Search Results

Occupant protection in side impacts, in particular for near-side occupants, is a challenge due to the occupant’s close proximity to the impact. Near-side occupants have limited space to ride down the impact. Curtain and side airbags fill the gap between occupant and the side interior. This analysis was conducted to provide insight on the characteristics of side impacts and the relevancy of currently regulated test configurations. For this purpose, 2007-2015 NASS-CDS and 2017-2021 CISS side crash data were analyzed for towed light vehicles. 2008 and newer model year vehicle data was selected to ensure that most vehicles were equipped with side/curtain airbags. The results showed that side impacts accounted for approximately 26.7% of the vehicles involved and 18.9% of the vehicles with at least one seriously injured occupant. Most side impacts involved damage to the front and front-to-center of the vehicle.

In order to evaluate the THOR-50M as a front impact Anthropomorphic Test Device (ATD) for vehicle safety design, the ATD was compared to the H3-50M in matching vehicle crash tests for 20 unique vehicle models from 2 vehicle manufacturers. For the belted driver condition, a total of fifty-four crash tests were investigated in the 56.3 km/h (35 mph) front rigid barrier impact condition. Four more tests were compared for the unbelted driver and right front passenger at 40.2 km/h (25 mph) in the flat frontal and 30-degree right oblique rigid barrier impact conditions. The two ATDs were also evaluated for their ability to predict injury risk by comparing their fleet average injury risk to Crash Investigation Sampling System (CISS) accident data for similar conditions. The differences in seating position and their effect on ATD responses were also investigated.

Driver oblique far-side sled impacts were simulated with three surrogates. The EuroSID side impact dummy with rib extension (ES2re), the WorldSID side impact 50th percentile male dummy (WS50M), and the Global Human Body Modeling Consortium’s 50th percentile male human body (GHBM) models. The versions of the surrogates’ models were 7.0, 7.5.1, and 5.0, respectively. Surrogates were seated in the front left driver seat in a virtual generic crossover sled environment. The Finite Element (FE) based environment consisted of a driver seat, a center console, and a passenger seat. Two restraint systems were considered for each surrogate: belt only (BO) and belt plus a generic seat-mounted far-side impact airbag (BB). Surrogates were restrained using a 3-point belt that has a digressive shoulder force load limiter, and retractor, and anchor pretensioners. The far-side airbag used was a 37-liter in volume and has two chambers.

This study was conducted to assess the effects of differing rear impact pulse characteristics on restraint performance, front-seat occupant kinematics, biomechanical responses, and seat yielding. Five rear sled tests were conducted at 40.2 km/h using a modern seat. The sled buck was representative of a generic sport utility vehicle. A 50th percentile Hybrid III ATD was used. The peak accelerations, acceleration profiles and durations were varied. Three of the pulses were selected based on published information and two were modeled to assess the effects of peak acceleration occurring early and later within the pulse duration using a front and rear biased trapezoidal characteristic shape. The seatback angle at maximum rearward deformation varied from 46 to 67 degrees. It was lowest in Pulse 1 which simulates an 80 km/h car-to-car rear impact.

Assessment of the physical evidence on a seat belt restraint system provides one source of data for determining an occupant’s seat belt use or non-use during a motor vehicle crash. The evidence typically associated with loading from a restrained occupant has been extensively researched and documented in the literature. However, evidence of loading to the restraint system can also be generated by other means, including the interaction of an unrestrained occupant with a stowed restraint system. The present study evaluates physical evidence on multiple stowed restraint systems generated via interaction with unrestrained occupants during a full-scale dolly rollover crash test of a large multiple passenger van. Unbelted anthropomorphic test devices (ATDs) were positioned in the driver and right front passenger seats and in all designated seating positions in the third, fourth, and fifth rows.

Prior to developing or modifying the protocol of a performance evaluation test, it is important to identify field relevant conditions. The objective of this study was to assess the distribution of selected crash variables from rear crash field collisions involving modern vehicles. The number of exposed and serious-to-fatally injured non-ejected occupants was determined in 2008+ model year (MY) vehicles using the NASS-CDS and CISS databases. Selected crash variables were assessed for rear crashes, including severity (delta V), impact location, struck vehicle type, and striking objects. In addition, 15 EDRs were collected from 2017 to 2019 CISS cases involving 2008+ MY light vehicles with a rear delta V ranging from 32 to 48 km/h. Ten rear crash tests were also investigated to identify pulse characteristics in rear crashes. The tests included five vehicle-to-vehicle crash tests and five FMVSS 301R barrier tests matching the struck vehicle.

The average body weight of the US population has increased over time. This study investigates the effect of increasing weight on seat and occupant responses in 15-18 km/h and 42 km/h rear sled tests. The effect of initial occupant posture is also discussed. Seven tests were conducted with lap-shoulder belted ATDs (anthropometric test device) placed on older and modern driver seats. Four tests were conducted with a 50th percentile male Hybrid III, two with 95th percentile male Hybrid III and one with a BioRID. The ATDs were ballasted to represent a Class I or II obese occupant in three tests. The tests were matched by seat model and sled velocity. The effect of occupant weight was assessed in three matches. The results indicated an increase in seatback deflection with increasing occupant weight.

