Search Results

Industry standards and practices define a number of mathematical and physical methods to estimate the cargo carrying volume capacity of a vehicle. While some have roots dating back decades, others try to assess the utility of the space for cargo by subjective measurements. Each these methods have their own inherent merits and deficiencies. The purpose of this paper is to highlight the differences in calculated cargo volume amongst the following practices: Society of Automobile Engineers (SAE) J1100[1] International Organization for Standardization (ISO 3832)[2], Global Car manufacturer's Information Exchange group (GCIE)[3], Consumer Reports[4]. This paper provides a method and associated rationale for constructing a new cargo volume calculation practice that attempts to harmonize these procedures into a more contiguous practice. This homologation will benefit publishing industry, vehicle manufacturers and customers alike.

This paper reports on seventy additional tests conducted using a mechanical device described by Bonugli et al. [4]. The method utilized quasi-static loading of bumper systems and other vehicle components to measure their force-deflection properties. Corridors on the force-deflection plots, for various vehicle combinations, were determined in order to define the system stiffness of the combined vehicle components. Loading path and peak force measurements can then be used to evaluate the impact severity for low speed collisions in terms of delta-v and acceleration. The additional tests refine the stiffness corridors, previously published, which cover a wide range of vehicle types and impact configurations. The compression phase of a low speed collision can be modeled as a spring that is defined by the force-deflection corridors. This is followed by a linear rebound phase based on published restitution values [1,5].