 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
<
back to Services & Technology list  Incident Management > Emergency Management > Emergency Notification
In automobile crashes, one of the most important factors in saving lives is a prompt response from emergency medical services. Emergency Notification Systems, sometimes referred to as "mayday" or "collision notification" systems, have been developed to reduce the time between when the crash occurs and when medical services are provided. By improving information transfer between the trauma care physician and emergency medical service personnel they result in faster, more appropriate care, thus saving lives and reducing disabilities resulting from crashes. These systems have three components: collision sensing, vehicle location, and communication. Collision Sensing Sensing is automatic and may be based on airbag deployment, rapid vehicle deceleration, or chassis deformation. Once the collision has occurred additional sensors may be used to determine:
Crash Location After detecting the crash, it is important for the emergency service provider to know the vehicle's location. Three methods may be used. Geographic Positioning Systems (GPS), the most common, uses satellites to locate the crash with an accuracy of 100m. Mobile communication systems are sometimes used, but are accurate to only 1km, making it difficult to locate crashes that are not near the roadway. The third types is a terrestrial based system. The cost for GPS, which is the most accurate and for that reason the most important, is around $400 for installation in vehicles. Communication Three types of communications may be used to transmit the information about the crash and its location from the crashed vehicle to the emergency services agency: Geosynchronous satellite, low earth orbit (LEO) satellite, and terrestrial communication System. Information Provided by Vehicle Occupants When there is an injury, additional information, such as the nature of the injury and blood type may help emergency medical service personnel provide the best possible treatment for the injured people. Several operational tests of emergency notification systems have been or are being conducted. COLORADO Mayday System This project tests the feasibility for determining vehicle crash locations and then transmitting the information via wireless communication. It evaluates GPS for vehicle location and cellular phone for communications. The cellular phone works over a 12,000-mile area in Colorado. It is equipped with TIDGET, which contains sensor arrays to locate vehicles. It includes a control center where all emergency calls are received and then processed according to the severity of crash. This operational test had two phases: Phase I: Detailed System Design of the prototype that was later used for testing. Phase II: The Mayday Workstation was built and installed and in-vehicle crash sensors and communications were installed in volunteers' automobiles. The final report on the test can be found at http://www.enterprise.prog.org/mayday.htm. Minnesota Mayday Project The objective of this project is to develop and test a Mayday System. This system is capable of transmitting data and voice messages to the different users and is being tested in 11 counties in southeastern Minnesota. This system is composed of GPS, in-vehicle sensors, satellite and cellular phone technology, and emergency response system to provide notification of accidents. The partners involved are Mn/DOT, Minnesota Department of Public Safety, Mayo Medical Center, Calspan Corporation, Castle Rock Consultants. Budget $3,000,000. PuSHMe The PuSHMe project is testing the functionality of a mayday system in the state of Washington. It assesses operational, user, institutional and technology requirements for the implementation of this system [14]. So far, the operational test has evaluated 250 mayday units New York An ACN operational test is being conducted in Erie County, New York. It is composed of crash sensors in vehicles, position locators, signal processors and cellular phones. These and related software were installed in approximately 1,000 vehicles. The partners involved in the test are Cellular One Buffalo, Datumtech, Erie County Medical center (ECMC), Erie Country Sheriff's Office (ECSO). URGENCY Urgency software version 1.0 was developed "for automatic and instant conversion of crash recorder data into a crash severity rating that calculates the probability of the presence of serious injuries in any given crash." The software identifies the type of crash, and using information on the 250,000 serious injuries that occur in the 27 million vehicles crashes each year, it determines the probability of injury in the crash. When it is fully developed, Urgency will also utilize information on pre-existing medical conditions, blood types, reactions to medications, pre-crash speed, braking deceleration, crash pulse, air bag time, sea belt forces, door openings, presence of fire, number, size and seating positions of occupants. These systems are designed to provide assistance in cases other than when there has been a crash. A number of services may be provided.
OnStar System General Motors has developed a system that combines in-vehicle capabilities with a manned service center. It consists of built-in Global Positioning System (GPS) and hands-free, voice activated cellular phone system. The system provides "mayday" services for emergencies; remote diagnostics of the vehicle's engine, power train, and braking systems; and travel-related services, such as hotel reservations. On-Guard The On-Guard 24-hour Emergency Response Center has been developed by ATX Technologies. The in-vehicle components are a central control unit complete with a backup battery, GPS antenna and two special buttons. One button, the communication button, connects the driver with the On-Guard Emergency Response Center so that the driver can tell the people in the center what emergency services or other help he needs. The other button is a panic button that sends automatic information on the status of the driver and automobile. The Response Center has direct communication to fire departments and 911 for emergencies. This system came out at the beginning of 1999. Installation costs are $1,000 and the monthly service fee is $19.95. 1. Orski, Kenneth. GM's OnStar: Offering Safety, Security and Convenience. ITS ONLINE http://www.itsonline.com/ko_onstar.html 2. ITS America News, Automatic Crash Detection Technology Wins Raves in Test, May 20, 1998 3. International Symposium on Transportation Recorders, Reducing Highway Deaths and Disabilities with Automatic Wireless Transmissioon of Serious Injury Probability Ratings from Crash Recorders to Emergency Medical Services Providers. May 3 - 5 1999 4. Veridian Engineering, Automated Collision Notification (ACN) http://www.calspan.com/acn.html 5. ITS Program Information Emergency Notification and personal Security. http://www.itsa.org 6. ITS America News ITS America Members Introduce Mobile MayDay October 28,1998 http://www.itsa.org 7. ITS America News Cargo Theft 'Out of Control'; Hi-Tech Answer to Track Trailers, Cargo. October 13, 1998 8. ITS America 1997 Project Book Automated Collision Notification Operational Field Test 9. ITS America Fact Sheets Mayday and Collision Notification Systems September 24, 1998 http://www.itsa.org 10. G. Junge, W. Huber, N. Ayland, E. Morello The Quartet/Storm Emergency Call System for automatic data transmission in case of accidents. Telematic for Transport 11. Ed Crow The Pennsylvania Rural Highway Trauma Program. http://www.arl.psu.edu/areas/patrauma/patrauma.html 12. Raymond Yuan, Robb Newman, Stanley Young and Eric Holm Candidate technologies for an Automated Collision Notification System. Proceedings of the 1994 International Congress on transportation electronics 1994 13. Edward Starosielec, Douglas J. Funke and Alan J. Blatt. Automated Crash Notification. TR News March - April 1999 14. http://www.wsdot.wa.goc/eesc/atb/atb/Status.html 15. http://www.enterprise.prog.org/mayday.htm Author: Hans Roth. Last Updated 02/02/00
|
Hosted by the Institute of Transportation
Studies at
the University of California at Berkeley and Caltrans
Copyright 2003 UC Regents