DOCSLIB.ORG

Cyclists' Road Safety

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Cyclists' Road Safety 2016 CYCLISTS’ ROAD SAFETY - DO BICYCLE TYPE, AGE AND INFRASTRUCTURE CHARACTERISTICS MATTER? DISSERTATION zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades doctor rerum naturalium (Dr. rer. nat) vorgelegt der Fakultät für Human- und Sozialwissenschaften der Technischen Universität Chemnitz KATJA SCHLEINITZ Verfasser: Katja Schleinitz, Desgin Cover: André Körner Bild Cover: https://pixabay.com/de/fahrrad-mountainbike-schattenwurf-236906/ under Creative Commons CC0 CYCLISTS’ ROAD SAFETY - DO BICYCLE TYPE, AGE AND INFRASTRUCTURE CHARACTERISTICS MATTER? Dissertation zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades doctor rerum naturalium (Dr. rer. nat.) vorgelegt der Fakultät für Human- und Sozialwissenschaften der Technischen Universität Chemnitz vorgelegt von: Katja Schleinitz, geboren am 13.01.1983 in Zwickau eingereicht am: 29.01.2016 Tag der Disputation: 19.05.2016 Gutachter: Prof. Dr. Josef F. Krems, Technische Universität Chemnitz Prof. Dr. Mark Vollrath, Technische Universität Braunschweig ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Over the past four years I have received support and encouragement by a great number of people. At the beginning, I want to thank my supervisor Prof. Krems for his support and that he gave me the opportunity to do my research in such an interesting field. He showed me, that research does not only take place in the academic “ivory tower”, but rather contributes to make our world a little bit safer. Moreover, I would like to thank Prof. Vollrath for his willingness to review my PhD thesis. Additionally, I would like to express my deep gratitude to Tibor Petzoldt. Without you, this work would never have been possible. Thanks for the countless hours of proofreading and discussions, your wise comments and suggestions as well as many cheerful hours, when you have given me some good laughs. Furthermore, very big thanks to Luise Franke-Bartholdt, my project colleague, for your support at the right time in the project in order to prevent me from going crazy. Your pragmatic view was very helpful to put things back into a proper perspective. In addition, I want to thank all my colleagues. Special thanks go to my roommate Thomas Franke for your numerous recommendations and that I could share my dissertation woes with you. Also I have to thank Nina Bär for the emotional support during the hard times of my PhD project and the several therapeutic hours on the golf course and in the belly dance studio. Various people have a part in making this PhD successful, thanks to Marta Pereira, Nadine Rauh, Peter Cocron, Matthias Beggiato and the colleagues from Sports Engineering as well as from Research Methods and Evaluation. I wish to acknowledge the help provided by all my students in the different projects, especially Christian Franze, Sarah Heilmann, Jessica Göthel and Sebastian Mach. I would like to thank the German Insurance Accident Research for the opportunity to work and learn in such an interesting project. Advice given by Tina Gehlert has been a great help in project management. I would sincerely thank my family for all their love and encouragement over the years. Special thanks go to my husband André Körner, for your understanding and that you believed in me, more than I did myself. I appreciate all your patience when listening to one of my presentations. Words cannot express how grateful I am to my parents, Ursula and Udo Schleinitz. You have stood unconditionally behind me, although I have not always chosen the straight way in my life. