Search Results

A comparative study of the safety performance of asymmetric and standard HPR windshields was conducted. The effect of increased interlayer thickness was also quantified. There were four different types of asymmetric windshields which had inner layer thicknesses of 0.8 to 1.5 mm and interlayer thicknesses of 0.76 and 1.14 mm. The experimental program consisted of both full scale sled tests and headform drop tests. A total of 127 vehicular impacts were carried out using a modified Volkswagen Rabbit. The test subject was a 50th percentile Fart 572 anthropomorphic test device. The asymmetric windshields were found to have a lower lacerative potential than that of the standard windshield. The best TLI value of 5.2 was provided by a 0.8 - 0.76 mm windshield at 60 km/h. That for the standard windshield was 7.7 at the same speed. All HIC values were less than 1,000 at 48 km/h.

Children riding on the bed over the cab in campers can be injured in forward force collisions from striking the glazing material and/or being ejected through the opening. The two types of glazing commonly used are acrylic and laminated. A comparison of the performance of the two types of glazing in simulated forward force collisions at velocities up to 30 mph showed the acrylic material to pose threats of neck and back injury and the laminated material to result in lacerations. Ejections occurred with the acrylic that were not present with the laminated windshields when correct glazing techniques were used. With poor installation procedures, ejections occurred in both types of glazing materials. It is concluded that the best way to avoid injury is to prevent the child from riding in the over-the-cab bunk. If the child does ride there, his body axis should be positioned at an angle to the longitudinal axis of the vehicle.

Conventional 30 mil HPR laminated and wide-zone monolithic tempered windshields are compared on a safety performance basis from the stand-points of occupant injuries from frontal force collisions and injury or loss of control from breakage from high speed external impact of stones. All experiments were conducted with the windshields installed by conventional methods in an automobile. Occupant injury potential as measured by the Severity Index for brain damage at a 30 mph barrier impact simulation was approximately two times as high for the tempered as for the laminated windshields, although only one tempered windshield exceeded the recommended maximum value of 1,000. Severe lacerations resulted in all impacts in which the tempered glass broke. Less severe lacerations were found for the laminated windshield impacts at comparable speeds.

Human tolerance to knee, chest, and head impacts based upon skeletal fracture of cadavers is reported. The results are based upon unrestrained cadaver impacts in a normal seated position in simulated frontal force accidents at velocities between 10 and 20 mph and stopping distances of 6-8 in. The head target was covered with 15/16 in. of padding. No skull or facial fractures were observed at loads up to 2640 lb. Extensive facial fractures and a linear skull fracture occurred during the application of the maximum head force of 4350 lb. The chest target was 6 in. in diameter with 15/16 in.of padding. The padding was rolled over the edge of the target to minimize localized high force areas on the ribs. A 1/8 in. diameter rod was inserted through the chest and fastened through a ball joint and flange to the soft tissue at the sternum.

The kinematics of rear-end collisions based on published acceleration pulses of actual car-to-car collisions (10 and 23 mph) were reproduced on a crash simulator using anthropomorphic dummies, human cadavers, and a volunteer. Comparison of the responses of subjects without head support were based on the reactions developed at the base of the skull (occipital condyles). The cadavers gave responses which were representative of persons unaware of an impending collision. The responses of both dummies used were not comparable with those of the cadavers or volunteer, or to each other. An index based on voluntary human tolerance limits to statically applied head loads was developed and used to determine the severity of the simulations for the unsupported head cases. Results indicated that head torque rather than neck shear or axial forces is the major factor in producing neck injury.

A comparison is presented of the forces, accelerations, and kinematics of an anthropomorphic dummy for identical sled impacts for unrestrained, lap belted, and lap and diagonal chest restrained conditions. Biaxial accelerometers were mounted in the head, chest, and on the proximal end of the femur to obtain the accelerations during the impacts. Seat belt load cells were put in series with the belts at each anchor point. Biaxial load cells were positioned to be impacted by the head, chest, and each knee for the unrestrained condition and by the head and chest for the lap belted configuration. For the lap and diagonal chest restrained condition these load cells were not used. Impacts of 10 and 20 miles per hour were made with sled stopping distance of 4 and 9 inches, respectively. At 20 miles per hour the head struck with a force of 1580 pounds in the unrestrained mode, 600 pounds with the lap belt, and did not hit with the lap and shoulder harness.