dummy

Proceedings of the 1st

joint ITAI–EVU Conference
18th EVU Conference
9th ITAI Conference

English Version

1
 dummy

The Institute of Traffic Accident Investigators Europäische Vereinigung für Unfallforschung und Unfallanalyse e. V.
Column House European Association for Accident Research and Analysis
London Road Inffeldgasse 11/II
Shrewsbury 8010 Graz
SY2 6NW Austria
United Kingdom www.evuonline.org
www.itai.org

c ITAI + EVU – 2009 All rights reserved

Partial reproduction is authorised for judicial purposes only by citing the source, e. g.:

Muttart, J.: Evaluating Driver Response and Ability to Avoid a Crash at Night, 1st joint ITAI–EVU
Conference, Hinckley, UK 2009

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Ken Naylor for assistance with reviewing the English language versions of
the papers. The conference proceedings were edited and laid out by Wolfgang Hugemann in LATEX.
The facilities in the conference room were organised by Bob Seston and Ian Smith, to whom we are
very grateful. On the side of the EVU we would like to thank Stephan Schal and Marianne
Wolkerstorfer for their efforts.

2
 Yaw Tests on Pavement, Gravel, and Grass
with ESC and ABS Braking

Wade Bartlett
William Wright

c 2009 by ITAI + EVU

ÿ

Abstract

Some crash analysis practitioners maintain that the Critical Speed Formula (CSF) cannot be used
in the presence of braking or acceleration, nor can it be used on surfaces other than dry pavement.
Some recent research (and some not-so-recent) refutes these positions. This paper will review some of
the literature on the matter, and will present results of a variety of yaw tests conducted under those
conditions.

Introduction on the same surface.

The Critical Speed Formula (CSF) is commonly
used for speed analysis where a car yaws out of
control. To use this technique, the investigator
must determine the vehicle’s path radius, and se-
lect a value for the lateral acceleration developed
during the manoeuvre.
At various events over the past 5 years, the au-
thors of this paper have conducted a variety of
critical speed yaw tests. This article will sum-
marize the results of tests conducted on grass,
on gravel, on split grass/pavement, and on var-
ious dry paved surfaces. Gravel-tests and dry
pavement tests included vehicles equipped with
electronic stability control (ESC) systems. Dry
pavement tests also included yaw while ABS-
braking and with wide open throttle (WOT).
Literature Review
Many older publications on crash reconstruction
note assert that any brake application will in-
validate the use of CSF [1, 10]. Rivers [11] in-
cluded that warning, and additionally cautioned
that CSF should not be used if all wheels are not
Fricke [6] observed that CSF conservatively
predicted the entry speeds for yaw tests even
when the brakes were applied (even to the point
of locking the two inside tyres) and with throttle
applied.
Brewer et al. [4] conducted 18 ABS-affected
yaw tests using two 1992 model year passen-
ger cars at speeds of 75 – 120 km/h. They ob-
served varying radii as the ABS cycled, particu-
larly when using 15 m chords. When using 20 m
chords with an average friction value of 0.75 g,
the calculated speeds were 8 % low on average,
with a standard deviation of 9 %.
After conducting yaw tests while ABS-braking
and while coasting, Lambourn [1994] reported
that ABS braking results in less out-tracking,
and that the ABS cycling was not distinguished
in the marks. Severe braking was determined to
exacerbate the under-estimation. At worst, CSF
analysis gave accuracy of ±10 % of true. This ac-
curacy expectation was reinforced by subsequent
testing which included a VW Passat equipped
with ESC [8].
Semon [12] concluded that CSF predicted ac-
tual speeds “with surprising accuracy”, even dur-

