Proceedings of 2015 International Conference on Fuzzy Theory and Its Applications (iFUZZY)
The Evergreen Resort Hotel (Jiaosi), Yilan, Taiwan, Nov. 18-20, 2015
Fuzzy logic approach to predict vehicle crash severity from
acceleration data
Bernard B. Munyazikwiye, Hamid R. Karimiand Kjell G. Robbersmyr
Abstract — Vehicle crash is a complex behavior to be investigated
as a challenging topic in terms of dynamical modeling. On this aim,
fuzzy logic can be utilized to analyze the crash dynamics rapidly and
simply. In this paper, the experimental data of the frontal crash is
recorded using an accelerometer located at the centre of the gravity
of the vehicle. The acceleration signal was the raw data from which
the collision intensity expressed by the kinetic energy and the jerk
were derived. The fuzzy logic model was then developed from the
two inputs namely kinetic energy and jerk. The output variable is the
crash severity expressed as the dynamic crash. The result shows that
the jerk contributes much to the crash than the kinetic energy of the
vehicle.
Key words: Fuzzy logic, vehicle crash severity, Jerk and
Kinetic energy
I. INTRODUCTION
Vehicle crash test is usually performed in order to
ensure safe design standards in crashworthiness, in the other
words, the ability of a vehicle to be plastically deformed and
yet maintains a sufficient survival space for its occupants
during crash scenario. Nowadays, due to advanced research
in computer simulation software, simulated crash tests can be
performed beforehand the full scale crash test. Therefore, the
costs associated with real crash test can be reduced. Vehicle
crashworthiness can be evaluated in four distinct modes,
namely, frontal, side, rear and rollover crashes. Several
researches have been carried out in this field, which resulted
in several novel computational models of vehicle collisions in
literature. Bernard at al. in [1] developed a state-space
mathematical modeling to identify lumped parameters of a
vehicle in frontal crash scenario from input and output data.
Fuzzy logic modeling among others has been proved
powerful tool in simulating nonlinear systems. Fuzzy logic
has gained application in all engineering fields for decision
making. It is used by transportation engineer in order to
assure maximum security to passengers. In [2] the authors
used a fuzzy logic aid on rear –end collision warning and
avoidance system. Also [3] provided a collision avoidance
system (CAS) for autonomous vehicles, focusing on
pedestrian collision avoidance. Zheng [4] applied a fuzzy
neuron network to predict road accident frequencies.
B.B. Munyazikwiye is with the Department of Engineering, Faculty of
Engineering and Science of the University of Agder, Grimstad, Norway
(e-mail: munybernard@gmail.com).
H.R. Karimi is with the Department of Engineering, Faculty of Engineering
and Science of the University of Agder, Grimstad, Norway e-mail:
hamid.r.karimi@uia.no).
K.G. Robbersmyr is with the Department of Engineering, Faculty of
Engineering and Science of the University of Agder, Grimstad, Norway
(e-mail: kjell.g.robbersmyr@uia.no).
978-1-4673-6570-3/15/$31.00 ©2015 IEEE
Number of publication has been published in control systems.
Not only fuzzy has application in control, but also in
prediction of crash severity. In [5] Pawlus at al. presented a
fuzzy logic approach to vehicle crash modeling.
In practice fuzzy logic means computation of words. Since
computation with words is possible, computerized systems
can be built by embedding human expertise articulated in
daily language. Also called a fuzzy inference engine or fuzzy
rule-base, such a system can perform approximate reasoning
somewhat similar to but much more primitive than that of the
human brain.
In their work [6] on vehicle crashworthiness, the authors
proposed a system for crash severity detection by a
fuzzy-based sensor fusion technique for a cognitive
radio-based vehicular ad hoc and sensor networks. In their
system, the jerk, collision intensity, inclination degree, and
temperature were the input fuzzy variables (antecedents) and
the crash (accident) severity is the output variable
(consequent). Fuzzy logic has been widely used by accident
risk management researchers. A typical example is the work
by Jalali at al. [7] where the authors used fuzzy logic
approach to forecast the lift truck accident in one of the
Iranian car manufacturers.
Fuzzy systems are rule-based systems that are constructed
from a collection of linguistic rules; on the other hand, fuzzy
systems are nonlinear mappings of inputs (stimuli) to outputs
(responses), i.e., certain types of fuzzy systems can be written
as compact nonlinear formulas. The inputs and outputs can be
scalars or vectors of numbers. These rule-based systems in
theory model represent any system with arbitrary accuracy
[8]. Several techniques have been used to reconstruct the
signal of vehicle crash [9-13].
The novelty of the approach used in this paper is that it is less
computational as compared with the previous approaches,
found in the literature.
II. FUZZY LOGIC MODEL DEVELOPMENT
A. Extraction of input variable from acceleration data
The kinetic energy is given by
1 2
KE mv . (1)
2
Where m is the mass of the vehicle equal to 873 kg and v is
velocity vector. The velocity, v, is the numerical integration
of the acceleration data, that is,
44
 t
v ³ at dt
0
(2) The first step is to define the linguistic variables to be used in
the Fuzzification process. A linguistic variable can be
The numerical differentiation of the measured acceleration regarded either as a variable whose value is a fuzzy number or
yields the jerk output and is defined by the following as a variable whose values are defined in linguistic terms.
expression.
da(t ) A linguistic variable V is characterized by: its name x, an
Jerk (3) universe U, a term set T(x), a syntactic rule G for generating
dt names of values of x, and a set of semantic rule M for
The jerk is directly related to a physical damage process of associating with each value its meaning [14].
materials and structures. When a crash happens, the vehicle
produces a negative acceleration and jerk. Negative Linguistic variable, V x, T x,U , G, M  (4)
acceleration makes passengers jerk in the forward direction
and sometimes can even cause casualty and death. Jerk is the
cause of parts’ molecular rupture, resulting in destruction. Let’s consider a linguistic variable “V” whose name is
“Jerk”.

