Search Results

The 8 papers in this technical paper collection focus on occupant protection. Topics covered include headform impact tests, simulated injury monitors (SIMon), injury factors in vehicles in small-overlap frontal crashes, and more. The 7 papers in this technical paper collection focus on occupant protection. Topics covered include headform impact tests, simulated injury monitors (SIMon), injury factors in vehicles in small-overlap frontal crashes, and more.

Recent field data have shown that the occupant protection in vehicle rear seats failed to keep pace with advances in the front seats likely due to the lack of advanced safety technologies. The objective of this study was to optimize advanced restraint systems for protecting rear seat occupants with a range of body sizes under different frontal crash pulses. Three series of sled tests (baseline tests, advanced restraint trial tests, and final tests), MADYMO model validations against a subset of the sled tests, and design optimizations using the validated models were conducted to investigate rear seat occupant protection with 4 Anthropomorphic Test Devices (ATDs) and 2 crash pulses.

Digital human modeling allows for the evaluation of equipment designs before physically building and testing prototypes. This paper presents an example of how digital human modeling was used to perform biomechanical studies on four new designs for future infantry headwear systems. Range of Motion (ROM) and cervical spine forces and moments were compared using static and dynamic simulations in a virtual environment. Results confirmed that headwear system prototypes with optimal overall mass and Centre of Mass (CM) location, as determined by previous human subject trials, exerted the least amount of biomechanical loading. Facial protection was favorable when considering forces and moments in the cervical spine, however when considering ROM, the rigid prototype mandible guards used in this evaluation are not recommended. The shape of a more accommodating mandible guard was developed, and the option to remove facial protection for some tasks was recommended.

Accident data show that the head and the chest are the most frequently injured body regions in side impact fatal accidents. Curtain side air bag (CSA) and thorax side air bag (SAB) have been installed by manufacturers for the protection devices for these injuries. In this research, first we studied the recent side impact accident data in Japan and verified that the head and chest continued to be the most frequently injured body regions in fatal accidents. Second, we studied the occupant seating postures in vehicles on the roads, and found from the vehicle's side view that the head location of 56% of the drivers was in line or overlapped with the vehicle's B-pillar. This observation suggests that in side collisions head injuries may occur frequently due to contacts with the B-pillar. Third, we conducted a side impact test series for struck vehicles with and without CSA and SAB.

As software (SW) becomes more and more an important aspect of embedded system development, project schedules are requiring the earlier development of software simultaneously with hardware (HW). In addition, verification has increasingly challenged the design of complex mixed-signal SoC products. This is exacerbated for automotive safety critical SoC products with a high number of analogue interfaces (sensors and actuators) to the physical components such as an airbag SoC chipset. Generally, it is widely accepted that verification accounts for around 70% of the total SoC development. Since integration of HW and SW is the most crucial step in embedded system development, the sooner it is done, the sooner verification can begin. As such, any approaches which could allow verification and integration of HW/SW to be deployed earlier in the development process and help to decrease verification effort, (e.g.: accelerate verification runs) are of extreme interest.

The experimental campaign discussed in publication 2019-01-0635 was extended to emulate more vehicle parameters and also to increase severity leading to deployment event. The engine speed (RPM) and Accelerator Pedal Position (APP) were emulated using LabVIEW and added to the previously reported emulated parameters of wheel speeds and brake status. Overlapping non-deployment events were generated and the EDR data is presented enriched with additional (faster) CAN bus data sniffed from the vehicle harness. While the non-deployment events were still generated using the rubber mallet in pendulum configuration as in 2019-01-0635, a series of tests were performed using an Izod pendulum to incrementally increase event severity until deployment event was generated. The Izod pendulum was instrumented with a rotational potentiometer to measure its instantaneous angle while laboratory accelerometers were used to separately measure acceleration.

Transfer or response equations are important as they provide relationships between the responses of different surrogates under matched, or nearly identical loading conditions. In the present study, transfer equations for different body regions were developed via mathematical modeling. Specifically, validated finite element models of the age-dependent Ford human body models (FHBM) and the mid-sized male Hybrid III (HIII50) were used to generate a set of matched cases (i.e., 192 frontal sled impact cases involving different restraints, impact speeds, severities, and FHBM age). For each impact, two restraint systems were evaluated: a standard three-point belt with and without a single-stage inflator airbag. Regression analyses were subsequently performed on the resulting FHBM- and HIII50-based responses. This approach was used to develop transfer equations for seven body regions: the head, neck, chest, pelvis, femur, tibia, and foot.

