Search Results

Electric vehicles (EVs) and the development around them has been rapid in recent years. As the battery is the most essential component of an electric vehicle, a lot of research and analysis has been focused on ensuring safe and reliable performance of batteries. Considering the location, size, and operating conditions for EV batteries, they must be designed with an in-built safety infrastructure keeping in mind certain realistic scenarios such as fire exposure, mechanical vibration, collisions, over-charging, single cell failures, and others. In this paper, we discuss an overview of various EV battery failure mechanisms, present current safety and abuse testing methods and standards associated with such mechanisms and discuss the need for the development and implementation of additional testing standards to better characterize the safety performance of EV battery packs.

As the automated vehicle (AV) industry continues to progress, it is important to establish the level of operational safety of these vehicles prior to and throughout their deployment on public roads. The Institute of Automated Mobility (IAM) has previously proposed a set of operational safety assessment (OSA) metrics which can be used to quantify the operational safety of vehicles. The OSA metrics provide a starting point to consistently quantify performance, but a framework to interpret the metrics measurements is needed to objectively quantify the overall operational safety for a vehicle in a given scenario. This work aims to present an approach to applying a calculation of the safety envelope component of the OSA metrics to rear-world collisions for use in such an assessment. In this paper, the OSA methodology concept is introduced as a means for quantifying the operational safety of a vehicle.

As the deployment of automated vehicles (AVs) on public roadways expands, there is growing interest in establishing metrics that can be used to evaluate vehicle operational safety. The set of Operational Safety Assessment (OSA) metrics, that include several safety envelope-type metrics, previously proposed by the Institute of Automated Mobility (IAM) are a step towards this goal. The safety envelope OSA metrics can be computed using kinematics derived from video data captured by infrastructure-based cameras and thus do not require on-board sensor data or vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I) connectivity, though either of the latter data sources could enhance kinematic data accuracy. However, the calculation of some metrics includes certain vehicle-specific parameters that must be assumed or estimated if they are not known a priori or communicated directly by the vehicle.

This study was conducted to assess the effects of differing rear impact pulse characteristics on restraint performance, front-seat occupant kinematics, biomechanical responses, and seat yielding. Five rear sled tests were conducted at 40.2 km/h using a modern seat. The sled buck was representative of a generic sport utility vehicle. A 50th percentile Hybrid III ATD was used. The peak accelerations, acceleration profiles and durations were varied. Three of the pulses were selected based on published information and two were modeled to assess the effects of peak acceleration occurring early and later within the pulse duration using a front and rear biased trapezoidal characteristic shape. The seatback angle at maximum rearward deformation varied from 46 to 67 degrees. It was lowest in Pulse 1 which simulates an 80 km/h car-to-car rear impact.

Assessment of the physical evidence on a seat belt restraint system provides one source of data for determining an occupant’s seat belt use or non-use during a motor vehicle crash. The evidence typically associated with loading from a restrained occupant has been extensively researched and documented in the literature. However, evidence of loading to the restraint system can also be generated by other means, including the interaction of an unrestrained occupant with a stowed restraint system. The present study evaluates physical evidence on multiple stowed restraint systems generated via interaction with unrestrained occupants during a full-scale dolly rollover crash test of a large multiple passenger van. Unbelted anthropomorphic test devices (ATDs) were positioned in the driver and right front passenger seats and in all designated seating positions in the third, fourth, and fifth rows.

The biomechanical injury assessment for an occupant in a planar vehicle-to-vehicle collision often requires a kinematic analysis of impact-related occupant motion. This analysis becomes more complex when the collision force is eccentric to the center of gravity on a struck vehicle because the vehicle kinematics include both translation and potentially significant yaw rotational rates. This study examines the significance of vehicle yaw on occupant kinematics in eccentric (off-center) planar collisions. The paper describes the calculation of the instantaneous center of rotation (ICR) in a yawing vehicle post-impact and explores how mapping this quantity may inform an occupant’s trajectory when using a free particle “occupant” analysis. The study initially analyzed the impact-related occupant motion for all the outboard seat positions in a minivan using several hypothetical examples of eccentric vehicle-to-vehicle crash configurations with varying PDOF, delta-V, and yaw rate.

Vehicle rear structure stiffness has increased as a result of the requirements in the FMVSS 301R, which has also corresponded to an increase in front-row seat strength. This study evaluates the structural behavior and occupant response associated with production-level seats equipped with body-mounted D-rings, and very stiff all-belt-to-seat (ABTS) in a group of 12 deceleration sled tests. A double-haversine pulse with approximately 100-msec duration was used for all tests, with peak accelerations of approximately 19 g for the 40 km/h (25 mph) tests and peak accelerations of 28 g for the 56 km/h (35 mph) test. This generic pulse was designed to represent a severe rear impact crash involving vehicles with stiffer rear structures. The tests compared occupant responses and resulting structural deformation of an original equipment manufacturer (OEM) production-level driver seat from a pickup and a very stiff modified ABTS. Both seating systems were equipped with dual recliners.

