|
04/23/2007 Fighting Driver Fatigue
According to a Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) report, driver fatigue plays a role in 13% of all truck crashes. (Other agencies place the number even higher at 30% to 40%.) In addition some 15,000 people die each year in fatigue related accidents involving motor vehicles of all types.
Driver fatigue has long been recognized as a problem in the trucking industry. The federal hours of service rules (first imposed in 1938) are an attempt to control the problem of fatigued drivers through regulation and enforcement. However, even strict adherence to the hours of service regulations is not a guarantee that a driver won’t become fatigued sometime during the course of a long shift.
In an effort to combat the problem of fatigued drivers a number of fatigue management technologies, FMTs, have been developed. These technologies fall into two broad categories, those that measure fatigued performance through vehicle based monitoring, and those that measure fatigued performance through driver based monitoring.
In April of 2005 the FMCSA conducted a “Pilot Test of Fatigue Management Technologies” as part of a project to determine which if any of the technologies showed promise in improving alertness and fatigue awareness of drivers. In addition, the project sought to determine drivers’ reactions and acceptance levels of the various devices that were tested. (Currently some motor carriers are also experimenting with various fatigue management systems and devices.)
There are three fatigue management technologies that are commercially available, two that monitor drivers and one that monitors vehicles. The Walter Reed Army Institute of Research developed the first driver based device. Called SleepWatch, and marketed by Precision Control Design of Fort Walton Beach, FL, it is worn like a watch and monitors rest and activity patterns. Based on those patterns it provides feedback to the driver concerning performance levels and the need for sleep.
The second type of device that monitors the driver rather than the vehicle is a dashboard mounted unit approximately the size of a small digital camera. It uses infrared based retinal scanning to determine how often a driver blinks and how long their eyes stay shut. The device beeps to provide drivers immediate warning as they approach a dangerous level of drowsiness. Department of Transportation research has demonstrated that tracking eyelid closure is a reliable method of predicting sleepiness. The device used in the FMCSA test is called the Copilot and is marketed by Attention Technologies of Pittsburgh, PA.
The vehicle-based technology is a lane tracking system that uses a small camera connected to a microprocessor. The system monitors the position of the vehicle in the driving lane and detects drifting, weaving or tracking irregularities and provides both visual and audible feedback to the driver. Studies have shown that lane tracking can be used as a very sensitive indicator of driver drowsiness and fatigue. The device used in the test was the SafeTRAC made by Applied Perception and AssistWare Technology of Bakerstown, PA.
All three technologies tested by the FMCSA appeared to have beneficial effects as far as improving alertness and fatigue awareness of drivers. However, feedback from the drivers at the end of the project indicated a distinct preference for devices that monitor the truck as opposed to those that monitor the driver.
The distinction between the two methods of monitoring is important because many drivers expressed concerns about the privacy of the data generated by devices that are designed to monitor them as opposed to their vehicles. All of these devices generate information that can be stored and retrieved at a later time. Drivers worry that employers, police, courts and even insurance companies might use the data against them. That concern extends beyond drivers to their employers. Motor carriers themselves might find the data being used by plaintiffs in accident related lawsuits.
Despite the privacy concerns it does appear that both motor carriers and drivers generally accept the concept of fatigue management technology. The FMCSA Executive Summary (of the April 2005 Pilot Test) notes; “Overall, participant drivers were positive toward the FMT approach in general and felt that if such technologies could be further improved, they would be of benefit in helping manage fatigue and alertness.” A spokesman for the American Trucking Association, Mike Russell agreed; “If these devices help keep drivers alert, they’re welcome….But if they’re mandatory, that’s another question.” | 
