Advertisement

Truck Drivers as Stakeholders in Cooperative Driving

  • Freek de BruijnEmail author
  • Jacques Terken
Conference paper
  • 809 Downloads
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8850)

Abstract

Cooperative driving for trucks has been claimed to bring substantial benefits for society and fleet owners because of better throughput and reduced fuel consumption, but benefits for truck drivers are questionable. While most work on cooperative driving focuses on the technology, the current paper focuses on the consequences for drivers and how to deal with those. Two concepts are proposed and evaluated. One concept supports drivers in coordinating cooperative driving with other truck drivers to locate, join, and quit platoons. The other concept provides drivers of following trucks with situation awareness by means of a “see through” system displaying camera images from the lead vehicle. A user evaluation in a driving simulator confirms that cooperative driving may have largely negative benefits for truck drivers, and that concepts such as the ones described in this paper may help to improve the cooperative driving situation for truck drivers.

Keywords

Cooperative driving Platooning Human Factors  User Experience 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    van Arem, B., van Driel, C.J.G., Visser, R.: The Impact of Cooperative Adaptive Cruise Control on Traffic-Flow Characteristics. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems 7(4), 429–436 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Damböck, D., Kienle, M., Bengler, K., Bubb, H.: The H-metaphor as an example for cooperative vehicle driving. In: Jacko, J.A. (ed.) Human-Computer Interaction, Part III, HCII 2011. LNCS, vol. 6763, pp. 376–385. Springer, Heidelberg (2011) Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Endsley, M.R.: Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Hum Factors 37(1), 32–64 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gomes, P., Olaverri Monreal, C., Ferreira, M.: Making Vehicles Transparent through V2V Video Streaming. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems 13(2), 930–938 (2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Holtzblatt, K., Jones, S.: Contextual Inquiry: A Participatory Technique for System Design. In: Namioka, A., Schuler, D. (eds.) Participatory Design: Principles and Practice. Erlbaum, Hillsdale (1993)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    ITEA. ITEA technology roadmap for software-intensive systems, second ed. Information Technology for European Advancement (ITEA). Office Association. (May 2004). https://itea3.org/article/itea-technology-roadmap-for-software-intensive-systems-edition-2.html
  7. 7.
    Matsumoto, S., Kawashima, H.: Fundamental study on effect of preceding vehicle information on fuel consumption reduction of a vehicle group. Journal of Communications and Networks 15, 173–178 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ozcelik Buskermolen, D., Terken, J.: Co-constructing stories: a participatory design technique to elicit in-depth user feedback and suggestions about design concepts. In Proceedings of the 12th Participatory Design Conference: Exploratory Papers, Workshop Descriptions, Industry Cases (PDC 2012), vol. 2, pp. 33–36. ACM, New York (2012)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rakotonirainy, A., Demmel, S., Gruyer, D.: Articulating cooperatives systems and driver behaviour theories. In: 16th ITS World Congress, September 21-25, Stockholm, pp. 3849–3854 (2009)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    de Winter J.C.F., Happee R., Martens M.H., Stanton N.A.: Effects of adaptive cruise control and highly automated driving on workload and situation awareness. A review of the empirical evidence. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour (in press, 2014)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Departement of Industrial DesignTechnische Universiteit EindhovenEindhovenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations