Search Results

Child occupants have not been studied in far-side impacts as thoroughly as frontal or near side crash modes. The objective is to determine whether the installation method of child restraint systems (CRS) affects far-side crash performance. Twenty far-side impact sled tests were conducted with rear-facing (RF) CRS, forward-facing (FF) CRS, high-back boosters, and belt only. Each was installed on second row captain’s chairs from a recent model year minivan. Common CRS installation errors were tested, including using the seat belt in Emergency Locking Mode (ELR) instead of Automatic Locking Mode (ALR), not attaching the top tether, and using both the lower anchors (LA) and seat belt together. Correct installations were also tested as a baseline comparison. Q3s and Hybrid III 6-year-old (6yo) anthropomorphic test devices (ATDs) were used. Lateral displacements of the CRS and head were examined as well as injury metrics in the head, spine, and torso.

Many vehicles allow consumers to adapt the vehicle environment to their families’ needs by folding or removing one or more rear row seats. It is currently unclear how different seat configurations affect child restraint systems (CRS) installed in adjacent seats. The objective is to quantify CRS performance in far-side impacts when the seating position adjacent to the CRS is in its normal upright position, folded in half, or removed. Twelve tests were conducted. Second row seats from a recent model year minivan were obtained, including full size captain’s chairs from the outboard positions and narrow seats from the center position. Rear-facing (RF) and forward-facing (FF) CRS were installed one at a time in either the outboard or center position. The seating position adjacent to the CRS was set in either the standard upright position, folded in half, or removed. Far-side impacts were conducted at 10° anterior of pure lateral at 24.8 ± 0.2 g. The Q3s ATD was used for all tests.

Sled testing procedures should reflect a rigorous level of repeatability across trials and reproducibility across testing facilities. Currently, different testing facilities use various methods to set the harness tension for child restraint system (CRS) sled tests. The objective of this study is to identify which harness tightening procedure(s) produce tensions within a reasonable target range while showing adequate reproducibility, repeatability, and ease-of-use. Five harness tightening procedures were selected: A) FMVSS 213 procedure, B) a 3-prong tension gauge, C) ECE R44/R129 procedure, D) two finger method, and E) pinch test. Two CRS models were instrumented with a tension load cell in the harness system. Seven sled room operators were recruited to perform each of the five harness tightening procedures for ten repetitions apiece on both instrumented CRS using a Hybrid III 3-year-old.

This study examines the performance of rear-facing child restraint systems (RF CRS) in moderate severity rear impact sled tests. The study also investigates the effects of RF CRS features on CRS kinematics and anthropomorphic test device (ATD) injury metrics in this scenario. Twelve tests were conducted at a moderate severity rear impact sled pulse (approximately 28.2 km/h and 18.4 g). Four models of RF CRS were tested in the rear outboard positions of a sedan seat. The CRABI 12-month-old and Hybrid III 3-year-old ATDs were instrumented with head and chest accelerometers, head angular rate sensors, six-axis upper neck load cells, and a chest linear potentiometer (3-year-old only). The effects of carry handle position, occupant size, presence of anti-rebound bar, Swedish style tethering, and lower anchor vs. seat belt installation were investigated. Data were also compared to pediatric injury assessment reference values (IARV).