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would also like to thank all of my friends who have reminded me again and again of the beautiful things in life. Thank you that the hours with you have brought me back from science to the reality, so I did not forget the other important things. ZUSAMMENFASSUNG iii ZUSAMMENFASSUNG In den letzten Jahren hat die Verbreitung von Elektrofahrrädern, sogenannten Pedelecs, stark zugenommen. Dies ist vor dem Hintergrund der Umweltfreundlichkeit und Gesundheitsförderlichkeit dieser Form der Fortbewegung zunächst grundsätzlich positiv zu bewerten. Gleichzeitig besteht jedoch die Sorge, dass Elektrofahrradfahrer häufiger und in schwerere Unfälle verwickelt werden könnten als Fahrradfahrer. So bieten motorgestützte Elektrofahrräder das Potential, höhere Geschwindigkeiten zu erreichen als konventionelle Fahrräder, und werden zudem vor allem von älteren Verkehrsteilnehmern genutzt. Nicht zuletzt deswegen könnten sich durch diese neue Mobilitätsform auch neue Herausforderungen für die Verkehrs-, insbesondere Radinfrastrukturen ergeben. Tatsächlich jedoch blieben die Auswirkungen auf die Verkehrssicherheit bisher weitestgehend ungeklärt. Um dieser Problematik zu begegnen, wurde im Rahmen einer Naturalistic Cycling Studie (NCS) und mehreren experimentellen Untersuchungen folgenden Fragen nachgegangen: Fahren Elektrofahrradfahrer tatsächlich schneller als nicht-motorisierte Radfahrer? Wie wirken sich diese potentiell höheren Geschwindigkeiten darauf aus, wie Elektrofahrradfahrer von Autofahrern wahrgenommen werden? Welchen Einfluss hat das Alter der Radfahrer auf die Geschwindigkeiten und auch auf deren Neigung zu Unfällen bzw. sicherheitskritischen Situationen im Verkehr? Und welchen Einfluss hat die Infrastruktur auf die gewählten Geschwindigkeiten und die Auftretenshäufigkeit von kritischen Situationen? Diese und weitere Fragen wurden in insgesamt vier Arbeiten, die in internationalen Fachzeitschriften publiziert sind (I - IV), beleuchtet. Im ersten Artikel werden die Geschwindigkeiten von Fahrradfahrern (n = 31) im Gegensatz zu Pedelecfahrern (n = 49; Motorunterstützung bis 25 km/h) sowie S-Pedelecfahrern (n = 10; Motorunterstützung bis 45 km/h) betrachtet. Als Einflussgrößen wurden das Alter und die Nutzung verschiedener Infrastrukturtypen der Probanden ausgewertet. Alle Räder wurden mit einem Datenaufzeichnungssystem inklusive Kameras und Geschwindigkeitssensoren ausgestattet, um für vier Wochen ein Bild des natürlichen Fahrverhaltens zu erhalten. Unabhängig von der Infrastruktur waren S-Pedelecfahrer schneller unterwegs waren als Fahrrad- und Pedelecfahrer. Pedelecfahrer fuhren ebenfalls signifikant schneller als konventionelle Fahrradfahrer. Die höchsten Geschwindigkeiten wurden für alle Radtypen auf der (mit dem motorisierten Verkehr geteilten) Fahrbahn sowie der Radinfrastruktur gemessen. Das Alter der Fahrer hatte ebenfalls einen signifikanten Einfluss auf die Geschwindigkeit: Unabhängig vom Fahrradtyp waren ältere Fahrer (65 Jahre und älter) deutlich langsamer als Probanden jüngerer iv ZUSAMMENFASSUNG Altersgruppen (41-64 Jahre sowie 40 Jahre und jünger). Die beiden jüngeren Altersgruppen fuhren selbst ohne Motorunterstützung (konventionelles Fahrrad) schneller als die älteren Pedelecfahrer. Genauere Analysen (wie etwa das Verhalten beim Bergabfahren) legen nahe, dass dieser Befund nicht allein der physischen Leistungsfähigkeit zugeschrieben werden kann. Es scheint vielmehr so, als ob ältere Fahrrad- und Elektroradfahrer durch die geringere Geschwindigkeit versuchen, Defizite in der Reaktionsgeschwindigkeit auszugleichen bzw. generell vorsichtiger fahren. Der zweite Artikel beschäftigt sich mit der Frage, inwieweit sich die Art und Häufigkeit von Unfällen und kritischen Situationen bei den drei verschiedenen Altersgruppen unterscheiden. Auch hier wurde auf die Daten aus der NCS zurückgegriffen, auf deren Basis eine umfassende Videokodierung durchgeführt wurde. Es zeigten sich keine Unterschiede zwischen den Altersgruppen hinsichtlich des Auftretens kritischer Situationen; weder in Bezug auf die absolute Anzahl, noch gemessen an der relativen Häufigkeit (pro 100 km). Ebenfalls keine Zusammenhänge fanden