201
Wade Bartlett, William Wright
ing acceleration or braking, as long as wheels
were not locked.
Brach [3] re-evaluated Shelton’s yaw-test data
[13] which included three conditions: modest for-
ward acceleration, coasting, and modest brake
application. These three conditions resulted in
estimates which were 1 – 2 % low, 5 % low,
and 13.5 % low respectively. Brach also noted
that hard braking on a split surface might cause
curved tyre marks which would not fit the as-
sumptions built into a CSF analysis.
A limited number of yaw-tests involving some
braking were reported by Bellion [2]. Calculat-
ing the speed using the average skidding friction
value gave conservative results. Using the front
tyre mark during split-surface tests on grass and
pavement gave conservative results, when using
a friction value equal to the sum of 2/3 of the av-
erage friction value on the outboard surface and
1/3 of the average friction value on the inboard
surface.
Cliff et al. [5] conducted yaw tests in a small
passenger car with brake application equivalent
to that necessary to generate 0.27 g in straight-
line braking. This was the most severe braking
which did not result in locking an inside tyre.
They concluded that there was very little differ-
ence in the results for the braked and unbraked
cases.
Test Procedures
Basic Technique
For all new tests reported here, the radius
of the vehicle’s path was evaluated using the
chord and middle ordinate measurement of the
front/outboard tyre mark. The chord was mea-
sured from the point where the outside rear tyre
was seen to begin tracking to the outside of the
front tyre’s path. That calculated radius was re-
duced by one half track width to approximate
the vehicle’s CG path radius.
Chord lengths of 9 – 15 m (30 – 50 ft) were
used. Vehicle speeds were measured with a Veri-
com VC3000DAQ, a rear-mounted 5th wheel
unit, a RaceLogic VBOX-III, RaceLogic Drift-
box, and/or a Stalker ATS RADAR.
202
Table 1 summarizes the vehicles used, their
drive configuration, and the tests conducted with
each one.
Dry Pavement
Nineteen yaw tests were conducted under "spe-
cial conditions" (ABS/ESC/WOT) on dry paved
surfaces in several locations in Washington State
(WA) and Florida (FL), in the United States.
Entry speeds at the start of the turning manoeu-
vre ranged from 60 – 100 km/h. The average
skidding friction value on each surface was ob-
tained via instrumented locked wheel skid tests.
Figure 1 shows the results, along with Hague’s
results from seven ESC-equipped Passat tests [8].
A conservative speed resulted in all cases when
using the skidding friction value. The front-
wheel-drive wide-open-throttle (FWD-WOT)
tests were consistently the least conservative.
During ABS-invoked braking while cornering
at the lateral traction limits, the oldest vehi-
cle in these tests, the Achieva, slowed longitu-
dinally at a rate of 0.25 g, while the newer ve-
hicles generated 0.35 – 0.45 g. The software-
commanded braking reduction during cornering
prevented any wheels from locking. The CSF-
calculated speeds fell in the same accuracy range
as non-braking tests.
ESC system operation tended to reduce and
stabilize out-tracking. ESC does not appear to
significantly alter the accuracy of the CSF anal-
ysis method.
Dry Gravel
Thirteen tests were conducted on the dry erodi-
ble surface of a large gravel parking lot us-
ing two vehicles, a 2007 Kia Sportage equipped
with ESC and a 2000 Chevrolet Impala. Both
were equipped with tyres appropriate for normal
street -use. The surface was compacted from reg-
ular use, but was not specially prepared prior to
or during testing. Subsequent tests were con-
ducted on previously untested areas to the great-
est extent possible, and nominally flat test loca-
tions were chosen to minimize normal force vari-
 Yaw Tests on Pavement, Gravel, and Grass with ESC and ABS Braking

Pavement Gravel Grass

Vehicle Test Drive Vehicle Type ESC WOT ABS No ESC All Grass-
Loc. Axle ESC Grass Pave.
2004 Chevrolet FL RWD 2-door 6 2 2 – – – -
Corvette Z06 sports car
1993 Oldsmobile FL FWD 4-door - 4 2 – - – –
Achieva mid-size saloon
1998 Oldsmobile WA FWD 4-door – 1 1 – – – –
Cutlass mid-size saloon
1999 Chevrolet WA AWD Mini-van – – 1 - - – -
Astro
2000 Chevrolet ME FWD 4-door – – – 6 – – –
Impala mid-size saloon
2007 Kia ME AWD Sport-Utility – – – 5 2 – –
Sportage
1998 Volvo NJ FWD Station wagon – – – – – 3 –
V70
1993 Nissan NJ FWD 4-door – – – - – 3 –
Altima small saloon
2001 Chevrolet ME FWD 4-door – – – – – 2 3
Impala mid-size saloon
2000 Ford ME RWD 4-door – – – – – 2 2
Crown Victoria full-size saloon

Table 1: Description of vehicles used for yaw testing reported here, as well as the number of each type of test on
each surface.

ations. Tyre mark measurements were made as speed.

