Search Results

Accident data show that the injury risks to children seated in child restraint systems (CRSs) are higher in side collisions than any other type of collision. To investigate child injury in the CRS in a side impact, it is necessary to understand the occupant responses in car-to-car crash tests. In this research, a series of full car side impact tests based on the ECE R95 test procedure was conducted. In the vehicle's struck-side rear seat location, a Q3s three-year-old child dummy was seated in a forward facing (FF) CRS, and a CRABI six-month-old (6MO) infant dummy was seated in a rear facing (RF) CRS and also was placed in car-bed restraint. In the non-struck side rear seat location, the RF CRSs also were installed. In addition to testing the CRSs installed by a seatbelt, an ISOFIX FF CRS and an ISOFIX RF CRS were tested. For the evaluations, occupant kinematic behavior and injury measures were compared.

In the current Japanese and European side impact regulation, occupant protection is evaluated based on anthropomorphic test device (hereafter referred to as the more commonly used term “dummy”) measurements recorded in a stationary car impacted by a moving deformable barrier (MDB). In order to validate and improve the side impact test procedures of the regulation and the associated new car assessment program, it is necessary to compare the side impact test procedure with car-to-car side impact tests conducted in various conditions. In this research, a series of car-to-car side impact tests using a small sedan as the target vehicle was conducted as follows: (1) A striking car impacted against the stationary car at 50 km/h at an impact angle of 90 degrees. (2) A 1BOX vehicle impacted the stationary car at 50 km/h at an impact angle of 90 degrees. (3) Both cars were moving, and the striking car impacted the struck car at an impact angle of 90 degrees.