sich zwischen dem Alter der Fahrer und der Art von Konfliktpartnern oder der Tageszeit der kritischen Situationen. Auch hier scheint es so, dass Ältere keinem erhöhten Risiko unterliegen, und etwaige altersbedingte Einschränkungen kompensieren können. Bei der Betrachtung des Einflusses des Infrastrukturtyps auf das Auftreten von kritischen Situationen zeigte sich, dass, bezogen auf die zurückgelegten Wegstrecken, die Nutzung der mit dem motorisierten Verkehr geteilten Fahrbahn als relativ sicher einzustufen ist. Demgegenüber ergab sich ein erhöhtes Risiko für Unfälle oder kritische Situationen auf designierter Radinfrastruktur. Dies widerspricht der Wahrnehmung vieler Radfahrer, die diese Infrastruktur als besonders sicher empfinden. Es ist allerdings anzunehmen, dass diese Wahrnehmung nicht nur auf der vermeintlichen Auftretenshäufigkeit, sondern auch auf dem angenommenen Schweregrad einer möglichen Kollision beruht. Zwei weitere Artikel beschäftigen sich damit, wie Autofahrer die Geschwindigkeit beziehungsweise die Annäherung von Elektrofahrrädern wahrnehmen. Dies ist insbesondere in Kreuzungssituationen relevant, in denen Autofahrer abschätzen müssen, ob sie noch rechtzeitig vor einem Fahrrad abbiegen können ohne mit diesem zu kollidieren. Es wurde vermutet, dass die fehlende Erfahrung mit Elektrofahrrädern und der von ihnen erreichbaren Geschwindigkeit vermehrt zu entsprechenden Unfällen führen könnte. Der Frage wurde mit einem Experiment zur Lückenakzeptanz auf der Teststrecke (Artikel III) und einer Videostudie zu Schätzungen von Zeitlückengrößen (Artikel IV) nachgegangen. Es zeigte sich, dass Autofahrer die verbleibende Zeit bis zur Kollision für Elektrofahrradfahrer geringer einschätzten als für konventionelle Radfahrer. Zudem wählten Autofahrer bei einem herannahenden Elektrofahrrad signifikant kleinere Zeitlücken zum Abbiegen, als bei einem konventionellen Fahrrad. Dieser
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Electrically-Assisted Bikes: Potential Impacts on Travel Behaviour ⇑ S
    Transportation Research Part A 103 (2017) 327–342 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Transportation Research Part A journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tra Electrically-assisted bikes: Potential impacts on travel behaviour ⇑ S. Cairns a, , F. Behrendt b, D. Raffo c, C. Beaumont d, C. Kiefer e a Transport Research Laboratory/University College London, United Kingdom b University of Brighton, United Kingdom c David Raffo Associates, United Kingdom d Transport Research Laboratory, United Kingdom e University of Sussex, United Kingdom article info abstract Article history: This paper reports on a review of the European literature about the impacts of having an Received 27 October 2015 electrically-assisted bike available to use, together with results from a trial in the UK city Received in revised form 14 March 2017 of Brighton, where 80 employees were loaned an electrically-assisted bike for a 6–8 week Accepted 21 March 2017 period. In the Brighton trial, three-quarters of those who were loaned an e-bike used them Available online 12 July 2017 at least once a week. Across the sample as a whole, average usage was in the order of 15– 20 miles per week, and was accompanied by an overall reduction in car mileage of 20%. At Keywords: the end of the trial, 38% participants expected to cycle more in the future, and at least 70% Pedelec said that they would like to have an e-bike available for use in the future, and would cycle Electrically-assisted bicycle Cycling more if this was the case. This is consistent with the results of the European literature e-Bike which shows that when e-bikes are made available, they get used; that a proportion of Electric mobility e-bike trips typically substitutes for car use; and that many people who take part in trials Sustainable transport become interested in future e-bike use, or cycling more generally.
