Search Results

Historically, assessments of frontal crash safety have been based primarily on the measured responses of 50th percentile male dummies in relatively high speed vehicle crashes against a rigid flat barrier. Under such test conditions, the ability of supplementary airbag systems to greatly reduce head injury potential is clearly evident in crash tests performed by Transport Canada and others. However, significant segments of the driving population travel routinely with their seats positioned ahead of the nominal mid-position used in 50th percentile male dummy tests. Moreover, most frontal impacts can be expected to produce softer vehicle deceleration signatures than those produced in flat rigid wall tests. The necessity of broadening the range of regulated crash conditions to which vehicles fitted with airbag systems are subjected is highlighted in crash tests performed by Transport Canada using 5th percentile female Hybrid III tests, with seats placed in their most forward positions.

As a consequence of various federal and provincial initiatives to promote the use of seat belts in Canada, the wearing rate of seat belts among front outboard passenger car occupants is now estimated at 90 percent. Accordingly, the vast majority of air bag deployments in Canada involve restrained occupants. In order to gain a better understanding of the field performance of air bag systems, Transport Canada recently initiated an m-depth study of motor vehicle collisions involving air bag deployments. To date, investigations have been completed on 242 such collisions. While the preliminary data suggest that supplementary air bag systems provide considerable added protection against serious head injuries in moderate and high severity frontal crashes, they also suggest that, in low severity crashes, deployment of an air bag system may expose belted occupants to unnecessary injury risk from the air bag itself.

Three-point restraint systems have been installed in vehicles since the early 1960s. However, it wasn't until the automatic protection rule became effective for 1987 Model Year vehicles that manufacturers began installing 3-point restraints with force-limiting shoulder belts and frontal airbags for the driver and right front passenger. This was the first time that all vehicle manufacturers had to certify that their cars would meet the 50th percentile, adult male protection requirements in the 48 km/h frontal, rigid-barrier test specified in FMVSS 208. To assess the effectiveness of these certified 3-point restraint systems, a search was done of the 1988-2005 NASS data for 3-point belted, front outboard-seated, adult occupants in passenger vehicles that were equipped with airbags and that were involved in frontal, towaway collisions.

With the current trend of including the evaluation of the risk of brain injuries in vehicle crashes due to rotational kinematics of the head, two injury criteria have been introduced since 2013 – BrIC and DAMAGE. BrIC was developed by NHTSA in 2013 and was suggested for inclusion in the US NCAP for frontal and side crashes. DAMAGE has been developed by UVa under the sponsorship of JAMA and JARI and has been accepted tentatively by the EuroNCAP. Although BrIC in US crash testing is known and reported, DAMAGE in tests of the US fleet is relatively unknown. The current paper will report on DAMAGE in NCAP-like tests and potential future frontal crash tests involving substantial rotation about the three axes of occupant heads. Distribution of DAMAGE of three-point belted occupants without airbags will also be discussed. Prediction of brain injury risks from the tests have been compared to the risks in the real world.