Jerk: name of the variable V

T(Jerk): {Small, very small, very very small, …}
Set of terms used in the discussion of Jerk
U: [0,120.000] universe of discourse

G(Jerk): Ti+1 = {small} P {very Ti}

For example in our model, the Jerk of the vehicle is

interpreted as a linguistic variable.
Figure 1. Experimental data
V Jerk , T Jerk ,U , G, M  (5)

Its terms set are

T(Jerk) = {very small, small, medium, high, very high} where
each term is characterized by a fuzzy set in an universe of
discourse U = [0, 1200000]. We interpret: very small as "a
jerk below about 30.000 m/s3", small as "jerk between 0 and
60.000 m/s3", medium as "a jerk between 30000 and 90000
m/s3", high as "a jerk between 60000 and 120000 m/s3".

GJerk  : Ti1 ^small `P^veryTi ` (6)

Figure 2. Kinetic energy and Jerk

B. Fuzzification of input variables

Basic structure of fuzzylogic ia adeof three main parts,
namely, Fuzzification, Inference engine Fuzzy rule base and
Defuzzification as shown in Figure 3.
Figure3. Basic structure of fuzzy logic
Figure 3. Basic structure of fuzzy logic
M small  ^u, P u 
small u  P>0,60.000@` (7)
In the above example, the term “Small” is used as a basis in
the T(Jerk), and thus this kind of term is called a “primary
term”. When we add modifiers to the primary terms, we can
define new terms (fuzzy terms).
In many cases, when the modifier “very” is added, the
membership is obtained by square operation. For example,
the membership function of the term “very small” is obtained
from that of “small”.
P very small u  Psmall u 2 (8)

45
Fuzzy logic process is completed in four steps: (1)
Fuzzification, (2) Fuzzy rules evaluation, (3) combination
and aggregation of rules (fuzzy inference engine), and (4)
Defuzzification [9]. Fuzzification is an important concept in
the fuzzy logic theory.

x Fuzzification: Fuzzification is the process where the

crisp quantities are converted to fuzzy (crisp to
fuzzy). In general, fuzzy logic is a multivalue logic,
by which intermediate values can be defined using Figure 4. Two inputs one output fuzzy model
expressions, such as true/false, high/low, and
below/above. Triangular membership functions, with adjacent functions
overlapping on each other as shown on Figure 6, have been
x Rules evaluation; The fuzzified inputs are applied to used in our model. A triangular membership function is
the antecedents of the fuzzy rules. If a given fuzzy illustrated in Figure5 and expressed by equation (10).
rule has multiple antecedents, the fuzzy operator
(AND or OR) is used to obtain a single number that
represents the result of the antecedent evaluation. To
evaluate the disjunction of the rule antecedents, one
uses the OR fuzzy operation. Typically, the classical
fuzzy operation union is used :

PA ‰ Bx max^PAx, PBx `. (9)