previously described, with chords of 9 m used for
all but the three highest speed tests and the ESC-
tests, where chords of 15 m were used.
The average locked-wheel skidding friction val-
ues and ABS-to-stop values for each of the
two vehicles tested were essentially the same,
at 0.56 g during ABS-to-stop tests, and 0.70 g
during locked-wheel skid tests. In contrast to
paved surfaces, where the ABS-value tends to be
slightly higher than the locked-wheel value, both
vehicles generated higher locked-wheel skidding
values on gravel due to the ploughing effect of
locked tyres.
The ABS-skidding value on gravel generated
during these tests was very similar to the lateral
force generated during severe turning manoeu-
vres. Figure 2 shows the CSF-calculated entry
speed, using the ABS-to-stop value for each ve-
hicle, as compared to the VBOX-III measured
Dry Grass
A 2001 Chevrolet Impala and a 2000 Ford Crown
Victoria were used on mowed dry healthy grass
which was 70 – 150 mm tall. The test area was
located at the edge of an active concrete-paved
runway in Maine (ME). ABS and locked-wheel
skids were conducted on both surfaces with both
vehicles, as shown in Table 2. Four yaw-tests
were conducted completely on the grass surface,
which resulted in very modest furrowing. Lesser
amounts of furrowing were observed during the
skid tests. The values from each vehicle’s spe-
cific testing were used for calculation purposes.
CSF results for the grass-only tests using the
ABS-to-stop friction value were essentially spot-
onaccurate or slightly conservative.
Subsequently, additional all-grass tests were

203
Wade Bartlett, William Wright
Grass Pavement
ABS Skid. ABS Skid.
Chevrolet Impala 0.50 0.41 0.93 0.83
(ME)
Ford Crown Victoria 0.43 0.38 0.95 0.79
(ME)
Dodge Charger (NJ) 0.46 n/a n/a n/a
Overall Average 0.46 0.39 0.94 0.81
Table 2: Average skidding and ABS-to-stop friction val-
ues on grass and pavement
conducted at a decommissioned airstrip in New
Jersey (NJ). In all cases, the ground was dry and
dusty with thin dry grass which was 0.2 – 0.6 m
tall. Several ABS-to-stop tests produced decel-
erations in the grass of 0.44 – 0.47 g. Two vehi-
cles were used for the yaw tests: a Volvo station
wagon (at entry speeds of 60, 68 and 112 km/h)
and a Nissan Altima (at entry speeds of 74,
70 and 77 km/h). Chord lengths of 12 m (40 ft)
were used for all but the fastest test, where an
18 m (60 ft) chord was utilized.
Split Grass/Pavement Surface
Five split-surface tests were conducted at the
Maine airport described above. Two tests were
conducted with the Ford and three tests were
conducted with the Chevrolet. For all tests,
the vehicles were driven towards the edge of the
pavement at a shallow angle, with a hard steer-
ing manoeuvre initiated as the outboard tyres
exited the pavement. The front outboard tyre
marks were measured in the grass.
Given a lateral acceleration, one can calcu-
late the dynamic weight transfer to the outboard
tyres due to cornering. Such a calculation could
incorporate both the lateral weight shift due to
the overturn moment (which is instantaneous)
and the load shift due to body roll (which will
lag lateral acceleration slightly). This type of
weight shift analysis is undertaken in more de-
tail by Gillespie [7].
Using a typical passenger car value of 0.35 for
the ratio of the centercentre-of-gravity height to
track width, the dynamic weight shift during a
204
0.6 g-lateral acceleration manoeuvre is expected
to be approximately 21 % of the sprung weight.
This yields a nominal 29 / 71 inboard / outboard
sprung weight distribution. This calculated re-
sult is very similar to Bellion’s 1/3 + 2/3 sugges-
tion, which yields good results, as shown in Fig-
ure 3.
The slowest split-surface test was measured
using a 9 m chord, and resulted in a 6.6 km/h
(4 mph) overestimate of the entry speed. All
other results using the 1/3 + 2/3 guideline were
very close or somewhat conservative.
Conclusions
Based on the literature and previous testing, it
seems clear that speed estimates based on av-
erage locked-wheel skidding drag factors gener-
ally yield slightly conservative speed estimates
on pavement.
The results reported here bolster earlier re-
ports that the CSF model is tolerant of braking,
regardless of the source, as long as wheels are
not locked, though some literature suggests that
even that is not a problem.
The CSF model has been shown to work well
under full throttle application on dry pavement.
This is consistent with Brach’s earlier findings.
Results for front wheel drive cars tend to be
less conservative than results for rear wheel drive
cars.
The actions of electronic stability control sys-
tems do not appear to reduce a vehicle’s lateral
force capability to such an extent as to meaning-
fully affect application of the CSF model, either
on gravel or dry pavement.
The CSF model has been shown to work rea-
sonably well on nominally flat unpaved gravel
and grass surfaces. Best results were obtained
by using the ABS-to-stop friction values. The
CSF model produced slightly conservative results
more often than not.
Bellion’s 1/3 + 2/3 friction recommendation
produced very reasonable results for split-friction
events, when using the ABS-to-stop friction val-
ues for the two surfaces.
 Yaw Tests on Pavement, Gravel, and Grass with ESC and ABS Braking

