Reflective gear can actually be detrimental when it comes to pedestrian effectiveness … [+]
The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines the term “irony” as, “a discrepancy between the actual outcome of a sequence of events and the normal or expected outcome.”
There’s no other way to describe the latest findings coming from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) regarding the occupant detection technology used in today’s high-tech driver assistance safety systems.
In the most recent testing of vehicles equipped with automatic pedestrian detection braking, the IIHS found that—ironically—the type of reflective clothing that’s otherwise recommended for pedestrians and cyclists is best seen by motorists when out after dark. , it actually confuses them. systems that are designed differently to avoid collisions with them.
The Institute’s study looked at the performance of automatic pedestrian detection braking systems in three popular compact SUVs, the 2023 Honda CR-V, Mazda CX-5 and Subaru Forester, to assess the technology’s effectiveness in detecting pedestrians after dark in different paths. lighting conditions and with them the wearing of different types of clothing.
In previous IIHS ratings, which gave separate ratings for daytime and nighttime pedestrian detection, the Forester earned its highest Superior rating, while the CR-V received its second-best Advanced rating; The CX-5 was not rated. For these evaluations, both child and adult pedestrian dummies used wore black shirts and blue pants.
But this time the organization took a deeper dive into the technology’s effectiveness through multiple evaluations with an adult mannequin wearing all-black clothing, as well as all-white and all-black clothing that included reflective strips similar to those used by road construction workers. All tests were conducted at 25 mph with no added road lighting and again with 10 and 20 lux added ambient while a dummy drove the test track perpendicular to the direction of the subject vehicle.
The study found that the effectiveness of the detection technology varied somewhat when performed under the three lighting scenarios, but was consistently worse when the dummy was wearing what would otherwise be considered safer reflective clothing.
The CR-V and MX-5 tended to crash into the road crossing dummy most of the time, no matter what it was wearing, but at least both slowed down a bit when the dummy was wearing all-black clothes. The systems failed to fully function with the reflective stripes added to the black or white alternatives. While the Forester was actually able to avoid hitting the pedestrian in all but one of the runs, it was when he/she was wearing the reflective vest, though to its credit, the SUV was at least able to slow down by 80% before contact was made. .
The IIHS has yet to determine why the systems tested had more difficulty recognizing the reflective elements than without them.
“These results suggest that some automakers should adjust their automatic emergency braking systems for pedestrians,” says IIHS President David Harkey. “It is untenable that the clothes that pedestrians, cyclists and road workers wear to be safe can make them harder to recognize by collision avoidance technology.”
Notably, in previous testing the IIHS found that during daylight hours pedestrian crashes were 27% lower for vehicles equipped with detection systems than for vehicles without. However, on unlit roads at night, the evaluation found zero difference in crash risk for vehicles with or without the technology.
Clearly, technology still has a long way to go before drivers can let their guard down when driving at any time of day and in any condition.
The full IIHS report can be found here.