Similarly, in order to evaluate the conjunction of the

rule antecedents, the AND fuzzy operation
intersection is applied: Figure5. Triangular membership function
PA ˆ Bx min^PAx , PBx `. (10)
­0 for x d a
°x  a
In our model, the AND fuzzy operator is used.
° for a d x d b
°b  a
x Aggregation of the rule outputs:The membership
functions of all rule consequents previously clipped
or scaled are combined into a single fuzzy set. The
membership functions of all rule consequents
previously clipped or scaled are combined into a
single fuzzy set.
x Defuzzification: yields a nonfuzzy control action
from an inferred control action. The most popular
defuzzification method is the centroid technique. It
finds a point representing the center of gravity
(COG) of the aggregated fuzzy set A, on the interval
[a, b].
A reasonable estimate can be obtained by calculating it over a
sample of points.
We use (IF antecedent THEN consequent) function for our
model.
In our model, the jerk and collision intensity (kinetic energy),
are the input fuzzy variables (antecedents) and the crash
(accident) severity is the output variable (consequent) as
shown in Figure 4.
46
P x  ® (11)
°c - x for b d x d c
°x - b
°0 for x t c
¯
C. Membership functions
The membership functions VERY SMALL (VS), SMALL
(S), MEDUIM (M), HIGH (H), and VERY HIGH (VH0 are
defined on each input variable. The same membership
functions are defined on the output variable. The five
memberships are graphically shown in Figure 5.
A range is defined for each variable. The following ranges [0
– 45000], [0 – 120000] and [0 – 70] are ranges for Kinetic
energy, Jerk and Crash severity variables respectively.
The five membership functions defined above have ranges
included in the ranges of their respective variables.
For example the membership function medium for the input
variable, Kinetic energy, is [12500 32500] with mid value of
22500 joules .
As an illustration, four rules are presented here for rules
aggregation and defuzzification of our models as shown in
Figure7. The method of defuzzification used is the COG,
center of gravity.

a. Input1 Kinetic energy membership functions

b. Input 2. Jerk membership functions a. Rule1 ; If K is VS with PVS 1 0.2 and J is H

with P H 8 0.67 then C is M with
PM 0.2

c. Output. crash severity membership functions

Figure6. Membership functions

D. Rule base formation

From two inputs and one output variables, 25 rules were
formed. These are summarized in Table1.
b. Rule 2; If K is H with P H 30000 0.75 and J is
Our model is a MISO (multiple inputs single output) system VH with PVH 100000 0.33 then C is VH
and is characterized as a collection of rules of the form.
R1: if x is A1, … and y is B1 then z is C1 with PM 0.2
R2: if x is A2, … and y is B2 then z is C2
……………………………………………
Rn: if x is An, … and y is Bn then z is Cn

Where x, … y and z are linguistic variables representing the

process state variable and the control variable.
Ai,… Bi and Ci are linguistic values of the variables x, … y
and z in the universe of discourse U, V and W, respectively
i = 1, 2, … , n.
That is, c. Rule 3; If K is VH with P H 40000 0.4 and J is
x  U, Ai  U
… VH with PVH 100000 0.33 then C is VH
y  V, Bi  V with PM 0.33
z  W, Ci  W

TABLE1. RULE BASE

JERK
VS S M H VH

VS VS S M M M
d.Rule 4; If K is M with P M 20000 0.25 and J is
P H 100000 0.67 then C is H with
KINETIC
ENERGY

S VS S M M H H with
M S S M H H PM 0.25
H S M M H VH
VH M M M H HV
47
 As shown in Figure 7 and Figure 9, if the kinetic energy is
23.100 joules and jerk is 108000 m/s3, then the dynamic crash
is 52.8 cm,

The 3-D Surface viewer in Figure 9 shows that the jerk

contributes too much o the dynamic crash than the kinetic
energy. This confirms that the jerk is directly related to a
physical damage process of materials and structures.
e. COG Defuzzification Figure 9 reflects what is obtained from the experimental data
where the maximum crash is 52 cm. Therefore the fuzzy logic
Figure 6. Defuzzification process approach can be easily used to estimate the crash severity.
It is observed from Figure10, that the increase in kinetic
energy contribute to the dynamic crash after exceeding
The defuzzified output, z, is obtained by COG [9], shown in 30000 joules.
equation (12).

¦ z P z 
N

j j
j 1
z (12)
¦ P z 
N

j
j 1

where
z j are are crips values , P c z j  is the membeship
value of z j and N is the number of rules.
Figure 8. 3-D Surface viewer
Using equation (10), the outputs of four rules are summed up
to produce a crisp output of rules shown in Figure 6. e.

