One-pedal or two-pedal: Does the regenerative braking system improve driving safety?

IF 5.7 1区 工程技术 Q1 ERGONOMICS Accident; analysis and prevention Pub Date : 2024-11-21 DOI:10.1016/j.aap.2024.107832
Jun Ma, Xu Zhang, Wenxia Xu, Jiateng Li, Zaiyan Gong, Jingyi Zhao
{"title":"One-pedal or two-pedal: Does the regenerative braking system improve driving safety?","authors":"Jun Ma, Xu Zhang, Wenxia Xu, Jiateng Li, Zaiyan Gong, Jingyi Zhao","doi":"10.1016/j.aap.2024.107832","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Electric vehicles equipped with regenerative braking systems provide drivers a new driving mode, the one-pedal mode, which enables drivers to accelerate and decelerate with the throttle alone. However, there is a lack of systematic research on driving behavior in one-pedal mode, and whether it actually enhances or reduces safety remains to be validated. A driving simulator was used to analyze driving behavior and safety in the one-pedal mode in situations with different urgency level, with the two-pedal mode (the traditional driving mode in internal combustion engine vehicles) serving as a comparative group. The driver's perception times, initial and final throttle release times, throttle to brake transition times, maximum brake pedal forces, collision ratios, and time-to-collision (TTC) were measured under the lead vehicle decelerating at 0.1 g, 0.2 g, 0.5 g, 0.75 g, as well as uncertainty (decelerating at 0.2 g to 25 km/h, then decelerating at 0.75 g to 0), and under headways of 1.5 s and 2.5 s. Results showed: 1) The regenerative braking system did not affect driver perception and reaction of the lead vehicle braking event and drivers extended throttle release to avoid rapid speed drops when the lead vehicle braked slowly; 2) the one-pedal mode exhibited a longer throttle to brake transition time and increased uncertainty in timing of brake pedal application; 3) the one-pedal mode was safer than the two-pedal mode in low urgency situations but became unsafe in high urgency or uncertain situations due to delayed braking. The implications of this research include enhancing regenerative braking systems and developing forward collision warning systems.</p>","PeriodicalId":6926,"journal":{"name":"Accident; analysis and prevention","volume":"210 ","pages":"107832"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accident; analysis and prevention","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2024.107832","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ERGONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Electric vehicles equipped with regenerative braking systems provide drivers a new driving mode, the one-pedal mode, which enables drivers to accelerate and decelerate with the throttle alone. However, there is a lack of systematic research on driving behavior in one-pedal mode, and whether it actually enhances or reduces safety remains to be validated. A driving simulator was used to analyze driving behavior and safety in the one-pedal mode in situations with different urgency level, with the two-pedal mode (the traditional driving mode in internal combustion engine vehicles) serving as a comparative group. The driver's perception times, initial and final throttle release times, throttle to brake transition times, maximum brake pedal forces, collision ratios, and time-to-collision (TTC) were measured under the lead vehicle decelerating at 0.1 g, 0.2 g, 0.5 g, 0.75 g, as well as uncertainty (decelerating at 0.2 g to 25 km/h, then decelerating at 0.75 g to 0), and under headways of 1.5 s and 2.5 s. Results showed: 1) The regenerative braking system did not affect driver perception and reaction of the lead vehicle braking event and drivers extended throttle release to avoid rapid speed drops when the lead vehicle braked slowly; 2) the one-pedal mode exhibited a longer throttle to brake transition time and increased uncertainty in timing of brake pedal application; 3) the one-pedal mode was safer than the two-pedal mode in low urgency situations but became unsafe in high urgency or uncertain situations due to delayed braking. The implications of this research include enhancing regenerative braking systems and developing forward collision warning systems.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
单踏板还是双踏板?再生制动系统能提高驾驶安全性吗?
配备再生制动系统的电动汽车为驾驶员提供了一种新的驾驶模式--单踏板模式,使驾驶员可以仅通过油门加速和减速。然而,目前还缺乏关于单踏板模式下驾驶行为的系统研究,这种模式究竟是提高了安全性还是降低了安全性,还有待验证。本研究使用驾驶模拟器分析了在不同紧急程度情况下单踏板模式下的驾驶行为和安全性,并将双踏板模式(内燃机汽车的传统驾驶模式)作为对比组。在主车减速 0.1 g、0.2 g、0.5 g、0.75 g 以及不确定情况(减速 0.2 g 至 25 km/h,然后减速 0.75 g 至 0)下,并在车头间距为 1.5 s 和 2.5 s 的情况下,测量了驾驶员的感知时间、油门初始和最终释放时间、油门到制动器的转换时间、最大制动踏板力、碰撞比率和碰撞时间(TTC)。结果显示1)再生制动系统不影响驾驶员对前导车辆制动事件的感知和反应,当前导车辆缓慢制动时,驾驶员会延长油门释放时间以避免车速急剧下降;2)单踏板模式表现出较长的油门到制动过渡时间,并且制动踏板踩下时间的不确定性增加;3)在低紧迫性情况下,单踏板模式比双踏板模式更安全,但在高紧迫性或不确定情况下,由于制动延迟,单踏板模式变得不安全。这项研究的意义包括增强再生制动系统和开发前撞预警系统。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
11.90
自引率
16.90%
发文量
264
审稿时长
48 days
期刊介绍: Accident Analysis & Prevention provides wide coverage of the general areas relating to accidental injury and damage, including the pre-injury and immediate post-injury phases. Published papers deal with medical, legal, economic, educational, behavioral, theoretical or empirical aspects of transportation accidents, as well as with accidents at other sites. Selected topics within the scope of the Journal may include: studies of human, environmental and vehicular factors influencing the occurrence, type and severity of accidents and injury; the design, implementation and evaluation of countermeasures; biomechanics of impact and human tolerance limits to injury; modelling and statistical analysis of accident data; policy, planning and decision-making in safety.
期刊最新文献
One-pedal or two-pedal: Does the regenerative braking system improve driving safety? Detection and analysis of corner case scenarios at a signalized urban intersection. Driving characteristics of static obstacle avoidance by drivers in mountain highway tunnels - A lateral safety distance judgement. Revisiting the correlation between simulated and field-observed conflicts using large-scale traffic reconstruction. V-FCW: Vector-based forward collision warning algorithm for curved road conflicts using V2X networks.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1