As micromobility devices (i.e., e-bikes, scooters, skateboards, etc.) continue to increase in popularity, there is a growing need to test these devices for varying purposes such as performance assessment, crash reconstruction, and design of new products. Although tests have been conducted across the industry for electric scooters (e-scooters), this paper describes a novel method for crash testing e-scooters with anthropomorphic test devices (ATDs) “riding” them, providing new sources for data collection and research. A sled fixture was designed utilizing a pneumatic crash rail to propel the scooters with an overhead gantry used for stabilization of the ATD until release just prior to impact. The designed test series included impacts with a 5.5-inch curb at varying incidence angles, a stationary vehicle, or a standing pedestrian ATD. Test parameter permutations included changing e-scooter tire sizes, impact speeds, and rider safety equipment.

Field data was analyzed on second-row children in front, side and rear impacts to study fatality trends by model year (MY) and calendar year (CY) with 1980-2020 MY vehicles. The different MY and CY perspectives show changes in rates that are useful for setting priorities for second-row child safety in rear impacts. 1990 to 2019 FARS was queried to assess the number of fatally injured and non-ejected second-row children (0-15 years old) in crashes without fires. The children included outboard occupants seated behind an occupied front seat and center occupants. The data was analyzed for rear, front and side impacts to assess crash frequency. 1990-2015 POLK was queried to assess exposure of registered vehicles and estimate a fatality rate. The FARS and POLK data were sub-grouped by MY of the vehicle and CY of the crash. There were 2.8-times more fatally injured children in frontal crashes than in the rear crashes. The ratio of frontal and rear crashes varied with CY sub-groups.

The average body weight of the US population has increased over time. This study investigates the effect of increasing weight on seat and occupant responses in 15-18 km/h and 42 km/h rear sled tests. The effect of initial occupant posture is also discussed. Seven tests were conducted with lap-shoulder belted ATDs (anthropometric test device) placed on older and modern driver seats. Four tests were conducted with a 50th percentile male Hybrid III, two with 95th percentile male Hybrid III and one with a BioRID. The ATDs were ballasted to represent a Class I or II obese occupant in three tests. The tests were matched by seat model and sled velocity. The effect of occupant weight was assessed in three matches. The results indicated an increase in seatback deflection with increasing occupant weight.

The operational safety of automated driving system (ADS)-equipped vehicles (AVs) must be quantified using well-defined metrics in order to gain an unambiguous understanding of the level of risk associated with AV deployment on public roads. In this research, efforts to evaluate the operational safety assessment (OSA) metrics introduced in prior work by the Institute of Automated Mobility (IAM) are described. An initial validation of the proposed set of OSA metrics involved using the open-source simulation software Car Learning to Act (CARLA) and Scenario Runner, which are used to place a subject vehicle in selected scenarios and obtain measurements for the various relevant OSA metrics. Car following scenarios were selected from the list of 37 pre-crash scenarios identified by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) as the most common driving situations that lead to crash events involving two light vehicles.

Occupant protection in rear crashes is complex. While seatbelts and head restraints are effective in rear impacts, seatbacks offer the primary restraint component to front-seat occupants in rear impacts. Seatback deflection due to occupant loading can occur in a previous rear crash and/or in multiple-rear event crashes. Seatback deflection will in-turn affect the plastic seatback deformation and energy absorption capabilities of the seat. This study was conducted to provide information on seatback deflection and seat energy consumption in low and high-speed rear impacts. The results can be used to examine seatback deflection and energy consumed in a previous rear impact, or in collisions with multiple rear impacts. Prior seatback deflection and energy absorption can affect the total remaining energy absorption and seat performance for a subsequent rear impact.

The operational safety of automated driving system (ADS)-equipped vehicles (AVs) needs to be quantified for an understanding of risk, requiring the measurement of parameters as they relate to AVs and human driven vehicles alike. In prior work by the Institute of Automated Mobility (IAM), operational safety metrics were introduced as part of an operational safety assessment (OSA) methodology that provide quantification of behavioral safety of AVs and human-driven vehicles as they interact with each other and other road users. To calculate OSA metrics, the data capture system must accurately and precisely determine position, velocity, acceleration, and geometrical relationships between various safety-critical traffic participants. The design of an infrastructure-based system that is intended to capture the data required for calculation of OSA metrics is addressed in this paper.

Seat strength has increased over the past four decades which includes a transition to dual recliners. There are seat collision performance issues with stiff ABTS and very strong seats in rear impacts with different occupant sizes, seating positions and physical conditions. In this study, eight rear sled tests were conducted in four series: 1) ABTS in a 56 km/h (35 mph) test with a 50th Hybrid III ATD at MGA, 2) dual-recliner ABTS and F-150 in a 56 km/h (35 mph) test with a 5th female Hybrid III ATD at Ford, 3) dual-recliner ABTS in a 48 km/h (30 mph) test with a 95th Hybrid III ATD leaning inboard at CAPE and 4) dual-recliner ABTS and Escape in 40 km/h (25 mph) in-position and out-of-position tests with a 50th Hybrid III ATD at Ford. The sled tests showed that single-recliner ABTS seats twist in severe rear impacts with the pivot side deformed more rearward than the stanchion side.