This paper is based on, and in continuation of the work previously published in ASEE NCS Conference held in Grand Rapids, MI [1]. Automotive seating rail structures are one of the key components in the automotive industry because they carry the entire weight of passenger and they hold the structure for seating foams and other assembled key components such as side airbag and seatbelt systems. The entire seating is supported firmly and attached to the bottom bodywork of the vehicle through the linkage assembly called the seat rails. Seat rails are adjustable in their longitudinal motion which plays an important role in giving the passengers enough leg room to make them feel comfortable. Therefore, seat rails under the various operating conditions, should be able to withstand the weight of the passenger along with the other assembled parts as mentioned above. Also, functional requirements such as crash safety is very important to avoid or to minimize injuries to the occupants.

Driving comfort is one of the most important indexes for automobile comfort. Driving posture comfort is closely related to the drivers' joint angles and joint torques. In present research, a new method is proposed to identify the most comfortable driving posture based on studying the relation between drivers' joint angles and joint torques. In order to truly reflect a driving situation, the accurate human driving model of 50 percent of the size of Chinese male is established according to the human body database of RAMSIS firstly. Biomechanical model based on accurate human driving model is also developed to analyze and obtain dynamic equations of human driving model by employing Kane method. The joint torque-angle curves of drivers' upper and lower limbs during holding wheel or pedal operation can be obtained through dynamic simulation in the MATLAB. Through curve-fitting analysis, the minimum joint torque of a driver' limb and the optimal joint angel can be found.

In highly automated vehicles (HAVs), new seat configurations may be desirable to allow occupants to perform new activities. One of the current HAV concepts is the swiveled seat layout, which might facilitate communication between occupants. The main objective of this study was to investigate the effects of seat swiveling angles on occupant kinematics and injury risk predicted by a Human Body Model (HBM) during a frontal impact. A detailed 50th percentile male HBM (GHBMC M50-O) was subjected to two frontal crash pulses in a sled setup. The model was positioned on a semi-rigid seat and restrained using a pre-inflated airbag and a three-point seatbelt. Simulations included four seat swiveling angles (0, -10, -20, and -30 degrees), three occupant positions (Sedan driver, large VAN driver or Laptop user), two airbag initial locations (nominal or matching the head Y location), and the inclusion of lateral supports on the seat pan.

This SAE Standard describes the interface between an on-vehicle Mayday detection, reporting system and the off-vehicle response center that will manage the response to the vehicle's call for assistance. The automatic detection and reporting by either the intelligent vehicle itself or by the intelligent roadway of a vehicle that is disabled or involved in an accident, [referred to as Automatic Mayday], is one of the key services identified by the ITS America program plan road map. This effort has been identified, as STD SAE J2313 in recent DOT-FHWA efforts to advance needed National standards. This document primarily addresses the responsibilities of a vehicle in detecting and reporting such an event. Equipment suites on each vehicle will vary widely, as will the communications channel employed to report the incident.

The objective of this document is to enhance the test procedure that is used for ejection mitigation testing per the NHTSA guidelines as mentioned in the FMVSS226 Final Rule document (NHTSA Docket No. NHTSA-2011-0004). The countermeasure for occupant ejection testing is to be tested with an 18kg mass on a guided linear impactor using the featureless headform specifically designed for ejection mitigation testing. SAE does not endorse any particular countermeasure for ejection mitigation testing. However, the document reflects guidelines that should be followed to maintain consistency in the test results. Examples of currently used countermeasures include the Inflatable Curtain airbags and Laminated Glass.

The objective of this document is to enhance the test procedure that is used for ejection mitigation testing per the NHTSA guidelines as mentioned in the FMVSS226 Final Rule document (NHTSA Docket No. NHTSA-2011-0004). The countermeasure for occupant ejection testing is to be tested with an 18kg mass on a guided linear impactor using the featureless headform specifically designed for ejection mitigation testing. SAE does not endorse any particular countermeasure for ejection mitigation testing. However, the document reflects guidelines that should be followed to maintain consistency in the test results. Examples of currently used countermeasures include the Inflatable Curtain airbags and Laminated Glass.

