Blog

As automotive technology gradually advances towards autonomy, it is of the utmost importance that automotive Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEM's) pay special attention to Vulnerable Road Users (VRU) in future product development. The classification of "Vulnerable" describes individuals who are at increased risk due to the lack of a "shell" (protective structure), task capability, resilience, and velocity. These individuals are then subdivided into mode-of-transport and age. Children, the elderly, and the disabled are at the highest risk because of their low task capability and, in some cases, lower physical resilience.

The advancement of safety features in Highway Vehicles has changed the way we travel, and profoundly increased the safety of vehicle operators, passengers, and pedestrians. As the automotive manufacturers have dedicated their focus on safety, and crash survivability, countless lives have impacted. From the advent of the safety-belt, Supplemental Restraint Systems (airbags, pre-tensioners), to engineering crush zones within vehicle structures have significantly increased motor-vehicle survivability. However, the highest risk component, the human operator, is still in control of most vehicle operating functions. This human component is referred to as “Human Factors.”

In recognition of innovation, dedication and best practices, we are now accepting nominations for the ninth annual Excellence in Safety Award. Recognizing the outstanding achievements of safety professionals each year, the Excellence in Safety Award honors those who educate, support, and take action to improve safety on and off the worksite.

Functional Safety

The goal of functional safety is to ensure that organizations provide dependable products to external customers.

As PRECO’s solutions have grown, our products have also begun the testing process with non-automotive applications. Increasingly collaborating with the automotive industry and developing products for fully autonomous automotive vehicle applications. A trend that further emphasizes the need for increased safety oversight described as Functional Safety[i]. 

In Part 1: An Increasingly Distracted World, you were asked to confront your ‘familiarity’ with your environments. A familiarity may cause any one of us to relax and lower our defenses while working with or around heavy-duty machinery. Reflecting on these three questions can help peel back the layers:

Sharing the roadways with buses, delivery trucks, large commercial vehicles, and more are members of the traveling public as they go about their daily routines. Regardless of the mode of transportation, being safe on the road is a responsibility shared by all.

From a cost versus benefit perspective, it is understood that value must justify the cost for leadership buy-in. These decisions are made regardless of the underlying motivation, which has consistently caused a disconnect between the safety technology industry and adoption.

In previous posts, we’ve looked at the difference between RADAR and LiDAR, and between RADAR and ultrasonic sensors. While there are significant differences between these three types of sensors, they have one thing in common: They are all used to increase safety by identifying and locating both still and moving obstacles relative to the path of a vehicle. RADAR sensors do this by emitting radio waves. LiDAR uses high frequency laser light. Ultrasonic sensors emit high-pitched sound waves.

Developing smart vehicles requires a tradeoff: As the vehicle gets more intelligent, it also gets more complex. You can look no further than the number and kinds of sensors newer vehicles now come equipped with to appreciate just how complex. These vehicles that once started as little more than an engine, four wheels, and some brakes have become highly sophisticated computers on wheels.

Each day safety technologies enter the innovative race to bring on-and off-road industries the safety solutions of the future. The public is invested in safety and companies flourish when they follow best safety practices. People want to know what accounts for good safety technology and how it’s implemented to promote efficiency. Despite this strong interest in safety technology, drivers are hesitant to adopt solutions that monitor their actions or take control of operations at any level.