child fell under the rear axle and was dragged about four feet. The child was bleeding from the head and mouth when sheriff's deputies arrived but did not suffer internal injuries.
The Salt Lake Tribune, February 19, 2002
DURHAM, N.C. - A 3-year-old girl was in fair condition after a car hit her when her father was backing out of the driveway. Police said that the father did not see his daughter behind a 1999 Buick when he put the car in reverse and backed down the home's driveway.
And, in Charlotte, North Carolina, two toddlers died within in two weeks in the summer of 2002 when their mothers backed over them in the driveway. Eli Bannister, 15 months, died after he was struck in his driveway in Wingate. And JaMichael Mazyck, 2 years old, died the same way.
For toddlers, a backing accident has become the most common type of pedestrian death - being run over in a driveway, often by their own parent, according to Theresa Cruz, director of the Carolinas Center for Injury Prevention and Control. The problem begins with the child trying to get to the parent, who doesn't realize the toddler is anywhere near the vehicle.
Janette Fennell studies car-related child deaths for the San Francisco-based Kids 'N Cars. Her organization has documented 215 backing-up accidents involving children and 193 child deaths since 1993. Almost as many toddlers are dying in backing-up accidents as those who died after being left in hot cars the past several years. Most of the fatalities are less than a year old. Fennell refers to the problem as "Bye-Bye Syndrome." Young children, who are just learning to walk, don't want to leave their mother or father for even a minute, according to Fennell. "This is a tragedy within a tragedy," she said. "Who can go on when there's a death of a child? And when it was a family member driving."
What is Causing this Epidemic?
___________________________________
Transportation experts, industry analysts and just plain common sense point to two obvious reasons for the rise in child-related backing deaths:
* The increase in SUV ownership.
* The decrease in personal play area for children.
The sales of SUVs, especially to America's "soccer moms," have steadily and dramatically grown as these vehicles increase in popularity. Functioning as a multi-use form of transportation for active parents, SUVs and vans have contributed significantly to the incidence of child backing deaths - the SUVs large size and extreme height (as compared to a passenger car) make it difficult for a driver to see objects and people on the ground behind the vehicle. Rear visibility is frequently poor, and the "blind spot" in back of the vehicle is much larger. One example is the Chevrolet Safari Van. The driver cannot see anything directly behind the vehicle if it's close to the back and lower than four feet - above the height of most children.
According to Fennell, San Francisco, Kids 'N Cars, the disappearance of the traditional backyard is also a contributor in backing accidents involving children. Because of the rise in subdivision and cluster housing developments, which feature a high number of large homes on small, often decoratively landscaped lots, children today have limited play space. Thus, they are using the driveway, and even the neighborhood roadways, as their playground. Half-acre backyards doubling for football fields simply don't exist anymore - they've been replaced with ponds, fountains, decorative shrubbery and exotic plants. Children are exposed to what their parents falsely believe to be the increased safety of the front drive and roadside parking areas, the most frequent location for backing crashes.
Backing Crashes Create Financial Burden
__________________________________________
In addition to the terrible threat of human injury or death, backing accidents result in increased cost for vehicle repairs, insurance premiums, legal fees and medical expenses ? not to mention the hassle associated with the loss of transportation during the repair process.
The Insurance Institute of Highway Safety recently conducted a 5mph crash test of midsize SUVs, which revealed that 66 percent of the vehicles sustained damages of $5,000 or more. Of these total repair costs, the Insurance Institute states that it cost an average of $1,065 to $2,006 just to repair flimsy bumpers on truck based vehicles, with many of the larger vehicles' bumper repair bills topping the $2,006 mark. In the same study, automobiles also were shown to suffer surprisingly high damages for simple 5mph (an average backing speed) crashes. A sampling of their findings for costs of repair:
Cadillac Seville - Cost of 5mph crash repair - $2,735: Chevrolet Impala - Cost of 5mph crash repair - $2,342: Dodge Intrepid - Cost of 5mph crash repair - $2,115: Buick LeSabre - Cost of 5mph crash repair - $2,084
According to Allstate Insurance Company, 27 percent of all automobile accidents occur in reverse, it becomes easy to understand why this problem has become such a monetary plague on drivers and insurers.
What Can be Done?
__________________________
Just recently, the CDC's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report addressed the issue of child safety and motor vehicles. Though national attention often focuses on protecting children as occupants transported in traffic on public roads, the CDC is acutely aware of the need to protect children who are unattended in or around motor vehicles that are not in traffic. The report calls for:
"...as children might be protected by commercially available vehicle enhancements, such as sensors that detect unseen obstacles behind a motor vehicle or devices that emit audible signals when a motor vehicle is in reverse."