Acknowledgements Forensic Accident Investigation:

Motor Vehicles
This research would not have been possible with- edited by Bohan, T.; Damask, A.
Lexis Law / Michie Butterworth publishers, 1995
out the generous assistance of individuals, police
departments, and organizations who are too nu- [13] Shelton, T.
Validation of the Estimation of Speed from Critical
merous to list. Speed Scuffmarks
Accident Reconstruction Journal 7 (1) (1995)
References
[1] Barzelay, M.; Lacy, G. Contact
Scientific Automobile Accident Reconstruction
Matthew Bender publishers 1986, pp 9–86 Wade Bartlett, PE, MSME
[2] Bellion, P. Consultant
Project Y.A.M.: Yaw Analysis Methodology Mechanical Forensics Engineering Services, LLC
SAE Technical Paper 970955 (1997) 179 Cross Road
[3] Brach, R. Rochester NH 03867, USA
An Analytical Assessment of the Critical Speed wade.bartlett@gmail.com
Formula
SAE Technical paper 970957 (1997)
William Wright, BSME
[4] Brewer, E.; Grage, J.; King, D.
ABS Affected Yaw
Consultant
unpublished internal test report, 1993 Florida Reconstruction, LLC
[5] Cliff, W.; Lawrence, J.; Heinrichs, B.; Fricker, T. 14939 99th Street North
Yaw Testing of an Instrumented Vehicle with and West Palm Beach FL 33412, USA
without Braking bill@floridarecon.com
SAE Technical Paper 2004-01-1187 (2004)
[6] Fricke, L. B. Proofread by Richard Lambourn
Traffic Accident Reconstruction
Vol. 2 of the Traffic Accident Investigation Manual
Northwestern University Press, 1990, pp 72–49
[7] Gillespie, T. D.
Fundamentals of Vehicle Dynamics
SAE 1992, pp 210
[8] Hague, D. J.; Lambourn, R. F.; Turner, D. F.
Critical speed studies I: the accuracy of speeds
calculated from critical curve marks, and their
striations
Proceedings ITAI 3rd National Conference (1997 in
Telford), pp 89–99
[9] Lambourn, R. F.
Braking and Cornering Effects With and Without
Anti-Lock brakes
SAE Technical Paper 940723 (1994)
[10] Lofgren, M. J.
Handbook for the Accident Reconstructionist
Institute of Police Technology and management
(IPTM) 3rd edition 1981, pp 37
[11] Rivers, R. W.
Traffic Accident Investigators’ Handbook
Charles C Thomas 1980, pp 191
[12] Semon, M.
Determination of Speed from Yaw Marks
chapter 4 in:

205
Wade Bartlett, William Wright

100 50%
Calculated Speed (km/h)

90 40%
2 Corvette ABS
80 2 Oldsmobile ABS
30%
2 WATAI ABS
6 Corvette ESC
70 7 Passat ESC 20%
(Hague)
2 Corvette RWD WOT
60 4 Oldsmobile FWD
10% WOT
1 WATAI FWD WOT
50 0%

40 -10%

Error
30 -20%

20 -30%
50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120
Measured Speed (km/h)

Fig. 1: Summary of yaw tests on dry pavement during ABS-braking, wide open throttle (WOT), and with the
electronic stability control system (ESC) active. Calculated speeds are based on the average locked-wheel
skidding friction value for that vehicle on that surface. The five darkened error points are associated with the
FWD-WOT tests.

206
 Yaw Tests on Pavement, Gravel, and Grass with ESC and ABS Braking

100 28%
Calculated Speed (km/h)

90 24%

80 20%

70 Impala (No 16%

ESC)
Kia w/o ESC
60 12%
Kia w/ ESC
50 Parity 8%

40 4%

30 0%
50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90

Error
20 Entry Speed (km/h) -4%

10 -8%

0 -12%

Fig. 2: Yaw Test results on gravel calculated using the ABS-to-stop value for two vehicles, including one equipped
with Electronic Stability Control.

130 90%
Calculated Speed (km/h)

110 75%

90 60%

70 45%

50 30%

30 15%
Actual Entry Speed (km/h)
Error

10 0%
45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110
-10 Calculated value -15%
lower than actual
-30 -30%
All Grass ME, using ABS-f & 9m chord
All Grass NJ, using ABS-f & 12 or 19m Chords
Split-Surface, using 1/3 inboard ABS-f plus 2/3 outboard ABS-f with 9m chord

Fig. 3: Results of ten yaw tests on grass and five tests on grass/pavement split.

207