HUMANIST 2014 – Vienna – 05.06.2014 Development and evaluation of a driver coaching function for electric vehicles Dr. Marcus SCHMITZ Vienna, 05.06.2014.

HUMANIST 2014 – Vienna – 05.06.2014

Development and evaluation of a driver coaching function for electric vehicles

Dr. Marcus SCHMITZ

Vienna, 05.06.2014

HUMANIST 2014 – Vienna – 05.06.2014 2

Introduction

HUMANIST 2014 – Vienna – 05.06.2014 3

Eco-driving approaches

Feedback mode

- Visual (e.g. screen, HUD)

- Haptic (e.g. active acceleration pedal)

- Acoustic

- eACC

Feedback timing

- Before trip (e.g. tips for efficient driving)

- During trip (e.g. information on current consumption)

- After trip (e.g. information on total consumption, costs)

Implementation

- Integrated

- Mobile device

Functionality

- General feedback

- Context-sensitive/situation-adaptive feedback

Content of feedback

- Recommendations for efficient driving

- Feedback on actual driving efficiency

- Presentation of efficient route

HUMANIST 2014 – Vienna – 05.06.2014 4

• Integrated approach with visual icons via head-up display

• Real-time feedback during trip

• Situation specific advices -> possibility to change driving behavior immediately

• Possibility of advice free driving -> reducing workload and distraction

• Considering safety critical aspects of driving

• Specific advices for electric vehicles

eFuture ”Driver coaching function”

HUMANIST 2014 – Vienna – 05.06.2014 5

Real-time driver coaching

Coaching advices1. Acceleration behavior2. Legal speed limit3. Speed behavior when approaching curves4. Achieving new target speed5. Speed behavior when approaching downhill sections6. Car following

Optimal behavior Actual behavior

Evaluation

Surrounding traffic

Traffic signs/rules

Topography

Energy consumption

HUMANIST 2014 – Vienna – 05.06.2014 6

Evaluation study

HUMANIST 2014 – Vienna – 05.06.2014 7

• Research questions – Is there an significant impact of the specific real-time coaching on

energy consumption (in comparison to unspecific coaching or sole verbal instruction)?

– Does the specific real-time coaching change the driving behavior?

– How do drivers evaluate the acceptance of specific real-time coaching?

Evaluation study

HUMANIST 2014 – Vienna – 05.06.2014 8

• Study design

Evaluation study

Experimental Condition Baseline Eco-drive

Specific real-time advices

BAS(no instruction)

COA(verbal instructions + specific real-time advices)

Consumption scale BAS(no instruction)

SKA(verbal instructions + consumption scale)

Verbal instruction BAS(no instruction)

VER(verbal instructions only)

HUMANIST 2014 – Vienna – 05.06.2014

Coaching approaches

9

Coaching advices - COA Consumption scale - SKA Verbal instruction - VER

Omit hard accelerating

Do not exceed the current legal speed limit

Keep constant speed while negotiating a curve

Decelerate by means of the electric brakeTry to omit hydraulic braking by means of anticipatory drivingSail over hilltops / sail when driving downhill in order to gain speedKeep a sufficient distance to leading vehicles in order to omit velocity fluctuations

HUMANIST 2014 – Vienna – 05.06.2014

Simulator

• Simulator – WIVW Driving simulator

Electric vehicle model with combined pedal solution

Measurement of energy consumption, acceptance/usability, and driving behavior

– Specific advices and consumption scale via head-up display

10

HUMANIST 2014 – Vienna – 05.06.2014

Track & sample

• Track– 15 km test track including several

changes of speed limit, sharp curves, in-/declines, car following, and intersections

• Sample– N = 30 (16 women, 14 men)– Age: m = 33 years (sd = 14 years)

11

HUMANIST 2014 – Vienna – 05.06.2014 12

Results

HUMANIST 2014 – Vienna – 05.06.2014 13

Results – Energy consumption

• Baseline: no difference between groups

• Each method reduced significantly energy consumption

• No difference regarding energy consumption between feedback conditions

F(2, 27) = 1.83, p = .180

Energy consumption

HUMANIST 2014 – Vienna – 05.06.2014 14

Results – Driving behaviour

F(2, 27) = 3.94, p = .032 F(2, 27) = 5.85, p = .008

Velocity Positive acceleration

HUMANIST 2014 – Vienna – 05.06.2014 15

Results – Driving behaviour

F(2, 27) = 2.86, p = .075 F(2, 27) = 2.46, p = .105

Deceleration Sailing

HUMANIST 2014 – Vienna – 05.06.2014 16

Results – Acceptance

• Drivers assessed specific online coaching to be helpful

• Subjective improvement of driving style and efficiency

• Advices were rated to be – not frustrating – not disturbing – not distracting – quite motivating – understandable

• Drivers criticised velocity advice to be too restrictive

• Need to increase accuracy of the recuperation advice as participants sometimes reached the according velocity too early or too late.

HUMANIST 2014 – Vienna – 05.06.2014 17

Conclusions

HUMANIST 2014 – Vienna – 05.06.2014 18

• Real-time feedback is acceptable and seen as more effective than the verbal instructions

• No difference regarding energy consumption between feedback groups

• Feedback type has significant impact on driving style

-> Recommendation for specific real-time feedback

• Long-term usage studies have to show impact on familiar and unfamiliar routes

• Further studies have to show which advices can be replaced by the active accelerator pedal workload reduction

• Drivers ask for more information about saved energy/saved miles

Conclusion

HUMANIST 2014 – Vienna – 05.06.2014

Many thanks!Würzburger Institut für Verkehrswissenschaften GmbH (WIVW)

Robert-Bosch-Str. 4

97209 Veitshöchheim

Tel.: +49-(0)931-78009-116

Fax: +49-(0)931-78009150

e-mail: [email protected]

Dr. Marcus SCHMITZ

Dipl.-Psych. Monika JAGIELLOWICZ

Dipl.-Ing. Michael HANIG

Cand.-Psych. Thomas HAMMER