No abstract

FOREWORDThe work performed under this project included multiple research efforts designed to investigate the use of simulators in training commercial motor vehicle drivers. The topics addressed in this project include the effectiveness of entry-level training (including simulation-based training) for commercial licensing testing and the effectiveness of different training methods in terms of licensing skills test scores and driving records post-licensure. As part of this project, several simulated advanced scenarios (e.g., tanker trailer, tire blowout) are showcased as well. A cost analysis of different training methods was performed as part of this project, along with a case study of existing uses of commercial vehicle driving simulators. This report documents the method, results, and conclusions of these efforts. NOTICEThis document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for its contents or the use thereof.The contents of this Report reflect the views of the contractor, who is responsible for the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official policy of the Department of Transportation.This Report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation.The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers named herein. Trade or manufacturers' names appear herein only because they are considered essential to the objective of this document. This study examined the effectiveness of a driving simulator for entry-level commercial motor vehicle (CMV) driver training and testing. Four training groups of 107 individuals (conventional 8-week certified course, conventional 8-week certified course with 60 percent of driving in a simulator, informal training with friends/relatives, and commercial's driver license [CDL] test-focused short courses) were followed from training into employment. There were no group differences in Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV) road tests. There were group differences in DMV range tests and validated real truck and simulator re-creations of DMV road and range tests. Conventional and simulator groups generally scored higher than informal and CDL test-focused participants. A 4-month follow-up after being hired as a CDL driver indicated no differences in performance, safety, self-or supervisory-ratings. Findings support the use of CMV driving simulator-based training, but simulator-based testing does not appear to be feasible at this point. Cost analysis indicated simulator training using the study simulator was $35/participant less expensive than conventional training. The simulator was examined in a demonstration of extreme conditions and emergency maneuvers under different vehicle configurations with 48 other drivers. Also provided is a case study of existing implementations of CMV simulator training, indicating benefits, drawbacks, and drivers' overall opinions.17.

No abstract

FOREWORDThe work performed under this project included a literature review of topics related to commercial motor vehicle driver fatigue (including topics of work hours, driving time, duty periods, and restart/recovery periods) published between 2006 and July 2010. The research also included an assessment of the tasks drivers perform in a typical workday. In addition, analyses were conducted to determine the impact of driving hours, work hours, and breaks on driving performance. NOTICEThis document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for its contents or the use thereof.The contents of this Report reflect the views of the contractor, who is responsible for the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official policy of the Department of Transportation.This Report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation.The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers named herein. Trade or manufacturers' names appear herein only because they are considered essential to the objective of this document. Current hours-of-service (HOS) regulations prescribe limits to commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers' operating hours. Besides assessing activities performed in the 14-hour workday, the relationship between safety-critical events (SCEs) and driving hours, work hours, and breaks was investigated. The data used in the analyses were collected in the Naturalistic Truck Driving Study and included 97 drivers and about 735,000 miles of continuous driving data. The assessment of the drivers' workday determined that, on average, drivers spent 66 percent of their shift driving, 23 percent in non-driving work, and 11 percent resting. Analyses on driving hours (i.e., driving only) and SCE risk found a time-on-task effect across hours. Analyses on work hours (i.e., driving in addition to non-driving work) found that risk of being involved in an SCE increased as work hours increased. This suggests that time-on-task effects may not be related to driving hours alone, but implies an interaction between driving hours and work hours: if a driver begins the day with several hours of non-driving work, followed by driving that goes deep into the 14-hour workday, SCE risk was found to increase. The finding from the workday characterization that drivers spent approximately 23 percent of their workday performing non-driving work provides a possible explanation for this time-on-task effect across work hours. Breaks from driving were found to be beneficial in reducing SCEs (during 1-hour window after a break) and were effective to counteract the negative effects of time-on-task. TECHNICAL REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE17.

No abstract