Search Results

Recently, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) revised the Final Rule for Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS 208) - Occupant Crash Protection [1]. This rule, which will first take effect during the 2004 model year, specifies a number of new compliance test requirements that advanced frontal protection airbags will have to meet. The goal of the new standard is to reduce the risk of serious airbag induced injuries, particularly for small women and young children, and provide improved frontal crash protection for all occupants. In response to this new rule, vehicles in the future will have electronic sensors located in the seat and other advanced sensor systems. These sensors will be designed to measure critical data, such as occupant weight and size, which will be used to control the airbag. The reliability of the sensors through the entire life of a vehicle is critical to its overall safety characteristics.

A comprehensive strategy for applying quasi-static and dynamic tests in the development of automobile side impact protection systems is presented. The approach is geared towards providing an understanding of how vehicle components relate to occupant protection as measured by the FMVSS 214 dynamic side impact test. These test methods are viewed as being complimentary, rather than competitive, tools to be employed in the overall strategy. The approach begins with obtaining detailed data from an FMVSS 214 dynamic test. Additional instrumentation is required so that the results of the test can be used to form the basis for setting conditions for subsequent quasi-static and dynamic tests. The Composite Test Procedure (CTP) is an integral part of the process. As described here, the CTP can be conducted under three different methods; three step procedure, continuous computer control, and continuous manual control.

Occupant protection in the event of interior head impact is a major issue in the development process of interior component countermeasures. As phase-in schedules for head impact protection regulations fast approach, auto safety engineers are presented with major challenges in regard to developing suitable design alternatives. This paper presents a variety of testing options which are available to evaluate interior design options. These test alternatives vary from simple component-level drop tests to in-vehicle compliance testing. Each type of test serves a specific purpose in the development of interior components from a head impact protection perspective. The basic parameters for each type of test, including mass, form shape, velocity, and motion will be discussed. Test data from component-level testing is presented, as well as the advantages and disadvantages for each alternative.

Over the last several years, designers have been working toward developing airbag suppression systems in order to satisfy the new Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 208 - Occupant Crash Protection requirements currently being phased-in [1, 2]. By September 1, 2005, all vehicles are required to be in compliance with the new requirements. The new rule requires that vehicles must have an airbag suppression system that turns the airbag off in cases where a child or child seat is detected in the front passenger occupant position. Typically incorporated in the seating structure or cushion area, these suppression systems are activated each time the seat is occupied. More so than any other component, this feature makes safety, durability, and reliability testing of these systems critical to their functionality. This paper will discuss how airbag suppression systems have affected the standard testing procedures of vehicle components including seats and airbags.