As the CDC Weekly Report makes so obvious, something needs to be done. But limitations in accurate crash data from reports such as these restrict widespread public attention to the problem, and even worse, action to solve it. Backing crashes are vastly underreported since most of the accidents occur on private property and not on public roads. Without hard statistics to support the staggering increase of these life threatening backing crashes, it's unlikely many production vehicles will incorporate any rear object sensing design improvements.
We Have the Technology
____________________________
Fortunately, the technology already exists, and is in use, to minimize such predictable and preventable tragedies. Special video cameras are available that let the driver clearly see what lies behind the car. Vehicle owners can also install a variety of sensors that sound an alarm when the backing car gets close to another object. These are called obstacle detection systems. The use of such devices is supported in the CDC report:
"Until production vehicles incorporate rear-obstacle sensing improvements, the use of aftermarket products to
improve safety is recommended. Examples of such products include back-up devices that detect and warn of the
presence of children..."
According to the statistics, many motorists will run into a toy, bike, shopping card, telephone pole or other vehicle.
Sound waves are conveniently used in many automotive obstacle-sensing products today. These systems are referred to as "ultrasonic" or sonar. Sound waves carry the benefit of being able to bounce off almost any type of object, or obstacle, in nearly the same manner regardless of the objects composition. Also, sound waves travel through air approximately one million times slower (Sound = 340 meters per second, light = 300,000,000 meters per second) than the electromagnetic waves in more sophisticated sensing systems.
This is a benefit for ultrasonic systems because one can measure the amount of time it takes for the sound wave to bounce off an object and return to the system, and very accurately calculate the distance from the system to the object.
While special mirrors, video, infrared and "reverse sonar" products are getting attention and use, they have limitations. Since these ultrasonic systems must be kept clean of debris, typically are more prone to false alarm in adverse weather and clearly cannot pass through a plastic bumper, they usually require a more complicated installation that often includes drilling holes in the bumper for the ultrasonic transducers.
A few automakers are offering reverse sonar as an option. But so far, that's been limited to a few luxury models, some minivans and sport utility vehicles. Ford makes it available to buyers of their Windstar minivans and some of their SUVs. It's also available on some luxury cars such as Mercedes and Cadillac Sevilles.
But inclement weather, muddy roads, sunlight glare and darkness can drastically inhibit the accuracy of reverse sonar products engineered to operate with video cameras, ultrasonic or infrared signals.
The ROSS(tm) System
_________________________
Rostra Precision Controls, Inc.'s Rear Obstacle Sensing System (ROSS(tm)) uses leading edge microwave X-band diplex Doppler radar technology to detect objects within 12 feet of the vehicle's rear. Drivers are alerted through a series of audible beeps that increase in intensity and from a surface-mounted in-dash LED display that changes from green to yellow to red, as objects draw closer.
How does it work?
The term "diplex Doppler" identifies the essence of the ROSS(tm) system technology. To better understand, it's helpful to review the term "Doppler" alone. Basic physics tells us that if you are standing still and a train is moving away from you, the sound from the train you hear is gradually decreasing in frequency. Alternately, if you are standing still and a train is moving toward you, the sound from the train you hear is gradually increasing in frequency. This phenomenon is called the Doppler Effect and is caused by the relative motion between you and train.
If the train is generating a constant frequency of noise and both you and the train are stationary, you will hear exactly the same single frequency that the train is producing. As the train slowly begins to move toward you, a single sound wave produced by the train will begin at some distance away from you and end slightly closer to you since the train is in motion and the relative distance between you and the train is decreasing. Thus, that particular sound wave was "crunched up" slightly because of the motion of the train, shortening the length of the sound wave.
Since we know that a shorter wave means a higher frequency, the faster the train moves closer to you, the more the sound waves are "crunched up," or getting shorter. Consequently, the higher frequency of the sound you will hear. This Doppler Effect occurs even up to the point where the train is moving very near the speed of the sound waves traveling through the air. If the train traveled at the same speed as the sound waves, all the sound waves generated by the train would just keep piling up on top of one another and when they got to you it would be one large "boom", or "sonic boom".
In the same manner as discussed earlier, the electromagnetic waves used by ROSS(tm) are also subject to the Doppler Effect. However, electromagnetic waves don't easily bounce off of every type of object, as do sound waves.