    [Show full text]
  • Electric Bicycles in Marin County
    Transportation Authority of Marin (TAM) Electric Bicycles in Marin County September 2020 Electric Bicycles Overview Table of Contents Page Executive Summary…………………………………………………………………. 2 Introduction…………………………………………………………………………….. 3 Types of E-bikes and Legal Definitions……………………………………. 4 Jurisdictional Policies……………………………………………………………….. 5 E-bikes and Public Transportation………………………………………….... 6 E-bike Specifics………………………………………………………………………… 7 E-bike Benefits and Constraints……………………………………………….. 8 Potential E-bike Enhanced Routes in Marin County…………………. 14 E-bike Counts…………………………………………………………………………… 21 E-bike Trends and Opportunities……………………………………….…… 22 E-bike Incentive Programs……………………………………………………… 24 Infrastructure Opportunities……………………………………………………… 29 Conclusions……………………………………………………………………………….. 33 Appendix A: Local E-Bike Retailers E-bike Survey…………………….. 34 Appendix B: Quantifying the Transportation Benefits………………. 38 Marin County | 1 Electric Bicycles Overview Executive Summary The purpose of this report is to identify the potential role e-bikes can play as part of the transportation system in Marin County, and, if they help reduce the impacts of vehicle use, what public agencies (including TAM) and private entities can do to encourage their use. This report looks at the history of e-bike development, the technical aspects of e-bikes, trends in sales and usage, ridership in Marin County, and specific actions public and private entities can do to support their use for transportation purposes. This includes, for example, subsidies to reduce the cost of e-bikes by employers in Marin County, and supporting facilities (such as secure bike parking) to improve the connection to transit. E-bikes may also be an effective extension of current transit and commuter rail (SMART) services in Marin County, although e-bike weight (50 to 70 pounds) make them too heavy to be loaded onto bus racks and they are not currently allowed on Golden Gate ferries.
    [Show full text]
  • A Bio-Energetic Model of Cyclist for Enhancing Pedelec Systems Nadia Rosero, John Jairo Martinez Molina, Henry Leon
    A bio-energetic model of cyclist for enhancing pedelec systems Nadia Rosero, John Jairo Martinez Molina, Henry Leon To cite this version: Nadia Rosero, John Jairo Martinez Molina, Henry Leon. A bio-energetic model of cyclist for enhancing pedelec systems. IFAC WC 2017 - 20th IFAC World Congress, Jul 2017, Toulouse, France. hal- 01575847 HAL Id: hal-01575847 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01575847 Submitted on 21 Aug 2017 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. A bio-energetic model of cyclist for enhancing pedelec systems Nadia Rosero, John J. Martinez ∗ Henry Leon ∗∗ ∗ Univ. Grenoble Alpes, CNRS, GIPSA-lab, F-38000 Grenoble, France (e-mail: nadia.rosero, [email protected]). ∗∗ Univ. de la Sabana, Faculty of Medicine, Chia, Colombia (e-mail: [email protected]) Abstract: The paper presents a whole-body bio-energetic model of a cyclist which includes the mechanical dynamics of the bike. This model could be used to solve control-design problems for pedelec systems. The behavior of some physiological variables during cycling is reproduced by keeping an energy aware transfer flow. The modeling approach considers three main levels: i) physiological, ii) bio-mechanical and iii) pure-mechanical.