Micro-mobility is a fast-growing trend in the transportation industry with stand-up electric scooters (e-scooters) becoming increasingly popular in the United States. To date, there are over 350 ride-share e-scooter programs in the United States. As this popularity increases, so does the need to understand the performance capabilities of these vehicles and the associated operator kinematics. Scooter tip-over stability is characterized by the scooter geometry and controls and is maintained through operator inputs such as body position, interaction with the handlebars, and foot placement. In this study, testing was conducted using operators of varying sizes to document the capabilities and limitations of these e-scooters being introduced into the traffic ecosystem. A test course was designed to simulate an urban environment including sidewalk and on-road sections requiring common maneuvers (e.g., turning, stopping points, etc.) for repeatable, controlled data collection.

This study assesses vehicle and occupant responses in six vehicle-to-vehicle high-speed rear impact crash tests conducted at the Exponent Test and Engineering Center. The struck vehicle delta Vs ranged from 32 to 76 km/h and the vehicle centerline offsets varied from 5.7 to 114 cm. Five of the six tests were conducted with Hybrid III ATDs (Anthropometric Test Device) with two tests using the 50th male belted in the driver seat, one test with an unbelted 50th male in the driver seat, one test with a 95th male belted in the driver seat, and one with the 5th female lap belted in the left rear seat. All tests included vehicle instrumentation and three tests included ATD instrumentation. The ATD responses were analyzed and compared to corresponding IARVs (injury assessment reference values). Ground-based and onboard vehicle videos were synchronized with the vehicle kinematic data and biomechanical responses.

The purpose of this research is to document representative examples of control inputs and body positioning experienced riders use to control a motorcycle through maneuvers representative of those encountered during real-world operation. There is limited publicly available data that tracks the magnitude or direction of steering head rotation, steering torque input, etc. used by a rider to initiate and exit a turn as well as maintaining directional control during maneuvers ranging from slow parking lot turns to high speed lane changes. Using Exponent’s Test and Engineering Center (TEC) track and skid pad, a course was defined that included several maneuvers at various speeds and radii. A previous paper [1] investigated the influence of rider kinematics (weight shift) on motorcycle control.

This study assesses the exposure distribution and injury rate (MAIS 4+F) to front-outboard non-ejected occupants by crash severity, belt use and head restraint type and damage in rear impacts using 1997-2015 NASS-CDS data. Rear crashes with a delta V <24 km/h (15 mph) accounted for 71% of all exposed occupants. The rate of MAIS 4+F increased with delta V and was higher for unbelted than belted occupants with a rate of 11.7% ± 5.2% and 6.0% ± 1.5% respectively in 48+ km/h (30 mph) delta V. Approximately 12% of front-outboard occupants were in seats equipped with an integral head restraint and 86% were with an adjustable head restraint, irrespective of crash severity. The overall injury rate was 0.14% ± 0.05% and 0.22% ± 0.06%, respectively. It was higher in cases where the head restraint was listed as “damaged”. Thirteen cases involving a lap-shoulder belted occupant in a front-outboard seat in which “damage” to the adjustable head restraint was identified.

NHTSA has recently been petitioned to address the protection of second-row children in rear crashes due front seatback performance. The protection of children is important. However, it is more complex than assessing front seat performance in rear impacts. Viano, Parenteau (2008 [1]) analyzed cases of serious-to-fatally injured (MAIS 3+F) children up to 7 years old in the second row in rear impacts involving 1990+ model year vehicles using 1997-2005 NASS-CDS. They observed that intrusion was an important factor pushing the child forward into the back of the front seat, B-pillar or other front structure. To help assess whether stiffening the front seats would be beneficial for second-row child safety, the 2008 study was updated using more recent data and model year vehicles. In the present study, 1997-2015 NASS-CDS data were analyzed for serious-to-fatally (MAIS 3+F) injured 0- to 7-year old children in the second row with 1994+ model year vehicles.

This study assesses front seat occupant responses in rear impacts with active head restraints (AHR) and conventional head restraints (CHR) using field accident data and test data from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS). 2003-2015 NASS-CDS data were analyzed to determine injury rates in 1997+ model year seats equipped with AHR and CHR. Results indicated that less than 4% of occupants were in seats equipped with AHR. Crashes of delta-V <24 km/h accounted for more than 70% of all exposed front seat occupants, irrespective of head restraint design. Rear crashes with a delta-V < 24 km/h included 35.6% fewer occupants who sustained a MAIS 1-2 injury overall and 26.4% fewer who sustained a MAIS 1-2 cervical injury in vehicles equipped with AHR compared to CHR. In IIHS 16 km/h rear sled tests, the biomechanical response of an instrumented BioRID was evaluated on seats with AHR and CHR. HIC15 and concussion risk were calculated from head acceleration data.