INTRODUCTION

Event data recorders (“EDRs” or auto “black boxes”) are devices that record and store

crash data associated with vehicle air bag systems. They have been defined as “an on-
board device or mechanism capable of monitoring, recording, disp laying, storing or
transmitting pre-crash, crash, and post-crash data element parameters from a vehicle,
event and driver.”

Promise a new and unique glimpse of the events that occur during a highway
traffic collision. The EDR in a colliding vehicle can provide a comprehensive snapsho
of the entire crash event –pre-crash, crash, and post-crash. In 2004, an estimated 40
million passenger vehicles were equipped with EDRs. By carefully collecting and
analyzing the details provided by the growing number of EDR-equipped vehicles, state
transportation agencies, federal agencies, and the highway safety research community
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA, USA) have an
unprecedented opportunity to understand the interaction of for controlling the unit. he
vehicle-roadside driver system as experienced in thousands of highway accidents
each year

The existing analysis of vehicular collision accidents of the basis of estimates from
tyre marks, crush shape and witness statements has many limitations . In recent years,
event data recorders ( EDRs) have been installed on many late-model vehicles to
record crash-related signals. The devices are found to be useful for forensic experts in
simplifying the reconstruction process and increasing the accuracy of identifying the
cause of a crash accident. Onboard EDRs are not a new concept and such systems
have been developed over a number of years. Many companies and governmental
organizations have made efforts to develop and standardize EDRs. In 1998, the
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) created a working group
to study the feasibility of EDRs.

1
 LITERATURE SURVEY

In the 1950's, Flight Data Recorders (FDR) were installed in commercial

aircraft to record control and other flight parameters in the event of an “unanticipated
energetic disassembly” of the airplane. The concept was simple:

(1) Collect objective real-time data from on board instruments in the aircraft and
record it to the FDR for post-crash review

(2) Gather physical evidence information from the post-crash scene and aircraft and
the

(3) compare and correlate the FDR data with the physical evidence gathered at the
crash site to reconstruct the crash with all the objective information.

The end result is an effort to establish and explain the underlying cause of
the collision and then identify appropriate opportunities to prevent similar events in
the future by whatever means depending on the cause of the event. Using all of these
bits of information, analysts could decide where to put the focus of aviation safety
efforts, whether a change in Engineering, Enforcement or Education as each relate
appropriately to aviation activities. To date, for the most part, many of the same basic
collision investigation techniques have been employed in automobile crash analysis.
Relying almost exclusively on information developed during the post-crash
investigation, collision reconstructionists have analyzed the objective scene data,
information about the people (ie:injuries) and about the involved vehicle(s) to better
understand the automobile crash event: to complete a “reconstruction.” Unlike
aviation crash investigators; however, surface transportation crash investigators
typically don’t (haven’t) had the benefit of FDR-like data.

Having the benefit of observing the positive effect of FDRs on aviation

safety, an early effort to capture objective crash data to supplement that relied on by
reconstructionists and to support other safety activities, the NHTSA was involved in
the experimental installation of about 1,000 disc (data) recorders during the “Disk
Recorder Project” in several surface vehicle fleets in the US in and before 1974. As a
product of this effort, 23 (by some reports 26) crashes were analyzed which included
delta-V’s of up to 20 mph (32.1km/h). In the ensuing years, other similar efforts were

2
made but none would appear to be as demonstrably effective as the 1992 General
Motors (US) installation of sophisticated crash-data recorders in seventy Formula-One
“Indy” race cars. Analyzing the data recorded from crashes with delta-Vs exceeding
more than 60 mph (96.5 km/h) and vehicle decelerations in excess of 100 g’s,
biomechanical engineers have been able to further refine their understanding of human
injury potential. By analyzing other data collected from these crashes, changes in
crash energy attenuation systems and driver protection systems were made which
demonstrably reduced the number of serious driver injuries during the 1998 racing
season

In 1997, seizing on this history and other similar observations of the

practical application for data recorders in aviation as well as in other surface vehicles,
the US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) issued recommendations to
pursue vehicle crash information using Event Data Recorder Based partly on a public
hearing held that year, the NTSB recommended to the NHTSA that it “...Develop and
implement, in conjunction with the domestic and international manufacturers, a plan to
gather better information on crash pulses and other crash parameters in actual crashes,
utilizing current or augmented sensing and recording devices (NHTSA H-97-18)...”
It almost appeared as though someone from the aeronautics side of the transportation
department was transferred to the surface transportation side of the NTSB. Working
from that easily made comparison with aviation FDRs or, as they’re commonly called
“black boxes,” the misapplied moniker of “automotive black box” was then attached to
the surface vehicle EDR effort(s) under way.