    [Show full text]
  • The Basics of Micromobility and Related Motorized Devices for Personal Transport
    INFO BRIEF The basics of micromobility and related motorized devices for personal transport www.pedbikeinfo.org 1 Introduction With a surge of new personal transportation weight categories. Cities or other jurisdictions devices coming to market, some integrated into can define the weight and width limitations for shared ride systems (such as bikeshare programs), different types of roadway facilities. there is a need to establish a common vocabulary for these options, and provide basic information This info brief specifically focuses on micromobility about how these devices are classified and devices used for personal transportation on regulated. This info brief provides an overview of paved roads, sidewalks, and paths, and does not powered forms of micromobility and compares cover devices used for vocational purposes and features of micromobility with a spectrum of other commercial goods/services delivery or for off- traditional and emerging forms of transportation. road or air-based travel. While pedestrians and It references and builds upon micromobility bicyclists—including those using nonmotorized definitions created by the Society of Automotive bikeshare bikes—might share similar Engineers (SAE), a standards-developing characteristics (such as small size and low travel organization and professional association. speed speed) as well as use the same facilities where micromobility devices are operated, they Powered micromobility devices, sometimes called are already well-defined by most regulatory, personal e-mobility devices, share
    [Show full text]
  • Punta Gorda, April 1Th 2016 Florida Bicycle Association
    117 Herald Court ● Unit 1111 ● Punta Gorda ● FL 33950 www.pedelec-sqb.com ● [email protected] ● (941) 505 8815 LLC Punta Gorda, April 1th 2016 Florida Bicycle Association interested in Electric Bicycle as a policy question Dear Customer and Friends of pedlecSQB Electric Bicycle Store One day early this year I watched through the tinted windows of my newly opened Shop. I was concerned, with the moody weather at that day. Would somebody come in and get out for a test ride at all? When Christopher LeDew dropped in and it turned out later on, that he actually is a brother in the cause if it comes to electric bicycle. Some weeks later I got an e-mail from him with an article that is meanwhile published in the Messenger of the Florida Bicycle Association. I was so baffled to read in that article, that he really did mirror the information and facts he learned from me on electric bicycles, that I have to share this article with you. It may be a little bit more to read as usually, but it is certainly worth it. Thanks again Chris to give me the permission to publish this on my newsletter. And for the rest, enjoy the funny but still serious and accurate article on electric bicycle that follows here. Sincerely yours Phil Pfaeffli Team pedelecSQB FBA Newsletter Article Electric Bikes Those of you that know me, know that I have a soft spot in my heart for commuter cyclists. Anyone who chooses not to drive in the comfort of a Volvo station wagon and instead rides our busy urban streets in the height of rush hour; anyone who, behind a make-shift cubicle divider, takes a full body baby-wipes bath; anyone who then soldiers on through an eight-hour work day in wrinkled clothes and messed-up hair has earned my respect.
    [Show full text]
  • Hardware Design Considerations for an Electric Bicycle Using BLDC Motor
    www.ti.com Table of Contents Application Report Hardware Design Considerations for an Electric Bicycle Using a BLDC Motor Srivatsa Raghunath ABSTRACT A traditional bicycle is a two-wheel vehicle that is propelled by the rider who delivers muscle power through pedals that rotate one of the two wheels. The rider steers the front wheel to create a force that returns and maintains the vehicle center of gravity into a stable zone whenever necessary, thus keeping the bicycle upright. An electric bicycle carries batteries that deliver electric power to a motor that is coupled to either wheel. In most electric bicycles the rider can chose to use muscle power to deliver all, part, or none of the propulsion power required to maintain an adopted travel speed. Some models even sense pedal pressure and command the motor to deliver more power whenever the rider pedals harder. Table of Contents 1 Introduction.............................................................................................................................................................................3 2 Motor Selection.......................................................................................................................................................................4 3 Stator........................................................................................................................................................................................4 4 Rotor.......................................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Micromobility Devices on Multiuse Trails August 2019
    Micromobility Devices on Multiuse Trails August 2019 Transportation in communities across America is changing with the advent of many small and light personal- mobility options, which typically run on electric motors, such as electric-assist bicycles (e-bikes), e-scooters (scooters) and hoverboards. Rails-to-Trails Conservancy (RTC) offers this perspective to assist communities, trail managers and policy makers in making decisions about how best to manage these devices on nonmotorized multiuse trails. Considering the fast-paced evolution of new mobility options, RTC has defined a criteria-driven approach to managing new technologies to prevent unsafe or stressful conditions while creating inclusive places. As the use of micromobility devices on trails is considered, RTC’s recommendations seek to promote greater trail use, including increased diversity of trail users as well as safe and pleasant trail experiences by preventing and managing trail user conflicts—objectives that at times may be in tension and require balancing by local jurisdictions. railstotrails.org | @railstotrails 1 Micromobility Devices on Multiuse Trails The State of Micromobility Currently, a range of micromobility technologies are in use as both personally owned and shared devices in many communities nationwide. These devices are evolving quickly, and their introduction to the marketplace is swift—often with limited information about how and where the devices can or should be used. While RTC seeks to offer guidance to communities, trail managers and policy makers about these devices that will be flexible and evolve alongside the market, it is important to understand the context of the technologies that currently exist. Current micromobility devices of note include e-bikes, scooters, e-skateboards (including longboards), self-balancing devices, and e-rollerblades and shoes.