The new sound and vibration laboratory at Autoliv’s Ogden Technical Center (OTC) was purpose-built with a focus on automotive safety restraint product development (air bags, seat belts, steering wheels, etc.). The laboratory requirements stem from the continued industry trend of quieter vehicles which drives the need for components with extremely low levels of rattle noise. The laboratory at OTC complements similar Autoliv testing facilities around the world. Test articles range from several cubic inches up to approximately one cubic foot and contain varying degrees of moving elements. With the new laboratory at OTC, Autoliv can test new product designs earlier in the development process and obtain test results and feedback faster. The function of the OTC test lab is vibration-induced rattle noise; shake components with a known input and measure the resulting noise.

This investigation addresses and evaluates: (1) belted drivers in frontal crashes; (2) crashes divided into low, medium, and high severity; (3) air-bag-equipped passenger vehicles separated into either model years 1985 - 1997 (with airbags) or model years 1998 - 2008; (4) rate of Harm as a function of crash severity and vehicle model year; and (5) injury patterns associated with injured body regions and the involved physical components, by vehicle model year. Comparisons are made between the injury patterns related to drivers seated in vehicles manufactured before 1998 and those manufactured 1998 or later. The purpose of this comparative analysis is to establish how driver injury patterns may have changed as a result of the introduction of more recent safety belt technology, advanced airbags, or structural changes.

Abstract Modern driver compartment restraint systems have at least three key components that work together: safety belt system, airbags, and collapsible steering column. During a crash, a steering column will collapse at a predetermined force called breakaway force. Once the force of a crash has reached the breakaway force threshold, the column will move towards the motor area. When the column moves, the drivers’ peak forces and acceleration are decreased because the time and distance that are given to decelerate are increased. The usage of a breakaway force element inside the steering column allows car manufacturers to control the movement of the steering column at a certain point during a crash. Any load below the breakaway force, such as airbag deployment and normal or misuse forces applied by the driver, is absorbed by the system. Today’s force-based systems are optimized (design/configure) using various crash configurations, leading to one specific behavior of the column.

Motorized shoulder belt tensioning is a new automotive seatbelt technology which has shown promise to reduce automotive crash injuries. The current study was conducted to determine if the Hybrid III family of dummies is an appropriate biofidelic surrogate for studying motorized shoulder belt tensioning. The objective was to measure torso retraction time, torso position, torso velocity, internal resistive moment, changes in torso curvature and the center of rotation of torso extension during seatbelt tensioning for the Hybrid III family. A previous study developed a protocol and test fixture to measure the biomechanics of volunteers subject to quasi-static loading by a motorized shoulder belt tensioner. A fixture supported the occupant leaning forward and applied shoulder belt tension. Kinematics were quantified by analyzing the motion of reflective markers on the dummy using an eight camera digital video system. A three axis load cell measured internal resistance to extension.

This research focuses on comparing the biomechanical response of the head and neck of the Hybrid III 3-year-old anthropometric test device finite element model and pediatric cadaver data, under flexion-extension bending and axial tensile loading conditions. Previous experimental research characterized the quasi-static biomechanical response of the pediatric cervical spine under flexion-extension bending and tolerance in tensile distraction loading conditions. Significant differences in rotational and linear stiffness were found between the Hybrid III model and the pediatric cadaver data. In this research the biomechanical child cadaver neck response has been implemented into the 3-year-old Hybrid III child dummy FE model. An explicit finite element code (LS-DYNA) and the modified Hybrid III model were used to numerically simulate the previous cadaver tests and validate the altered Hybrid III neck.

Biomechanical surrogates are used in various forms to study head impact response in automotive applications and for assessing helmet performance. Surrogate headforms include those from the National Operating Committee on Standards for Athletic Equipment (NOCSAE) and the many variants of the Hybrid III. However, the response of these surrogates to loading at the chin and how that response may affect the loads transferred from the jaw to the rest of the head are unknown. To address part of that question, the current study compares the chin impact response performance of select human surrogates to that of the cadaver. A selection of Hybrid III and NOCSAE based surrogates with fixed and articulating jaws were tested under drop mass impact conditions that were used to describe post mortem human subject (PMHS) response to impacts at the chin (Craig et al., 2008). Results were compared to the PMHS response with cumulative variance technique (Rhule et al., 2002).