Search Results

Determining occupant kinematics in a vehicle crash is essential when understanding injury mechanisms and assessing restraint performance. Identifying contact marks is key to the process. This study was conducted to assess the ability to photodocument the various fluids on different vehicle interior component types and colors with and without the use of ultraviolet (UV) lights. Biological (blood, saliva, sweat and skin), consumable and chemical fluids were applied to vehicle interior components, such as seatbelt webbing, seat and airbag fabrics, roof liner and leather steering wheel. The samples were photodocumented with natural light and UV light (365 nm) exposure immediately after surface application and again 14 days later. The review of the photos indicated that fabric type and color were important factors. The fluids deposits were better visualized on non-porous than porous materials. For example, blood was better documented on curtain airbags than side or driver airbags.

The passive safety performance of a child seat is modulated by the design features of the child seat and the vehicle interior. For example, in the rear-facing configuration, the child seat impacting front structures increases the head injury risk during a frontal crash. Therefore, this study evaluates the effectiveness of the load leg countermeasure in improving the child seat's overall kinematics and its capability to prevent the secondary impact on the vehicle interior structure in a severe frontal crash scenario. An in-depth, real-world crash investigation involving a properly installed rear-facing child seat impacting the center console was selected for the study where the infant sustained a severe brain injury. In addition, this crash is employed to choose the crash parameters for evaluating the effectiveness of the load leg countermeasure in a similar scenario.

This SAE Standard describes head position contours and procedures for locating the contours in a vehicle. Head position contours are useful in establishing accommodation requirements for head space and are required for several measures defined in SAE J1100. Separate contours are defined depending on occupant seat location and the desired percentage (95 and 99) of occupant accommodation. This document is primarily focused on application to Class A vehicles (see SAE J1100), which include most personal-use vehicles (passenger cars, sport utility vehicles, pick-up trucks). A procedure for use in Class B vehicles can be found in Appendix B.

This SAE Standard describes head position contours and procedures for locating the contours in a vehicle. Head position contours are useful in establishing accommodation requirements for head space and are required for several measures defined in SAE J1100. Separate contours are defined depending on occupant seat location and the desired percentage (95 and 99) of occupant accommodation. This document is primarily focused on application to Class A vehicles (see SAE J1100), which include most personal-use vehicles (passenger cars, sport utility vehicles, pick-up trucks). A procedure for use in Class B vehicles can be found in Appendix B.

The purpose of this SAE Recommended Practice is to verify that vehicles and/or components are capable of communicating a required set of information, which is described by the diagnostic messages specified in SAE J1939-73, that is in accordance with off-board diagnostic tool interface requirements contained in the government regulations cited below. This document describes the tests, methods, and results for verifying diagnostic communications from an off-board diagnostic tool (i.e., scan tool) to a vehicle and/or component. SAE members have generated this document to serve as a guide for testing vehicles for compliance with ARB and other requirements for emissions-related on-board diagnostic (OBD) functions for heavy-duty engines used in medium- and heavy-duty vehicles. The development of HD OBD regulations by U.S.

This study focused on occupant responses in very large pickup trucks in rollovers and was conducted in three phases. Phase 1 - Field data analysis: In a prior study [9], 1998 to 2020 FARS data were analyzed; Pickup truck drivers with fatality were 7.4 kg heavier and 4.6 cm taller than passenger car drivers. Most pickup truck drivers were males. Phase 1 extended the study by focusing on the drivers of very large pickup trucks. The size of 1999-2016 Ford F-250 and F-350 drivers involved in fatal crashes was analyzed by age and sex. More than 90% of drivers were males. The average male driver was 179.5 ± 7.5 cm tall and weighed 89.6 ± 18.4 kg. Phase 2 – Surrogate study: Twenty-nine male surrogates were selected to represent the average size of male drivers of F-250 and F-350s involved in fatal crashes. On average, the volunteers weighed 88.6 ± 5.2 kg and were 180.0 ± 3.2 cm tall with a 95.2 ± 2.2 cm seated height.

This paper presents an analysis on the position of driver eye height as a function of their standing height, weight, biological sex, seat back angle and seat bottom angle. Typically, eye heights are estimated based on standing height, or measured from a rigid seated position with a vertical seat back. While reasonably close, these estimated eye heights are generally not correct for individuals seated in deformable vehicle seats with non-vertical seat back angles. Thus, these measurements tend to overestimate the participants eye height in more ecologically probable scenarios, such as driver eye height while operating a vehicle. In this study, eye measurements were taken from a standing position and while seated on a rigid surface and then compared to the same participant’s eye height measured while seated on six different representative vehicle seats with seat back angles of 20, 25, and 30 degrees respectively.

This SAE Standard defines methods and apparatus to evaluate electronic devices for immunity to potential interference from conducted transients along battery feed or switched ignition inputs. Test apparatus specifications outlined in this procedure were developed for components installed in vehicles with 12-V systems (passenger cars and light trucks, 12-V heavy-duty trucks, and vehicles with 24-V systems). Presently, it is not intended for use on other input/output (I/O) lines of the device under test (DUT).

This SAE Standard defines methods and apparatus to evaluate electronic devices for immunity to potential interference from conducted transients along battery feed or switched ignition inputs. Test apparatus specifications outlined in this procedure were developed for components installed in vehicles with 12-V systems (passenger cars and light trucks, 12-V heavy-duty trucks, and vehicles with 24-V systems). Presently, it is not intended for use on other input/output (I/O) lines of the device under test (DUT).

This document applies primarily to mobile cranes that lift loads by means of a drum and hoist line mechanism. It can be used to determine the hoist line speed and power of other hoist line mechanisms, if the load can be held constant and hoist line travel distance is sufficient for the accuracy of the line speed measurements prescribed. This recommended practice applies to all mechanical, hydraulic, and electric powered hoist mechanisms.

This specification sheet establishes requirements for a high collapse pressure configuration filter element of a specific configuration with a minimum filtration ratio of 75 for particles larger than 7 µm when designed and tested in accordance with SAE J2321 and this specification sheet.

This Recommended Practice covers air braked trucks, truck-tractors, trailers and buses. It enumerates the identification and installation of the air brake components not covered in other SAE recommended practices and standards.

This SAE Recommended Practice describes the dynamic testing procedures required to evaluate the integrity of patient compartment interior Storage Compartments such as cabinets, drawers, or refillable supply pouch systems when exposed to a frontal, side or rear impact (i.e., a crash impact). Its purpose is to provide component manufacturers, ambulance builders, and end-users with testing procedures and, where appropriate, acceptance criteria that, to a great extent, ensure interior Storage Compartments or systems meet the same performance criteria across the industry. Descriptions of the test set-up, test instrumentation, photographic/video coverage, test fixture, and performance metrics are included.

This SAE Recommended Practice describes the testing procedures required to evaluate the integrity of a ground ambulance-based patient litter, litter retention system, and patient restraint when exposed to a frontal, side or rear impact. Its purpose is to provide litter manufacturers, ambulance builders, and end-users with testing procedures and, where appropriate, acceptance criteria that, to a great extent ensures the patient litter, litter retention system, and patient restraint utilizes a similar dynamic performance test methodology to that which is applied to other vehicle seating and occupant restraint systems. Descriptions of the test set-up, test instrumentation, photographic/video coverage, test fixture, and performance metrics are included.

The scope and purpose of this SAE Recommended Practice is to provide a classification system for deformation sustained by trucks involved in collisions on the highway. Application of the document is limited to medium trucks, heavy trucks, and articulated combinations.1 The Truck Deformation Classification (TDC) classifies collision contact deformation, as opposed to induced deformation, so that the deformation is segregated into rather narrow limits or categories. Studies of collision deformation can then be performed on one or many data banks with assurance that data under study are of essentially the same type.2 Many of the features of the SAE J224 MAR80 have been retained in this document, although the characters within specific columns vary. Each document must therefore be applied to the appropriate vehicle type. It is also important to note that the TDC does not identify specific vehicle configurations and body types.

This SAE Standard serves as a guide for vibration testing procedures of Automotive and Heavy Duty storage batteries.

The SAE J1939 documents are intended for light, medium, and heavy-duty vehicles used on or off road, as well as appropriate stationary applications which use vehicle derived components (e.g., generator sets). Vehicles of interest include, but are not limited to, on- and off-highway trucks and their trailers, construction equipment, and agricultural equipment and implements. The purpose of these documents is to provide an open interconnect system for electronic systems. It is the intention of these documents to allow Electronic Control Units to communicate with each other by providing a standard architecture. This particular document, SAE J1939-21, describes the data link layer using the Classical Extended Frame Format (CEFF) with 29-bit IDs, as defined in ISO 11898-1, December 2015. For SAE J1939, no alternative data link layers are permitted.

This document is intended to supplement SAE J2403 by providing the content of Table 1, Table 2, and Table 3 from SAE J2403 in a form that can be sorted and searched for easier use. It is NOT intended as a substitute for the actual document, and any discrepancies between this Digital Annex and the published SAE J2403 document must be resolved in favor of the published document. This document provides the content of Table 1 and Table 2 published in SAE J2403 into the single table in the 'Term' tab, while the 'Recommended Term Definitions' tab provides the content of Table 3 in SAE J2403 and the 'Glossary' tab provides the content of Table 4 in SAE J2403.

Abstract The outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic in the beginning of 2020 has made it necessary to review many practices in countless areas, changing our lifestyles drastically. Humanity has put health issues in priority to deal with the disease effectively. While health systems are having difficult times in terms of patient care, vaccination, and treatment protocols, existing designs in many areas have proven to be inefficient in preventing or decelerating the pandemic. As the disease is transmitted mainly by particle transfer through coughing, sneezing, and even with speaking, wearing face masks and keeping a distance of 2 m as well as hygiene (especially hand) are shown to be effective methods. However, long exposure to indoor air populated with people is still a major risk due to the possibility of high concentration of virus-contaminated air.