    [Show full text]
  • Electric Bikes Get Things Rolling the Environmental Impact of Pedelecs and Their Potential
    background // august 2014 Electric bikes get things rolling The environmental impact of pedelecs and their potential For our Environment Imprint Publisher: Federal Environment Agency (UBA) Department I 3.1 PO Box 14 06 06844 Dessau-Roßlau Tel: +49 340-2103-0 [email protected] Internet: www.umweltbundesamt.de /umweltbundesamt.de /umweltbundesamt Authors: Ulrike Wachotsch, Andrea Kolodziej, Bernhard Specht, Regina Kohlmeyer und Falk Petrikowski with the assistance of Caroline Ommeln, Katrin Dziekan, Nadja Richter, Tina Mutert, Markus Menge and Manuela Weber Translated from German: Nathaneil W. Fritz Layout: Umweltbundesamt Download this paper: http://www.umweltbundesamt.de/publikationen/ e-rad-macht-mobil Photocredits: Cover: © autofocus67 / Fotolia.de p. 5: © Giant p. 19, 20: Katrin Dziekan / UBA p. 13: Backfiets.nl p. 16: Andrea Kolodziej / UBA p. 21: © Microstockfish / Fotolia.de p. 22: www.inmod.de Date: August 2014 Content Synopsis / Abstract 4 1. Status Quo 5 Electric bikes: facts and figures 6 2. Possible applications and potential benefits of pedelecs 8 2.1 Pedelecs – possible applications 8 2.2 Infrastructure requirements and parking 14 3. Environmental impact of pedelecs 15 3.1 Reduced energy consumption and CO2 emissions 15 3.2 Reduced impact on air quality 15 3.3 Reduced space consumption and noise 16 3.4 Characteristics and environmental effects of battery types currently used in pedelecs 17 3.5 Returning and recycling pedelecs and rechargeable batteries 19 4. Recommendations for action 21 List of abbreviations 23 Notes 24 Synopsis / Abstract Riding a pedelec is like riding a bike with the wind The amount of energy a pedelec requires for a 10 km at your back – one can take longer journeys than on trip is roughly equal to the energy needed to bring a conventional bike, without arriving drenched in 0.7 litres of room-temperature water to a boil.
    [Show full text]
  • The Bike Is Back with a Battery Dr.Ir
    The bike is back with a battery Dr.ir. Frank van der Hoeven, Delft University of Technology, Faculty of Architecture The attention the electric car receives as a promising means of sustainable transportation seems at times to overshadow the rise of that other electric vehicle: the pedelec or electric bicycle. For those who don't know yet: a pedelec is a bicycle assisted by an electric motor. That motor is powered by a rechargeable (lithium-ion) battery. The motor is intended to assist pedaling, not to replace it. It is the newest evolution of the bike. Its numbers are growing fast. This paper assumes that the growing use of pedelecs requires a different approach from design research and policy making towards electric two wheelers. It will outline the major differences between regular bike use and pedelec use and addresses issues like city to city cycling, bicycle theft, parking and street charging. The bike's market share When it comes to sustainable mobility most of the transportation policies seem to focus on increasing the use of public transport, combined with land use policies such as transit-oriented develop- ment of transport development areas. {1} Much energy and resources are pumped in the construction and ex- ploitation of bus, BRT and light rail systems to almost no avail. Cur- rently only 3% of all kilometres travelled in The Netherlands are travelled using bus, tram or metro combined. Train users and cy- clists make up for 8% of those distances each. And yes, car drivers and car passengers together make up for three quarters of the kilo- metre production, with respectively 51% and 24%.
