Skip to main content

LRC evaluates headlight systems to improve night driving

Through its Transportation Lighting and Safety program, the Lighting Research Center (LRC) at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute is evaluating the potential for new lighting technologies and approaches to improve driving safety at night, including new car headlight systems. For the study, vehicle manufacturer Audi AG has provided the LRC with an A7 equipped with adaptive high beam ‘matrix lights’ that allow drivers to benefit from using high beams all the time while selectively dimming a portion of the bea
June 26, 2015 Read time: 3 mins
Through its Transportation Lighting and Safety program, the Lighting Research Center (LRC) at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute is evaluating the potential for new lighting technologies and approaches to improve driving safety at night, including new car headlight systems.

For the study, vehicle manufacturer 2125 Audi AG has provided the LRC with an A7 equipped with adaptive high beam ‘matrix lights’ that allow drivers to benefit from using high beams all the time while selectively dimming a portion of the beam in the direction of other drivers to prevent glare. In the Audi system, the beam pattern is split into numerous individual light-emitting diodes (LEDs) arranged in a grid or matrix that adapts to the surroundings in real-time. The lighting system is being evaluated by LRC researchers this June.

The LRC earlier studied adaptive high beams as part of a project for the 834 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) that resulted in a report to Congress on nighttime glare and driving performance. Michael Perel, retired chief of the NHTSA Human Factors Division who initiated the project, said, “At that time, because of driver glare complaints and high nighttime crash rates, we wanted to investigate whether dynamically changing the forward light distribution in response to real-time road and traffic conditions could provide drivers with increased seeing distance without causing increased glare. The study did find potential benefits with this concept, variations of which are now being implemented by Audi and other manufacturers.”

LRC’s research for NHTSA demonstrated that forward visibility under adaptive high-beam systems was comparable to that under high beams, while disability and discomfort glare for oncoming drivers were comparable to levels experienced when facing low beams. The results of a recently published LRC study of driver visual performance suggest that nighttime crashes might be reduced up to seven per cent when adaptive high beams are used, relative to low-beam headlights.

Current requirements for vehicle forward lighting in the US specify the photometric performance of low- and high-beam headlight patterns, and vehicles are required to have a set of low-beam and a set of high-beam headlights conforming to these specifications. Adaptive high beams have not been used on vehicles in the US because the modifications to the high-beam beam pattern result in a pattern of illumination that does not conform with either the high- or the low-beam performance standards.

“Our expectation is that testing at Rensselaer of the Audi MatrixBeam system used in Europe will help ongoing standards development efforts in the US,” said Stephan Berlitz, head of Development, Lighting Functions and Innovations at Audi. “We believe the introduction of this technology in the US would be very well-received by customers, just as it has been in Europe and elsewhere, so we are happy to do all that we can to support standards and test procedure development for the US market.”

For more information on companies in this article

Related Content

  • Report analyses multiple ITS projects to highlight cost and benefits
    March 16, 2015
    Every year in America cost benefit analysis is carried out on dozens of ITS installations and pilot studies and the findings, along with the lessons learned, are entered into the Department of Transportation’s (USDOT’s) web-based ITS Knowledge Resources database. This database holds more than 1,600 reports and periodically the USDOT reviews the material on file to draw conclusions from this wider body of evidence. It has just published one such review ITS Benefits, Costs, and Lessons Learned: 2014 Update Re
  • Road safety charity calls for ban on hands-free phones in vehicles
    June 8, 2016
    Following new research from psychologists at the University of Sussex, road safety charity Brake has renewed its calls for the UK government to look again at the laws around driving and mobile phone use. The study, published in the Transportation Research Journal, shows that drivers who are engaged in conversations that spark their visual imagination are much less able to spot and react to potential hazards. When the drivers involved in the study were asked about a subject that required them to visualis
  • Lindsay zips-up lane closure solution
    May 11, 2017
    Moveable barrier systems are offering engineers a new traffic management options. Work zones - be they for maintenance or road widening - are a fact of life and when they occur on major highways, they create no end of problems for traffic planners and travellers alike.
  • Texas moves to prevent wrong-way drivers
    May 30, 2014
    A study has shown the extent and ramifications of wrong way driving and proposed cost-effective countermeasures. Wrong way driving collisions occur relatively infrequently but the results can be devastating. Statistics from the US National Transportation Safety Board, an independent, federal all-modes agency, reveal that wrong way (WW) driving, account for only about 3% of accidents on high-speed divided highways but are much more likely to result in fatal and serious injuries.