Search Results

Injury to the far side occupant has been demonstrated as a significant portion of the total trauma in side impacts. The objective of the study was to determine the response of PMHS in far side impact configurations, with and without generic countermeasures, and compare responses to the WorldSID and THOR dummies. A far side impact buck was designed for a sled test system that included a center console and three-point belt system. The buck allowed for additional options of generic countermeasures including shoulder or thorax plates or an inboard shoulder belt. The entire buck could be mounted on the sled in either a 90-degree (3-o'clock PDOF) or a 60-degree (2-o'clock PDOF) orientation. A total of 18 tests on six PMHS were done to characterize the far side impact environment at both low (11 km/h) and high (30 km/h) velocities. WorldSID and THOR-NT tests were completed in the same configurations to conduct matched-pair comparisons.

The aim of this study was to assess the crash injury benefits of an Automatic Emergency Braking System (AEBS), for the passenger vehicle population in France. These benefits were examined in regards to the number/proportion of fatalities and serious injured crashes that could be saved per annum. The two crash types investigated included pedestrian crashes and rear-end collisions. AEBS was expected to intervene 0.6sec prior to the crash and at published levels of force according to whether braking previously occurred and the road condition/surface adherence. The analysis involved national crash data, BAAC, collected by the French Ministry of transport, in-depth crash data made available from the European EACS (European Accident Causation Survey) database by LAB, as well as findings from the U.S. NASS/CDS and NHTSA PCDS in-depth databases. A step-wise methodology was used to calculate the crash injury benefits of AEBS across the two crash types.

In a side impact, the occupants on both the struck, or near side, of the vehicle and the occupants on the opposite, or far side, of the vehicle are at risk of injury. Since model year 1997, all passenger cars in the U.S. have been required to comply with FMVSS No. 214, a safety standard that mandates a minimum level of side crash protection for near side occupants. No such federal safety standard exists for far side occupants. The mechanism of far side injury is believed to be quite different than the injury mechanism for near side injury. Far side impact protection may require the development of different countermeasures than those which are effective for near side impact protection. This paper evaluates the risk of side crash injury for far side occupants as a basis for developing far side impact injury countermeasures. Based on the analysis of NASS/CDS 1993–2002, this study examines the injury outcome of over 4500 car, light truck, and van occupants subjected to far side impact.

Injury to the far side occupant has been demonstrated as a significant portion of the total trauma in side impacts. The objective of the study was to determine the response of PMHS in far side impact configurations, with and without generic countermeasures, and compare responses to the WorldSID and THOR dummies. A far side impact buck was designed for a sled test system that included a center console and three-point belt system. The buck allowed for additional options of generic countermeasures including shoulder or thorax plates or an inboard shoulder belt. The entire buck could be mounted on the sled in either a 90-degree (3-o'clock PDOF) or a 60-degree (2-o'clock PDOF) orientation. A total of 18 tests on six PMHS were done to characterize the far side impact environment at both low (11 km/h) and high (30 km/h) velocities. WorldSID and THOR-NT tests were completed in the same configurations to conduct matched-pair comparisons.