3
METHADOLOGY

The crash sensing algorithm used in 1999 model year GM vehicles decides whether to
deploy the airbags based on calibration values stored in the SDM reflecting that
vehicle model’s response to a variety of impact conditions. This predictive algorithm
must make airbag deployment decisions typically within 15-50 msec (.015-.050 sec)
after impact. The SDM's longitudinal accelerometer is low-pass filtered at
approximately 400 Hz. to protect against aliasing, before being input to the
microcontroller (see Figure 1). The typical SDM contains 32k bytes of ROM for
program code, 512 bytes of RAM, and 512 bytes of EEPROM. Every 312 µsec, the
algorithm samples the accelerometer using an A/D converter (ADC) and when two
successive samples exceed about 2 gs of deceleration, the algorithm is activated
(algorithm enable). impact conditions. This predictive algorithm must make airbag
deployment decisions typically within 15-50 msec (.015-.050 sec) after impact.The
SDM's longitudinal accelerometer is low-pass filtered at approximately 400 Hz. to
protect against aliasing, before being input to the microcontroller (see Figure 1). The
typical SDM contains 32k bytes of ROM for program code, 512 bytes of RAM, and
512 bytes of EEPROM. Every 312 µsec, the algorithm samples the accelerometer
using an A/D converter (ADC) and when two successive samples exceed about 2 gs of
deceleration, the algorithm is activated (algorithm enable). Several other sensors
provide driver seat belt status, vehicle speed, engine RPM, brake on/off status, and
throttle position. The driver seat belt switch signal is typically input into the SDM
while the remaining sensors are monitored by one or more other electronic modules
that broadcast their data onto the serial data bus. If there is an airbag deployment or a
near-deployment crash, the last five seconds of data immediately preceding algorithm
enable are stored in EEPROM. All stored data can later be recovered using a laptop
PC equipped with appropriate software and interface hardware. shows how the pre-
impact sensor data would appear when downloaded. To understand this requires some
knowledge of the serial data bus and the SDM's role. First, the serial data bus operates
as a "contention" type of bus. Electronic modules transmit data based on a "send on
change" design. For example, when engine speed changes by at least 32 RPM, the
engine microcontroller broadcasts the new RPM value on the serial bus. Once each
second, the SDM takes the most recent sensor data values and stores them in a

4
recirculating buffer (RAM), one storage location for each parameter for a total of 5
seconds. When the airbag sensing system algorithm “enables” shortly after impact,
buffer refreshing is suspended. Note that algorithm enable is asynchronous with the
transmission of vehicle speed and other data. Hence, the data on the bus can be
skewed in time from the crash by as much as one second. The modules that broadcast
the sensor data (engine RPM, brake status, etc.) also diagnose the sensors for faults
and indicate the data's validity to the SDM. The bus is also constructed so failures of
the serial link are detected by the SDM. At the time of deployment, the state of the
driver's seat belt switch, the manual cutoff passenger airbag switch (if equipped),
warning lamp state, and time to deployment are temporarily stored in RAM. The
critical parameter values used to make the deployment decision are also captured in
RAM When 150 msec have elapsed from algorithm enable, the data stored in RAM
are transferred to the EEPROM. It requires about 0.7 sec to permanently record all
information. Once a deployment record is written the data are frozen in EEPROM and
cannot be erased, altered, or cleared by service or crash investigation personnel. The
recording of near-deployment data includes the pre-impact vehicle speed, engine
RPM, etc. The criteria used to determine whether a near-deployment event is stored in
EEPROM is based on the maximum ∆V observed during the event. If this maximum
∆V is larger than the previously recorded ∆V, the new near-deployment event is stored
along with the corresponding pre-impact data. The near- deployment record is cleared
after 250 ignition cycles. This is equivalent to an average of about 60 days of driving.
Each time the algorithm is enabled and no deployment is commanded, the SDM
compares the maximum ∆V previously stored with the maximum ∆V of this new
event to decide whether to update the near-deployment event data