Occupant protection in rear crashes is complex. While seatbelts and head restraints are effective in rear impacts, seatbacks offer the primary restraint component to front-seat occupants in rear impacts. Seatback deflection due to occupant loading can occur in a previous rear crash and/or in multiple-rear event crashes. Seatback deflection will in-turn affect the plastic seatback deformation and energy absorption capabilities of the seat. This study was conducted to provide information on seatback deflection and seat energy consumption in low and high-speed rear impacts. The results can be used to examine seatback deflection and energy consumed in a previous rear impact, or in collisions with multiple rear impacts. Prior seatback deflection and energy absorption can affect the total remaining energy absorption and seat performance for a subsequent rear impact.

Interest in rear-seat occupant safety has increased in recent years. Information relevant to rear-seat occupant interior space and kinematics are needed to evaluate injury risks in real-world accidents. This study was conducted to first assess the effect of size and restraint conditions, including belt misuse, on second-row occupant kinematics and to then document key clearance measurements for an Anthropomorphic Test Device (ATD) seated in the second row in modern vehicles from model years 2015-2020. Twenty-two tests were performed with non-instrumented ATDs; three with a 5th percentile female Hybrid III, 10 tests with a 10-year-old Hybrid III, and 9 tests with a 6-year-old Hybrid III. Test conditions included two sled bucks (mid-size car and sport utility vehicle (SUV)), two test speeds (56 and 64 km/h), and various restraint configurations (properly restrained and improperly restrained configurations). Head and knee trajectories were assessed.

Blunt impacts to the back of the torso can occur in vehicle crashes due to interaction with unrestrained occupants, or cargo in frontal crashes, or intrusion in rear crashes, for example. Six pendulum tests were conducted on the back of an instrumented 50th percentile male Hybrid III ATD (Anthropomorphic Test Device) to determine kinematic and biomechanical responses. The impact locations were centered with the top of a 15-cm diameter impactor at the T1 or at T6 level of the thoracic spine. The impact speed varied from 16 to 24 km/h. Two 24 km/h tests were conducted at the T1 level and showed repeatability of setup and ATD responses. The 16 and 24 km/h tests at T1 and T6 were compared. Results indicated greater head rotation, neck extension moments and neck shear forces at T1 level impacts. For example, lower neck extension was 2.6 times and 3.8 times greater at T1 versus T6 impacts at 16 and 24 km/h, respectively.

Seat strength has increased over the past four decades which includes a transition to dual recliners. There are seat collision performance issues with stiff ABTS and very strong seats in rear impacts with different occupant sizes, seating positions and physical conditions. In this study, eight rear sled tests were conducted in four series: 1) ABTS in a 56 km/h (35 mph) test with a 50th Hybrid III ATD at MGA, 2) dual-recliner ABTS and F-150 in a 56 km/h (35 mph) test with a 5th female Hybrid III ATD at Ford, 3) dual-recliner ABTS in a 48 km/h (30 mph) test with a 95th Hybrid III ATD leaning inboard at CAPE and 4) dual-recliner ABTS and Escape in 40 km/h (25 mph) in-position and out-of-position tests with a 50th Hybrid III ATD at Ford. The sled tests showed that single-recliner ABTS seats twist in severe rear impacts with the pivot side deformed more rearward than the stanchion side.

This study deals with passenger side restraint system design for frontal impact and four impact modes are considered in optimization. The objective is to minimize the Relative Risk Score (RRS), defined by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NTHSA)'s New Car Assessment Program (NCAP). At the same time, the design should satisfy various injury criteria including HIC, chest deflection/acceleration, neck tension/compression, etc., which ensures the vehicle meeting or exceeding all Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 208 requirements. The design variables include airbag firing time, airbag vent size, inflator power level, retractor force level. Some of the restraint feature options (e.g., some specific features on/off) are also considered as discrete design variables. Considering the local variability of input variables such as manufacturing tolerances, the robustness and reliability of nominal designs were also taken into account in optimization process.

By their nature as chaotic, high-energy events, rollovers pose a high risk of injury to unrestrained occupants, in particular through exposure to projected perimeter contact and ejection. While seat belts have long been accepted as a highly effective means of retaining and restraining occupants in rollover crashes, it has been suggested that technologies such as laminated safety glazing or rollover-activated side curtain airbags (RSCAs) could alternatively provide effective occupant containment. In this study, a full-scale dolly rollover crash test was performed to assess the occupant containment capability of laminated side glazing and RSCAs in a high-severity rollover event. This allowed for the analysis of unrestrained occupant kinematics during interaction with laminated side glazing and RSCAs and evaluation of failure modes and limitations of laminated glazing and RSCAs as they relate to partial and complete ejection of unrestrained occupants.