    [Show full text]
  • Motivations and Barriers for Using Speed Pedelecs for Daily Commuting
    Article Motivations and Barriers for Using Speed Pedelecs for Daily Commuting Nikolaas Van den Steen 1,2,* , Bert Herteleer 1 , Jan Cappelle 1 and Lieselot Vanhaverbeke 2 1 Energy and Automation Research Group, KU Leuven Technology Campus Ghent; Gebroeders de Smetstraat 1, 9000 Ghent, Belgium; [email protected] (B.H.); [email protected] (J.C.) 2 Research Group MOBI, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Pleinlaan 2, 1050 Brussels, Belgium; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 31 October 2019; Accepted: 29 November 2019; Published: 3 December 2019 Abstract: Speed pedelecs, electric bicycles that can provide pedal assistance up to 45 km/h, have seen rapid uptake over the past ten years in Flanders, Belgium, yet perceptions around motivators and barriers have not been studied and understood in detail. This paper reports on the qualitative experiences of 100 participants from 10 Flemish companies who replaced their commuting vehicle by a speed pedelec for up to three weeks. Focus groups provided data in the identification of the motivators and the barriers towards speed pedelecs in comparison to those for bicycles and pedelecs classified in nine categories. The results from the focus groups show notable differences in motivators for using speed pedelecs compared to bicycles and pedelecs—the higher available speed and range within a given timeframe, which provides the possibility of better time management. The mental benefits and the competitive aspect of commuting with a speed pedelec were identified as new motivators. The purchase cost and the perception of safety as barriers remain, with reliability, flexibility, and planning identified as new barriers.
    [Show full text]
  • Pedelec Epac Bicycles (Electrically Power Assisted Cycles) - En 15194 Component Description
    English | S - 1 16 17 c 18 1 19 20 2 21 6 3 1 4 I 5 II 22 6 3 23 7 b 24 8 5 2 III 9 a IV 25 10 4 26 11 27 12 28 29 30 13 14 EPAC FAHRRÄDER (ELEKTROMOTORISCH UNTERSTÜTZTE RÄDER) - EN 15194 15 PEDELEC EPAC BICYCLES (ELECTRICALLY POWER ASSISTED CYCLES) - EN 15194 COMPONENT DESCRIPTION Frame: Suspension fork: STEVENS ORIGINAL-BETRIEBSANLEITUNG 1 Top tube 4 Chainstay a Motor I Fork crown STEVENS TRANSLATION OF THE ORIGINAL OPERATING INSTRUCTIONS 2 Down tube 5 Rear stay b Rechargeable battery II Stanchion tube III 3 Seat tube 6 Head tube c Display and Lower leg Weitere Informationen finden Sie in den Anleitungen auf der beiliegenden CD-ROM control element IV Drop-out For more information see the operating instructions on the enclosed CD-ROM 1 Saddle 13 Chain Wheel: 2 Seat post 14 Crank arm 25 Quick-release/ 3 Seat post clamp 15 Pedal thru axle 4 Pannier rack 16 Stem 26 Reflector ring 5 Rear light 17 Handlebars 27 Rim 6 Mudguard 18 Front light 28 Tyre 7 Lock 19 Brake lever 29 Spoke 8 Rear brake 20 Shifter 30 Hub 9 Rotor 21 Headset 10 Kickstand 22 Valve 11 Cassette sprockets 23 Front brake 12 Rear derailleur 24 Rotor S - 2 | English English | S - 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Component Description ............................................................. S - 1 Imprint ........................................................................ S - 2 General Safety Instructions ........................................................... S - 4 Intended Use ..................................................................... S - 6 Before Your First Ride ............................................................... S - 11 Before Every Ride .................................................................. S - 15 After an Accident .................................................................. S - 18 Riding a STEVENS Pedelec – Special Features ............................................
    [Show full text]
  • User Manual Disco/ Disco E-Bike/ Disco Pedelec
    USER MANUAL DISCO/ DISCO E-BIKE/ DISCO PEDELEC USER MANUALDISCO ver. 002.16 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Foreword: ..................................................................................................................... 4 2 Introductory information: ............................................................................................... 6 2.1 Use ......................................................................................................................... 6 2.2 Accessibility ............................................................................................................ 6 2.3 Adjustments ............................................................................................................ 6 2.4 Equipment .............................................................................................................. 6 2.5 Transportation ................................................................................................ 6 2.6 Cleaning and maintenance ..................................................................................... 7 2.7 Auxiliary electric motor .................................................................................... 7 2.8 Technical specifications .......................................................................................... 7 3 Before using the bicycle for the first time: ..................................................................... 8 3.1 Statutory provisions ...............................................................................................
    [Show full text]