5
 Application

Main purpose of Vehicle black box system is to provide data which can be used in
analyzing cause of accidents; to serve such purpose, black box caputes real-time
driving information. Most existing vehicle black box system employees Digital Video
Recorder (DVR) to record scene or same view as the driver. Recent vehicle black box
system not only captures the scene, but also captures speed of the vehicle, direction,
acceleration and break operation, external pressure, and many more. The black box
system exploits vehicle sensors and Global Positioning System (GPS) to collect such
data. Vehicle black box system has three main components: Driving Information,
Automotive Black Box, User Device. First, Driving Information is considered as
generated data while the vehicle is in active mode. It collects images,voice, GPS,
speed through sensors attached to Automotive Black Box. Collected general driving
data is stored in Automotive Black Box which is installed on inside of the vehicle. It
manages data collected from Driving Information. We separate general driving data
and accident driving data according to policy of Storage Manager and saves the datato
the external storage device. User Device is front-end used as user interface that
presents stored Driving Information to the user.

1. Hazardous goods transport

2. Coaches and buses
3. Commercial vehicles
4. Vans
5. Emergency service vehicles
6. Motorcyclists
7. Young drivers

Today, EDRs are used in several ways :

Medical

Making it available to emergency services would provide vital information for on the
scene assessment and treatment of injuries and for treatment in hospital.The data could
be used retrospectively in trauma research to improve injury predictions and support
decisions about service provision to improve emergency service response to crashes.
“Measured crash direction and force data can markedly improve injury prediction,

6
algorithms, biomechanics, cost of injury research, and identification of problem
injuries.”

Legal

EDR data would provide much more accurate evidence on the standard of driving
resulting in a crash. For example, driver alertness or vehicle speed can be difficult or
impossible to assess accurately after a crash. Better data would help to distinguish
between careless and dangerous driving and result in greater justice in charging.

Crash prevention

There is evidence that the presence of EDRs can improve driver performance. The
Metropolitan Police attribute a 25% reduction in crash rate to a Safe Driving
programme which includes the fitting of EDRs.

• Understanding accidents. Data from EDRs can be used to make cars safer For
example, if people hit the gas when they meant to hit the brakes, it suggests an
opportunity to redesign the car’s layout.

• Court cases, particularly to establish excessive speed .The star witness in many
cases has been data from EDRs. In most cases it has been used to find a driver guilty,
but in at least one case it has been used to establish innocence.

• Monitoring teens. A commercial product taps into EDRs to signal drivers that they
are cornering too hard, driving too fast,or braking too aggressively.It emits a
clickingtone that gets progressively louder if the driver’s behavior doesn’t change. It
also logs data from EDRs,which allows parents to find out if the irteens have drivet he
family sedan in excess of the speed limit.

• Insurance companies Most drivers have insurance so court cases often involve two
companies fighting it out to determine liability.

7
 Advantages

1. Monitoring and recording of parameters of the car’s systems

2. The dangerous car, driving or surroundings warning
3. Advise driver’s position, trip and other information
4. Detect and record details about the accident

The “Haddon Matrix” with the benefit of EDR data

Human Vehicle Environment

Pre-crash 5 seconds of The status of 5 seconds of

objective pre-cras certain parameter objective pre-

data - especially related to the air crash data -

braking, speed bag system especially

and accelerator including errors braking and

application - and warning accelerator

supplement the messages are application -

subjective recorded supplement and

recollections by enhance the post-

parties/witnesses a crash

to observations and roadway evidence

actions evaluation

8
Crash Notification of Actual crash pulse Actual crash
authorities by way in the form of location may be
of delta-V and time established through
the GM “On Star” will be the GM
system that a available for “On Star” system
crash has occurred comparison to
enables the traditional post-
activation of the crash vehicle
EMS system more deformation
quickly analysis to suggest

generalized crash
parameters
Post- Driver’s belt circuit Collected delta-V Post-crash roadway
status, air bag data can be evidence
Crash
deployment and compared to is inspected,
seat belt pre- traditional documented and

tensioner command methods such as analyzed after the

times would post-crash crash which

supplement post- vehicle deformation may be used with

crash evaluation of to better EDRdatabythe

the injuries to better understand suggest reconstructionist to

indicate occupant general crash more fully
understand the
position, motion & parameters
restraint use event

9
10
 Disadvantages

1. The speed input is measured at the wheels or transmission. Therefore, a

vehicle that is in yaw (sliding sideways) or braking fully may record an
erroneous speed. Actual speed of the vehicle may be much higher or lower.
2. Multiple impact crashes may not be recorded. The EDRs only have limited
space to record a few or even one event.
3. Data may not be recorded or may be corrupted if power is lost during the
collision.

