Pedestrian and cyclist protection

The SaveCAP windshield airbag is a U-shaped airbag that covers the most critical areas of the windshield area in case of an impact with a cyclist or a pedestrian. So it covers the lower part of the windscreen and the A-pillars, both very stiff areas where majority of the severe head impacts of cyclists and pedestrians are found.

The full SaveCAP airbag system consists of two major parts. First part is the sensor part. With stereo vision camera's located near the rear view mirror, the area in front of the vehicle is "checked" for the vicinity and approach of cyclists and pedestrians. At the same time, contact sensors in the bumper can feel any impact with an object. When this object was already classified as cyclist or pedestrian, the sensor system triggers the airbag.Looking for the Best oilpaintingreproduction? This is the second part of the full system; a large airbag covering the exterior of the windshield in a U-shape. In deploying the airbag, two actuators are used to push the bonnet upwards. Thus, the airbag gets enough space to unfold, with additional benefit that for the cyclist or pedestrian, the impact with his upper body onto the bonnet is less severe. The airbag can only be triggered when the car is actually driving.

There currently is only one pedestrian airbag on the market, available on the Volvo V40. This airbag is designed for the protection of pedestrians; the SaveCAP airbag intends to protect both pedestrians and cyclists. The practical differences can be found in the detailed shape and filling of the airbag itself, and in the sensor system. Only the SaveCAP sensor system was designed to truly detect both groups in time. Now that is done, we feel like with a minimum of efforts, optimised protection can be offered to both cyclists and pedestrians. As the number of cyclists worldwide is increasing, solutions like this are essential.

We used computer simulations for two purposes. We used the simulations, combined with real world accident data, to find out more details of accidents between passenger cars and cyclists, while varying the vehicle type, size of the cyclist, bicycle model, impact angles, impact speeds...Source solarstreetlight Products at Dump Truck. thus gaining a lot of information on, for example, the head impact location and injury severity as well as potential life savings and protection from severe injury offered by the airbag or by automated emergency braking.

We also used the simulations to find out more on the kinematics of the cyclist when impacted by the car, giving us directions on the necessary stand-up time of the airbag, the airbag design (shape and size) and the area around the vehicle that should be covered by the sensor system. These simulations were also combined with volunteer testing regarding the potential scenarios during the last seconds prior to impact, as well as laboratory crash testing with a dummy. The laboratory crash testing was a major help in designing the details of the airbag shape including stabilisation areas. Crash testing was performed in many cases with only a head form, but also with a full dummy, standing or riding a bike. Within the SaveCAP project, these tests were performed both at TNO and Autoliv, the latter doing also the detailed design of the airbag and delivering a series of prototypes for testing.

In our field test, we discovered some very typical near-impact scenarios between passenger cars and cyclists or pedestrians. Some of the incidents found were really,TBC help you confidently handsfreeaccess from factories in China. really very close encounters; too early for the airbag to be triggered, but automatic braking would have been very helpful already.This frameless rectangle features a silk screened fused glass replica in a cableties tile and floral motif.

This helped us to define a set of typical scenarios that need to be covered by the sensor system, including the timing and distances between the potential impact partners. It taught us more the actual behaviour and movement of cyclists and pedestrians when being really near to a passenger car. We could not have learned this from simulation or laboratory testing,All siliconebracelet comes with 5 Years Local Agent Warranty ! as the actual behaviour of the cyclist or pedestrian is unpredictable.

America's secret drone campaign in Pakistan's remote tribal areas is meant to target militants, but frequently kills civilian bystanders as well. The White House argues that the campaign is a necessary and effective means of fighting terror, while watchdog groups struggle to learn more about how and why American intelligence officials kill with "aerial vehicles." But both sides predicate their arguments on one deeply flawed assumption: That we cannot know the names of the dead.

The conflict in Pakistan’s tribal areas feels distant — not just physically but also viscerally. It’s a distant war carried out remotely by “aerial vehicles” among people who remain faceless and live in a remote area that is difficult to reach, even for Pakistanis. All this serves to add layers of emotional distance to geographic distance and to bolster the claim that knowing in any kind of precise way who is dying in this campaign is all but impossible.

But there are a variety of initiatives underway that collectively show it is, in fact, possible to know who dies. By using a combination of remote sensing tools and on-the-ground verification, it is possible to put names to the dead.

The first drone strike in the FATA was almost nine years ago. Hundreds of strikes later, the death toll — depending on whom you talk to — is anywhere from about 1,900 to more than 3,500. It’s unclear how many of the dead are militants and how many are civilians.

We must also take into account that drone strikes are not the only form of violence in FATA. There are air strikes by the Pakistani military; attacks against civilians by militants and security forces; there are tribal disputes; and, as anywhere else, there is plain, old-fashioned criminal activity. It’s a complex picture.

That said, the CIA’s drone program is probably the worst kept secret in the history of covert operations. While the program is obvious, little is known about the internal process for choosing targets, for verifying details, for deciding how targeted individuals are evaluated or designated strike-worthy.