This study assesses the exposure distribution and injury rate (MAIS 4+F) to front-outboard non-ejected occupants by crash severity, belt use and head restraint type and damage in rear impacts using 1997-2015 NASS-CDS data. Rear crashes with a delta V <24 km/h (15 mph) accounted for 71% of all exposed occupants. The rate of MAIS 4+F increased with delta V and was higher for unbelted than belted occupants with a rate of 11.7% ± 5.2% and 6.0% ± 1.5% respectively in 48+ km/h (30 mph) delta V. Approximately 12% of front-outboard occupants were in seats equipped with an integral head restraint and 86% were with an adjustable head restraint, irrespective of crash severity. The overall injury rate was 0.14% ± 0.05% and 0.22% ± 0.06%, respectively. It was higher in cases where the head restraint was listed as “damaged”. Thirteen cases involving a lap-shoulder belted occupant in a front-outboard seat in which “damage” to the adjustable head restraint was identified.

Optimization of heavy materials like steel, in order to create a lighter vehicle, it is a major goal among most automakers, since heavy vehicles simply cannot compete with a lightweight model's fuel economy. Thinking this way, this paper shows a case study where the Size Optimization technique is applied to a front floor reinforcement. The reinforcement is used by two different vehicles, a subcompact and a crossover Sport Utility Vehicle (SUV), increasing the problem complexity. The Size Optimization technique is supported by Finite Element Method (FEM) tools. FEM in Computer Aided Engineering (CAE) is a numerical method for solving engineering problems, and its use can help to optimize prototype utilization and physical testing.

Driver injury probabilities in real-world frontal crashes were statistically modeled to estimate the relative roles of five variables of topical interest. One variable pertained to behavior (belt-wearing rate), one pertained to crash circumstances (speed change), and three pertained to occupant demographics (sex, age, and body mass index). The attendant analysis was composed of two parts: (1) baseline statistical modeling to help recover the past, and (2) sensitivity analyses to help consider the future. In Part 1, risk functions were generated from statistical analysis of real-world data pertaining to 1998-2014 model-year light passenger cars/trucks in 11-1 o’clock, full-engagement frontal crashes documented in the National Automotive Sampling System (NASS, 1997-2014). The selected data yielded a weighted estimate of 1,269,178 crash-involved drivers.

This study examined occupant and seat responses with ABTS (all-belts-to-seat) in rear end collisions. Some have claimed improved ABTS seat performance and retention in rear impacts than conventional seats. ABTS seats tend to have higher ultimate yield strengths than conventional yielding seats. Most ABTS seats have asymmetric seatback stiffness due to the need for additional structure on one side of the seat to support shoulder belt loads. Many designs use a single-side recliner and single stanchion that anchors the D-ring. This asymmetry results in twisting of the seatback in severe rear impacts. Seatback twist can allow the occupant to move away from the shoulder belt. Rearward pull tests on ABTS seats also demonstrates seatback twisting and in some cases large drops in load during the test. The added strength and stiffness of ABTS seats lead to designs that are vulnerable to sudden force drops from separated parts.

An understanding of stiffness characteristics of different body regions, such as thorax, abdomen and pelvis of ES-2re and SID-IIs dummies under controlled laboratory test conditions is essential for development of both compatible performance targets for countermeasures and occupant protection strategies to meet the recently updated FMVSS214, LINCAP and IIHS Dynamic Side Impact Test requirements. The primary purpose of this study is to determine the transfer functions between the ES-2re and SID-IIs dummies for different body regions under identical test conditions using flat rigid wall sled tests. The experimental set-up consists of a flat rigid wall with five instrumented load-wall plates aligned with dummy’s shoulder, thorax, abdomen, pelvis and femur/knee impacting a stationary dummy seated on a rigid low friction seat at a pre-determined velocity.

An eleven-group taxonomy was created to classify real-world side crashes from the Crashworthiness Data System (CDS) component of the National Automotive Sampling System (NASS). Three steps were taken to develop the classification scheme: (1) side-impact towaway crashes were identified by examining 1987-2016 model year light passenger vehicles with Collision Deformation Classification (CDC) data from the 1997-2015 calendar years of NASS; (2) case reviews, engineering judgments, and categorization assessments were conducted on these data to produce the eleven-group taxonomy; and (3) taxonomic groups were reviewed relative to regulated crash test procedures. Two of the taxonomic groups were found to have the most frequent crash types, each contributing approximately 22% to the total, followed closely by a third taxonomic group contributing approximately 19%.

There has been a general consensus in the scientific literature that a rim gouging, not scraping, into a roadway surface generates very high forces which can cause a vehicle to overturn in some situations. However, a paper published in 2004 attempts to minimize the forces created during wheel rim gouging and the effect on vehicle rollover. This paper relied largely on heavily filtered lateral acceleration data and discounted additional test runs by the authors and NHTSA that did not support the supposed conclusions. This paper will discuss the effect of rim gouging using accepted scientific methods, including full vehicle testing where vehicle accelerations were measured during actual rim gouging events and static testing of side forces exerted by wheels mounted on a moving test fixture. The data analyzed in this paper clearly shows that forces created by rim gouges on pavement can be thousands of Newtons and can contribute to vehicle rollover.