4. EDR data underestimates the severity.

5. Some vehicles have anomalies. For example, late model Chevrolet Cavaliers
built in Mexico have the brake input r Low speed impacts do not produce
accurate data. The impact severity is too low and the eversed (if the EDR says
the brakes were on, they were really off and vice versa).

11
 Future scope

1. Standardization throughout the industry. All vehicles will have the same EDR
data that can be accessed by one tool.
2. The EDR will have much more data over longer periods of time. There are
currently aftermarket systems available that are superior to the OEM systems.
Rental, trucking and taxi companies use these. Some have GPS capabilities to
measure speed and position more accurately.
3. Automated collision notification (ACN) where authorities are called by the
vehicle when a collision is detected. This is currently in use by GM with its
OnStar system.
4. Insurance companies will write into their policies who owns the EDR data
and how the data will be handled.
5. Pay as you drive and rates based on driving style insurance policies.
Progressive Insurance in Minnesota are running a pilot program, called
TripSense, where drivers get a reduced rate if they install a black box and
share the data with the company.
6. There will be a wide range of aftermarket EDRs available to add to your
vehicle if you want
7. Standard mapping and routing features, which are valuable management
tools to improve operations, lower cost, and provide assistance for driver
training.
8. Speed detection is not connected to the vehicle computer and uses an in
dependent input source, which is less intrusive and more reliable.
9. Data retrieval is done through the download to a flash drive in a few seconds.
10. Data can be collected from dozens of vehicles on a single flash drive and
reviewed when convenient.
11. As agencies recognize the necessity of video recording for liability, driver
training ,and vehicle maintenance purposes, they will not need to buy two
different systems for each vehicle.
12. Better product, better customer service and training, more useful features,
simpler operation, and more reliable data.

12
 Conclusion

Current EDR technology can provide very useful information to crash

reconstructionists and vehicle safety researcher s by objectively reporting real
-world crash data. Even though they are limited in the number of recorded
parameters and storage capacity, their capabilities are increasing mainly due to
emerging vehicle safety technologies such as electronic stability control. Present-
day EDRs can provide useful information that can be used to support crash
reconstruc tion research. This data also has the potential to augment data in crash
databases, by providing information especially relating to system performance
not traditionally co llected nor estimated in these databases. Some examples are:
airbag deploymenttimes,second d-stage deployments,andcrash pulse
acceleration.These are all important to vehicle safety researchers and not readily
available from non-EDR real-world crash data.

It is very important to understand the limitati ons of EDR data and care should
always be exercised when interpreting any EDR-repor ted parameter. A wide
range of EDR module-specific limitations exist, and therefore importance should
be placed on module type identification. Also, a clear understanding of what
(and when) the EDR is measuring needs to be gained before any analysis.
Awareness of the EDR limitations is needed for correct interpretation and use of
the data. An example of a potentially misleading situation involves the GM
EDR-reported “% throttle” pre-crash parameter. It can be measured at either the
accelerator pedal or “under the hood,” depending on the vehicle model. Each
measurement location might report significantly different values for the same
data element. There is also an uncertainty associated with pre-crash data timing
due to the way in which the data is processed by the ACN. Similarly, crash pulse
data does not necessarily start at the instant of the crash but most likely a short
time thereafter Ultimately, present-day EDR data can be a powerful investigative
and research tool by complementing existing crash evidence and estim ates. It
should always be used inconjunction with other data s ources, including a
complete re construction, since issues like the ones just described eventually limit
the application of the EDR data.

13
 References

01. National Highway Transportation Safety Administration, “Event Data Recorders

Summary of Findings by the NHTSA EDR Working Group,” Final Report, 2001

02. National Safety Council (US), “Accident Facts” multiple annual editions, Itasca,
USA; see also http://www.nsc.org

03. Kowalick, Thomas M,Fatal Exit, The Automotive Black Box Debate, John Wiley
and Sons, 2005

04. Event Data Recorders: A New Resource for Traffic Safety Research by Alan
German atTransport Canada

05. Event data recorders—final report.NHTSA EDR Working Group,NHTSA,US

DOE 2001,.

14