Search Results

This study demonstrates the use of pressure sensing technology to predict the crash severity of frontal impacts. It presents an investigation of the pressure change in the front structural elements (bumper, crush cans, rails) during crash events. A series of subsystem tests were conducted in the laboratory that represent a typical frontal crash development series and provided empirical data to support the analysis of the concept. The pressure signal energy at different sensor mounting locations was studied and design concepts were developed for amplifying the pressure signal. In addition, a pressure signal processing methodology was developed that relies on the analysis of the air flow behavior by normalizing and integrating the pressure changes. The processed signal from the pressure sensor is combined with the restraint control module (RCM) signals to define the crash severity, discriminate between the frontal crash modes and deploy the required restraint devices.

Advanced high strength steels (AHSS) have been widely accepted as a material of choice in the automotive industry to balance overall vehicle weight and stringent vehicle crash test performance targets. Combined with efficient use of geometry and load paths through shape and topology optimization, AHSS has enabled vehicle manufacturers to obtain the highest possible ratings in safety evaluations by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). In this study, vehicle CAE side impact models were used to evaluate three side impact crash test conditions (IIHS side impact, NHTSA LINCAP and FMVSS 214 side pole) and the IIHS roof strength test condition and to identify several key components affecting the side impact test performance. HyperStudy® optimization software and LS-DYNA® nonlinear finite element software were utilized for shape and gauge optimization.

Ten sled tests were conducted with a Hybrid III 10-year-old dummy under a 3-point belt only restraint condition to evaluate its performance. The results of the Hybrid III 10-year-old in these tests indicate that there are artifactural noise spikes observable in the transducer responses. A number of metal-to-metal contacts in the shoulder area were identified as one of the sources for the chest acceleration spikes. Noise spikes were also observed in the response from multiple body regions; however, the source of the spikes could not be determined. Compared to the other Hybrid III dummies, non-characteristic dummy chest deflection responses were also observed. This limited analysis indicates that the Hybrid III 10-year-old dummy requires additional development work to eliminate the metal-to-metal contacts in the shoulder area and to understand and correct the other sources of the noise spikes. More investigation is needed to determine if the chest deflection response is appropriate.

This paper discusses steps for identifying, evaluating and recommending a quantifiable design metric or metrics for Side Airbag (SAB) development. Three functionally related and desirable attributes of a SAB are assumed at the onset, namely, effective SAB coverage, load distribution and efficient energy management at a controlled force level. The third attribute however contradicts the “banana shaped” force-displacement response that characterizes the ineffective energy management reality of most production SAB. In this study, an estimated ATD to SAB interaction energy is used to size and recommend desired force-deformation characteristic of a robust energy management SAB. The study was conducted in the following three phases and corresponding objectives: Phase 1 is a SAB assessment metric identification and estimation, using a uniform block attached to a horizontal impact machine.

Since statistics indicate that front impact is the major accident type, Ford has been studying energy-absorbing structures for some time. Early designs such as the “ball and tube” and “rail splitter” were discarded in favor of the “S” frame. Details of the design approach and testing are given in this paper. Design objectives were increased effective collapse distance, compatibility with production practices, and maintenance of satisfactory noise, vibration, and harshness levels. Safety objectives are improved passenger compartment integrity and reduction of seat belt loads. Barrier crash tests at 30 mph (equivalent to collision into standing vehicle at 50 mph) were used to evaluate the design of the “S” frame. Results of testing indicate that occupant restraint with seat belts, combined with front end structural improvements, offer the most promise for injury reduction during service front impact accidents.

This paper reports a study undertaken by the Crash Safety Working Group (CSWG) of the United States Council for Automotive Research (USCAR) to determine generic acceleration pulses for testing and evaluating advanced batteries subjected to inertial loading for application in electric passenger vehicles. These pulses were based on characterizing vehicle acceleration time histories from standard laboratory vehicle crash tests. Crash tested passenger vehicles in the United States vehicle fleet of the model years 2005-2009 were used in this study. Crash test data, in terms of acceleration time histories, were collected from various crash modes conducted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) during their New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) and Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) evaluations, and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS).

One method of understanding the general mechanical response of a complex system such as a vehicle, a human surrogate, a bridge, a boat, a plane, etc., is to subject it to an input, such as an impact, and obtain the response time-histories. The responses can be accelerations, velocities, strains, etc. In general, when experiments of this type are run the responses are contaminated by sample-to-sample variation, test-to-test variability, random noise, instrumentation noise, and noise from unknown sources. One common method of addressing the noise in the system to obtain the underlying response is to run multiple tests on different samples that represent the same system and add them together obtaining an average. This functionally reduces the random noise. However, if the fundamental response of each sample is not the same, then it is not altogether clear what the average represents. It may not capture the underlying physics.

This paper reports a 2010 study undertaken to determine generic acceleration pulses for testing and evaluating advanced batteries for application in electric passenger vehicles. These were based on characterizing vehicle acceleration time histories from standard laboratory vehicle crash tests. Crash tested passenger vehicles in the United States vehicle fleet of the model years 2005-2009 were used. The crash test data were gathered from the following test modes and sources: 1 Frontal rigid flat barrier test at 35 mph (NHTSA NCAP) 2 Frontal 40% offset deformable barrier test at 40 mph (IIHS) 3 Side moving deformable barrier test at 38 mph (NHTSA side NCAP) 4 Side oblique pole test at 20 mph (US FMVSS 214/NHTSA side NCAP) 5 Rear 70% offset moving deformable barrier impact at 50 mph (US FMVSS 301). The accelerometers used were from locations in the vehicle where deformation is minor or non-existent, so that the acceleration represents the “rigid-body” motion of the vehicle.