Citation

Klauer S, Hong Y, Mollenhauer M, Vilela JPT. Safety (Basel) 2023; 9(2): e30.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2023, MDPI: Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute)

DOI

10.3390/safety9020030

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

This study assessed the limitations of the EasyMile EZ10 Gen 3 low-speed automated vehicle (LSAV) while operating on public roadways. The primary interest was to evaluate the infrastructure elements that posed the greatest challenges for the LSAV. A route was chosen that would satisfy a legitimate transit need. This route included more operational complexity and higher traffic volumes than a typical EasyMile LSAV deployment. The results indicate that the LSAV operated at a lower-than-expected speed (6 to 8 mph), with a high frequency of disengagements, and a regular need for safety operator intervention. Four-way stop-sign controlled intersections, three-lane roads with a shared turning lane in the middle, open areas, and areas without clear markings were the most challenging for the LSAV. Some important considerations include the need to have LSAVs operate on roadways where other vehicles may pass more safely, or on streets with slower posted speed limits. Additionally, the low passenger capacity and inability to understand where passengers are located onboard make it hard for the LSAV to replace bus transits. Currently, the LSAV is best suited to provide first/last-mile services, short routes within a controlled access area, and fill in gaps in conventional transits.

Language: en

Keywords

automated vehicles; naturalistic driving study; performance; safety; transportation as a service