35 * 0.2 + 70 * 0.33 + 70 * 0.33 + 52.5 * 0.25

z
0.2 + 0.33 + 0.33 + 0.25
z 59.7mm

III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Figure 9. Dynamic crash vs Jerk

Figure 7. Rules viewer

Figure 10 Dynamic crash vs kinetic energy

48
 IV. CONCLUSION [7] R. J. Naieni, A. Makui and R. Ghous, An Approach for
The approach presented in this paper shows the application of Accident Forecasting Using Fuzzy Logic Rules: A Case
fuzzy logic to vehicle crash modeling. The availability of Mining of Lift Truck Accident Forecasting in One of
acceleration data, one can easily estimate the crash severity. the Iranian Car Manufacturers, International Journal of
To obtain a more precise fuzzy model’s output, the number of Industrial Engineering & Production Research, Volume
rules can be increased, as well as the number of membership 23, Number 1, March 2012,
functions (MF) for each variable. The factor which plays an
important role in fuzzy modeling is the shape of MF. To [8] S. N. Sivanandam, S. Sumathi and S. N. Deep,
achieve a better response of a fuzzy model it is advisable to Introduction of fuzzy logic using Matlab, ISBN-10
increase the number of MFs, the number of rules and verify 3-540-35780-7, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2007.
shape of MF which is could be suitable for the vehicle crash
modeling. It is shown in this paper that the Jerk plays an [9] H.R. Karimi, and K.G. Robbersmyr, Signal analysis and
important part in crash severity as compared to, the kinetic performance evaluation of a vehicle crash test with a
energy has small contribution. More input variables, such us fixed safety barrier based on Haar wavelets. International
stiffness of the barrier, the angle of impact, would improve Journal of Wavelets, Multi resolution and Image
the results. In our future work more input variable will be Processing, Volume: 9, Issue: 1(2011) pp. 131-149.
combined for getting the output crash severity.
[10] L. Zhao, W. Pawlus, H.R. Karimi, K.G. Robbersmyr,
Data-Based Modeling of Vehicle Crash using Adaptive
REFERENCES
Neural-Fuzzy Inference System, IEEE/ASME
Transactions on Mechatronics, 19(2), pp. 684-696, 2014,
[1 ] B. B. Munyazikwiye, K. G. Robbersmyr and H.R.
DOI. 10.1109/TMECH.2013.2255422.
Karimi, A state-space approach to mathematical
modeling and parameters identification of vehicle
[11] W. Pawlus, K.G. Robbersmyr, H.R. Karimi,
frontal crash, Systems Science & Control Engineering,
Investigation of vehicle crash modeling techniques:
2014 Vol.2, 351–361.
theory and application. International Journal of
Advanced Manufacturing Technology, February 2014,
[2] V. Milanes , J. Perez, J.Godoy and E. Onieva, A fuzzy aid
Volume 70, Issue 5, pp 965-993, DOI.
rear-end collision warning/avoidance system, Expert
10.1007/s00170-013-5320-3.
Systems with Applications 39 (2012) 9097–9107.
[12] H.R. Karimi, W. Pawlus, K.G. Robbersmyr, Signal
[3] D. Llorca, V. Milanes, I. Parra, M. Gavilan, I. Garcea
reconstruction, modeling and simulation of a vehicle
and M.A. Sotelo, Autonomous Pedestrian Collision
full-scale crash test based on Morlet wavelets, Neuro
Avoidance Using a Fuzzy Steering Controller, IEEE
computing, Volume 93, 15, September 2012, pp. 88-99.
transactions on intelligent transportation systems, vol. 12,
no. 2, June 2011
[13] W. Pawlus, K.G. Robbersmyr, H.R. Karimi,
Mathematical modeling and parameters estimation of a
[4] S. Saravanan1, A. Sabari and M. Geetha, Fuzzy-Based
car crash using data-based regressive model approach,
Approach to Predict Accident Risk on Road Network,
Applied Mathematical Modeling, 35 (2011) 5091-5107.
International Journal of Emerging Technology and
Advanced Engineering, Vol 4, Issue 5, May 2014.
[14] T. J. Ross, Fuzzy Logic with Engineering Applications,
Third Edition, 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. ISBN:
[5] W. Pawlus, H.R. Karimi, K.G. Robbersmyr,
978-0-470-74376.
A Fuzzy Logic Approach to Modeling a Vehicle Crash
Test, Central European Journal of Engineering, March
2013, Volume 3, Issue 1, pp. 67-79.

[6] M. J. Piran, A. Ali, and D. Y. Suh, Fuzzy-Based Sensor

Fusion for Cognitive Radio-Based Vehicular Ad Hoc and
Sensor Networks, Mathematical Problems in
Engineering, Volume 2015, Article ID 439272.

49