One-pedal or two-pedal: Does the regenerative braking system improve driving safety?
- PMID: 39577104
- DOI: 10.1016/j.aap.2024.107832
One-pedal or two-pedal: Does the regenerative braking system improve driving safety?
Abstract
Electric vehicles equipped with regenerative braking systems provide drivers a new driving mode, the one-pedal mode, which enables drivers to accelerate and decelerate with the throttle alone. However, there is a lack of systematic research on driving behavior in one-pedal mode, and whether it actually enhances or reduces safety remains to be validated. A driving simulator was used to analyze driving behavior and safety in the one-pedal mode in situations with different urgency level, with the two-pedal mode (the traditional driving mode in internal combustion engine vehicles) serving as a comparative group. The driver's perception times, initial and final throttle release times, throttle to brake transition times, maximum brake pedal forces, collision ratios, and time-to-collision (TTC) were measured under the lead vehicle decelerating at 0.1 g, 0.2 g, 0.5 g, 0.75 g, as well as uncertainty (decelerating at 0.2 g to 25 km/h, then decelerating at 0.75 g to 0), and under headways of 1.5 s and 2.5 s. Results showed: 1) The regenerative braking system did not affect driver perception and reaction of the lead vehicle braking event and drivers extended throttle release to avoid rapid speed drops when the lead vehicle braked slowly; 2) the one-pedal mode exhibited a longer throttle to brake transition time and increased uncertainty in timing of brake pedal application; 3) the one-pedal mode was safer than the two-pedal mode in low urgency situations but became unsafe in high urgency or uncertain situations due to delayed braking. The implications of this research include enhancing regenerative braking systems and developing forward collision warning systems.
Keywords: Driving behavior; Driving safety; One-pedal mode; Rear-end collision; Regenerative braking.
Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Similar articles
-
Age and gender differences in time to collision at braking from the 100-Car Naturalistic Driving Study.Traffic Inj Prev. 2014;15 Suppl 1:S15-20. doi: 10.1080/15389588.2014.928703. Traffic Inj Prev. 2014. PMID: 25307380
-
Analysis of drivers' deceleration behavior based on naturalistic driving data.Traffic Inj Prev. 2020;21(1):42-47. doi: 10.1080/15389588.2019.1707194. Epub 2020 Jan 27. Traffic Inj Prev. 2020. PMID: 31986072
-
Modelling braking behaviour and accident probability of drivers under increasing time pressure conditions.Accid Anal Prev. 2020 Mar;136:105401. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2019.105401. Epub 2019 Dec 26. Accid Anal Prev. 2020. PMID: 31884236
-
A farewell to brake reaction times? Kinematics-dependent brake response in naturalistic rear-end emergencies.Accid Anal Prev. 2016 Oct;95(Pt A):209-26. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2016.07.007. Epub 2016 Jul 22. Accid Anal Prev. 2016. PMID: 27450793
-
How to design an fMRI-compatible driving simulator: A systematic review.Traffic Inj Prev. 2025 Apr 15:1-8. doi: 10.1080/15389588.2025.2473541. Online ahead of print. Traffic Inj Prev. 2025. PMID: 40232985 Review.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources