Search Results

Objective: A friction rollover test was conducted as part of a rollover sensing project. This study evaluates vehicle and occupant responses in the test. Methods: A flat dolly carried a Saab 9-3 sedan laterally, passenger-side leading to a release point at 42 km/h (26 mph) onto a high-friction surface. The vehicle was equipped with roll, pitch and yaw gyros near the center of gravity. Accelerometers were placed at the vehicle center tunnel, A-pillar near the roof, B-pillar near the sill, suspension sub-frame and wheels. Five off-board and two on-board cameras recorded kinematics. Hybrid III dummies were instrumented for head and chest acceleration and upper neck force and moment. Belt loads were measured. Results: The vehicle release caused the tires and then wheel rims to skid on the high-friction surface. The trip involved roll angular velocities >300 deg/s at 0.5 s and a far-side impact on the driver’s side roof at 0.94 s. The driver was inverted in the far-side, ground impact.

Objective: This study analyzes rear sled tests with a 95th% male and 5th% female Hybrid III dummy in various seating positions on ABTS (All Belt to Seat) seats in severe rear impact tests. Dummy interactions with the deforming seatback and upper body extension around the seat frame are considered. Methods: The 1st series involved an open sled fixture with a Sebring ABTS seat at 30 mph rear delta V. A 95th% Hybrid III dummy was placed in four different seating positions: 1) normal, 2) leaning inboard, 3) leaning forward and inboard, and 4) leaning forward and outboard. The 2nd series used a 5th% female Hybrid III dummy in a Grand Voyager body buck at 25 mph rear delta V. The dummy was leaned forward and inboard on a LeSabre ABTS or Voyager seat. The 3rd series used a 5th% female Hybrid III dummy in an Explorer body buck at 26 mph rear delta V. The dummy was leaned forward and inboard on a Sebring ABTS or Explorer seat.

The original Malibu II study, conducted by Bahling et al, found that neck compression loading in rollover crashes is caused by the occupant moving toward the ground and therefore, roof crush was not causally related to the loading. Some have disputed this finding claiming that the occupant does not “dive toward the roof,” but rather, the roof “moves in” toward the occupant, and that roof deformation is the primary cause of cervical spine injuries in rollover crashes. The original study included a detailed analysis of film and force transducer data for 10 Potentially Injurious Impacts (PII's). This paper presents an independent analysis of these 10 PII's and one additional PII. This analysis uses the film and transducer data to evaluate the timing of roof deformation and neck loading, the magnitude of roof deformation at the time of peak neck load, and the motion of the vehicle and occupants in the inertial reference system.

Various factors were evaluated to determine their influence on the odds of front seat occupants receiving either fatal or serious/fatal injuries in single-vehicle rollovers. Factors evaluated included roof strength-to-vehicle weight ratio (as measured in accordance with FMVSS 216), and SAE H61 Effective Headroom. Roof strength-to-weight ratio had no statistically significant effect (p>0.05) on the likelihood of fatality or serious/fatal injury for belted or unbelted drivers. SAE H61 Effective Headroom had no statistically significant effect (p>0.05) on the likelihood of fatal or serious/fatal injury for seat belted drivers in rollovers.

Understanding occupant kinematics is an important part of accident reconstruction, particularly with respect to injury causation. Injuries are generally sustained as the occupant interacts with the vehicle interior surfaces and is rapidly accelerated to the struck component's post-impact velocity. This paper describes some methods for assessing occupant kinematics in a collision, and discusses their limitations. A useful technique is presented which is based on free-body analysis and can be used to establish an occupant's path of motion relative to the vehicle, locate the point of occupant contact, and determine the occupant's velocity relative to that contact location.

Rollover crash and accident studies identify significant roof-to-ground impacts adjacent to the vehicle occupant as a potential cause of severe injuries. It is not possible with existing dynamic rollover test methods to specifically repeat or recreate a particular roof-to-ground impact in a controlled fashion. Variations associated with tire-to-dolly, tire/wheel-to-ground, and vehicle-to-ground interactions early in current rollover test methods tend to produce unpredictable and unrepeatable roof-to-ground impacts later in the test. A new test device now enables researchers to bypass the uncertainty of these first ground interactions by beginning each test with the desired roof-to-ground impact conditions as a test input. The new rollover test method releases a rotating vehicle onto the ground from the back of a moving semi-trailer.

In rollovers, belted occupants sustain a lower fatality rate compared to unbelted occupants primarily due to lower risk of partial or full ejection. However, seat belt and occupant compartment designs found in most current vehicles do not prevent head contact with the vehicle interior during a rollover because of occupant torso and head excursion that result from the rollover dynamics. An experimental study was conducted to simulate the airborne phase of a rollover. The goals of this study were to: 1) quantify the effect of restraint anchor locations and belt component designs in reducing head excursion, and 2) to better correlate the response between humans and an Anthropomorphic Test Device (ATD) during the high angular roll rate of the airborne phase of a rollover. A Head Excursion Test Device was designed to rotate a restrained occupant about an axis to approximate the inertial loading experienced during the airborne phase of a rollover.

Occupant simulation models have been used to study trends or specific design changes in “typical” accident modes such as frontal, side, rear, and rollover. This paper explores the usage of the Articulated Total Body Program (ATB) as an accident reconstruction tool. The importance of model validation is discussed. Specific areas of concern such as the contact model, force-deflection data, occupant parameters, restraint system models, head/neck loadings, padding, and intrusion are discussed in the context of accident reconstruction.

Rollover accidents are responsible for a significant percentage of crash injuries. Increasing seat belt restraint use is the most effective way to reduce rollover injuries. Injuries to restrained occupants are also of interest. It has been suggested that head/neck injuries are caused by roof crush, and that modification to roof structures and seat belt systems would lead to a substantial reduction in severe rollover injuries. Field accident data and rollover testing are used to evaluate the relationship between roof crush, seat belt design, and severe rollover injuries.

Recent detailed field accident data are examined with regard to injuries associated with rear impacts. The distribution of “Societal Harm” associated with various injury mechanisms is presented, and used to evaluate the performance of current seat back and restraint system designs. Deformation associated with seat back yield is shown to be beneficial in reducing overall Societal Harm in rear impacts. The Societal Harm associated with ejection and contact with the vehicle rear interior (the two injury mechanisms addressed by a rigid seat approach), is shown to be minimal. The field accident data also confirm that restraint usage in rear impacts has a substantial injury-reducing effect. Laboratory tests and computer simulations were run to investigate the mechanism by which seat belts protect occupants in rear impacts.

This paper summarizes work relating to the assessment of societal benefits of side impact protection. National Crash Severity Study (NCSS) and National Accident Sampling System (NASS) accident data technigues were reviewed with respect to the reliability of output information concerning the distribution of side impact accidents by impact severity and relationships between injury and impact severity. NCSS and NASS are confounded by errors and inadequacies, primarily as a result of improper accident reconstruction based upon the CRASH computer program. Based on review of several sample cases, it is believed that the NCSS/NASS files underestimate Lower severities and overestimate higher severities in side impact, with delta-V errors probably overestimated by 25-30 percent in the case of the more serious accidents. These errors cannot be properly quantified except on a case-by-case basis. They introduce unknown biases into NCSS/NASS.

The NHTSA notices of proposed rulemaking on side impact protection have focused worldwide attention on one of the most difficult and frustrating efforts in automobile crash safety. Traditional vehicle design has evolved obvious structural contrasts between the side of the struck vehicle and the front of the striking vehicle. Protection of near-side occupants from intruding door structure is a most perplexing engineering challenge. Much useful and insightful engineering work has been done in conjunction with NHTSA's proposed rulemaking. However, there are many major engineering issues which demand further definition before reasonable side impact rulemaking test criteria can be finalized. This paper reviews recent findings which characterize the human factors, biomechanics, and occupant position envelope of the typical side impact crash victim.

Collision Safety Engineering, Inc. (CSE), has developed a test prototype system to protect occupants during lateral impacts. It is an inflatable system that offers the potential of improved protection from thoracic, abdominal and pelvic injury by moving an impact pad into the occupant early in the crash. Further, it shows promise for head and neck protection by deployment of a headbag that covers the major target areas of B-pillar, window space, and roofrail before head impact. Preliminary static and full-scale crash tests suggest the possibility of injury reduction in many real-world crashes, although much development work remains before the production viability of this concept can be established. A description of the system and its preliminary testing is preceded by an overview of side impact injury and comments on the recent NHTSA Rule Making notices dealing with side-impact injury.

Eight lateral dolly rollover tests were conducted on 1983 Chevrolet Malibusata nominal speed of 51.5 km/h (32 mi/h). Four of the vehicles had rollcages, and four had standard production roofs. Unrestrained outboard front GM Hybrid ill dummies with head and neck transducers were used. Numerous cameras documented the vehicle and dummy movements. Detailed vehicle kinematics data allowed quantitative analysis of the conditions for head and neck loads. For both roof structures, the dummies moved upward and outward from their seats due to rotation and acceleration of the vehicle. High head/neck loads were measured when the head contacted a part of the car experiencing a large change in velocity, often that part of the car which struck the ground. The results of this work indicate that roof strength is not an important factor in the mechanics of head/neck injuries in rollover collisions for unrestrained occupants.

The relatively rare occurrence of injury or fatality in fuel-fed fires has received considerable attention in automotive safety rulemaking and products liability litigation. The literature related to fatalities associated with fire is confirmed by recent FARS data, and there are no reliable field data which confirm a need for further injury-reducing effect related to FMVSS 301. NHTSA has acknowledged this by removing crash fire rulemaking from its priorities plan. The police-reported crash fire data now available must be supplemented with in-depth investigation by trained teams before informed judgements can be made regarding further safety improvements with respect to crash fire injury.

Determining whether restraint systems were used in an accident is an important task of the field accident investigator. Restraint systems protect people by causing the forces which must be applied to the person in a collision of a particular value of to be applied to stronger parts of the anatomy over a longer period of time, and by helping to prevent ejection. Restraint use may cause characteristic changes in the vehicle at the mounting points, in the retractor mechanism, the restraint system hardware, and the webbing. Occupant Injuries will reflect altered occupant kinematics and altered load application areas when restraints are used.

The relationship between occupant crash injury and occupant compartment intrusion is seen in the perspectives of the velocity-time analysis and the NCSS statistical data for two important accident injury modes, lateral and rollover collisions. Restraint system use, interior impacts, and vehicle design features are considered. Side impact intrusion is analyzed from physical principles and further demonstrated by reference to staged collisions and NCSS data. Recent publications regarding findings of the NCSS data for rollovers, as well as the NCSS data itself, are reviewed as a background for kinematic findings regarding occupant injury in rollovers with roof crush.