Now let's tackle the term "diplex Doppler", the technology used by ROSS(tm). There are two frequencies transmitted in a diplex Doppler system, and by transmitting these frequencies from the rear of an automobile, the ROSS(tm) system can analyze and compare the amount of the Doppler Effect on each different frequency. The diplex Doppler technology demonstrates a relationship between the amount of phase shift (the "crunching" from above discussion) of the two frequencies and the distance between the vehicle and the object. By comparing the amount of phase shift of each individual frequency, the ROSS(tm) system can determine the approximate distance of an object from the rear of a moving automobile. Since there must be a phase shift for the system to have data to analyze, the ROSS(tm) is not capable of static or stationary detection.
The system will not detect an object unless there is motion between the ROSS(tm)-equipped vehicle and the object. Also, the ROSS(tm) will ignore those phase shifts that correlate to an increasing distance to the object. For example, let's say you were at a grocery store parking lot and there was a shopping cart four feet behind your rear. If you put the vehicle in reverse gear while keeping the vehicle stationary with your brake, the ROSS(tm) system would not detect the shopping cart while your vehicle is stationary. But, as you let off the brake and the vehicle begins to slowly back up, the ROSS(tm) system will then detect the shopping cart and alert you with an audible and LED visual indicator corresponding to the distance from the shopping cart. In this same scenario, and while the vehicle is still stationary and in reverse gear, if the cart began to roll toward the rear of your vehicle, the ROSS(tm) would then be able to detect the cart and alert you to its presence and distance. Similarly, while the vehicle is stationary and in reverse gear, if the shopping cart began to roll away from the rear of your vehicle, the ROSS(tm) system would then be able to detect its presence and distance but would not alert the driver because the object is moving away from the rear of the vehicle.
Rostra chose to implement the diplex Doppler technology into its ROSS(tm) systems because it is capable of detecting the presence of an object while determining the approximate distance to the object. Furthermore, the use of microwave X-band radar overcomes many of the shortfalls and problems commonly associated with ultrasonic systems.
Why ROSS(tm)?
According to Thomas Weiss, vice president, automotive and electronic accessories group, Rostra Precision Controls, the ROSS(tm) kit is the perfect answer for individuals seeking a higher level of safety in their vehicles. The product is particularly useful for families with small children, or for use in SUVs and other like vehicles where it is difficult to see clearly out of rear windows. In addition to the increased safety afforded by the ROSS(tm), the product also contributes to lower repair, medical, legal and insurance expenses by preventing accidents before they happen.
Other rear object sensing systems using mirrors, video cameras, ultrasonic or infrared waves to alert drivers can be affected by dirt, mud, heavy rain, sleet, snow and various light conditions. The technology in the ROSS(tm) eliminates these concerns, offering the highest rear object detection accuracy since the microwave-based system is unaffected by climatic conditions. The ROSS also offers a more aesthetic installation as it can be hidden from view behind plastic bumper fascias, unlike the other systems.
ROSS(tm) can be installed in less than 30 minutes by mounting two microwave sensors under or behind the bumper. The wires connect conveniently to the wiring harness supplying the rear light assembly of the vehicle. An audible module easily fits inside the vehicle, behind plastic panels, carpet or beneath the parcel shelf, and the tri-color LED display can be mounted on the rear windshield or trim panel, so it is clearly visible through a rear-view mirror.
Rostra's ROSS(tm) carries a suggested retail price of approximately $500, has a three-year, 36,000-mile warranty and is manufactured in the United States. To find a dealer/installer, contact Rostra Precision Controls, Inc. at (800) 782-3379 or visit www.rostra.com.
Rostra Precision Controls, Inc. headquartered in Laurinburg, North Carolina, is the leading supplier of vehicle speed control systems, transmission components and vehicle comfort seating systems to the global automotive aftermarket industry. The company is also a leading manufacturer of electronic controls, systems and components for the original equipment automotive industry. It holds ISO9001 and QS 9000 certifications.
References
__________________
Allstate Insurance Company, 2002, independent report
Associated Press, December 6, 2001
Canadian Broadcasting Company, June 17, 2002, report
Centers for Disease Control, June 2002, report
Centers for Disease Control, Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, July 5, 2002, report
Charlotte Observer, July 9, 2002
The Herald-Sun (Durham, N.C.), May 13, 2002
Insurance Institute of Highway Safety
Kids 'N Cars, June 2002, report
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration /Department of Transportation/ HS 808 016
New Mexico State Highway and Transportation Department, Research Bureau, August 13, 1999
The Salt Lake Tribune, February 19, 2002
Spotlight Health, August 12, 2002
USA Today, July 24, 2002
