We thank you for hosting this important and timely workshop. It is our pleasure to visit here and share our thoughts from a vehicle’s perspective of vehicle/infrastructure design (SVID). We also hope to learn what you and others are doing in this young and exciting field. Put simply, we hope to gain insight into answering the question: what vehicle and infrastructure technologies can we develop together such that we can significantly enhance automobile transportation efficiency, effectiveness, safety, and life-cycle costs? Life-cycle costs include direct and indirect economic factors as well as socioeconomic factors including quality, of life, environment, and conservation of renewable and non-renewable resources.

Other speakers here like David Albright and Tom Larson have already defined SVID and have described three key criteria for appropriate SVID projects. Taking their lead, a project must 1) be important to both automotive and infrastructure designers, 2) have a high potential for mutual economic benefit, and 3) be challenging professionally as well as seen as being highly beneficial to society.

We believe that to be successful in SVID we must begin with a few specific and well designed projects that are small enough in size and complexity to quickly demonstrate to ourselves and others how the process will work in practice.

For example, appropriate technology candidates might easily be found by focusing on the physical interface between the automobile and the highway. In other words, "where the rubber hits the road." Such technologies, both active and passive, might address noise reduction (electronic mufflers and quieter chassis and road surfaces), vibration reduction (active auto suspensions, smoother running engines, and smoother road surfaces), and shorter (safer) auto stopping distances in all-weather conditions (antilock breaks, active suspensions, and better die materials and road surfaces).

As we begin to choose initial SVID demonstration technologies, we first need a process that will assure that the right vehicle and infrastructure problems are attacked first. The attached ten figures describe a multi-step methodology for gathering information that ultimately should lead to choosing SVID projects that meet the three previously discussed selection criteria.

Figure 1 In order for a consumer to want to purchase an automobile, it must first meet certain basic requirements, like "does it work as advertised, does it embody adequate quality and safety features, and is it priced appropriately?" These are "needs." Then certain perception (image) factors that the buyer "wants" will be added such that, together, will finally induce the consumer to buy a particular car "brand" that appears to best meet the consumer's needs and desires.

Figure 2 Any changes in automotive designs have potentially large impacts on the American economy, employment, many other industries, and natural resources. Accordingly, it is vital that any changes in the automobile be done purposefully and with care.

Figure 3 There are many attributes (metrics) that effect the many stakeholders linked to the automotive industry. It is important to correctly integrate these often divergent view points and requirements in order that no one segment is optimized at the expense of the whole system. In other words, sub-optimization must be avoided.

Figure 4 Historically, metrics are satisfied sequentially in any country often at the expense of other sectors and with little thought to application in other countries and/or markets. Countries working together on SVID can add a global perspective that is more effective and efficient than any one group working separately.

Figure 5 Safety factors have been key consumer drivers effecting the way automobiles are designed and marketed.

Figure 6 Product acceptance in the marketplace depends on a perceived need and/or want by the consumer. The marketplace is also greatly effected by state and federal government regulatory practices that mandate certain automotive-related technologies. Technology related to safety has frequently been voluntarily introduced into the marketplace by auto manufacturers before consumers perceived a need or desire to buy them even when the added cost was relatively small. SVID can help optimize transportation technology developments vis-a-vis social, regulatory, and economic factors for a particular market.

Figure 7 To help focus this workshop on the tasks at hand, an SVID planning matrix is proposed. The matrix and associated discussion points are patterned after the very thoughtful paper "Mobility Technology Tomorrow II" introduced by Gregory Henderson and Neil Schilke for the auto and aero sectors in January 1992, at the second Society of Automotive Engineers Mobility Technology Planning Forum held in Phoenix, Arizona, USA. Their paper can be found in Automotive Engineering, Volume 100, Number 5, page 23-30.

Figure 8 SVID planning matrix that maps metrics (systems, environment,...) versus the vehicle or infrastructure sectors, versus time for awareness, development, and application.

Figure 9 Some SVID discussion departure points to focus attention on particular vehicle and infrastructure attributes.

Figure 10 Additional SVID discussion points to focus attention on other vehicle and infrastructure attributes.