Search Results

The most important tool used in testing methods for evaluating the performance of seat-systems in rear-end impacts is a biofidelic crash test dummy. It has been reported that there are differences in response between two kinds of such dummies, BioRID P3 and Hybrid III, in rear-end impacts at Δ V=9.2 km/h. The objective of this study is to compare the responses of these two types of dummies, at moderate speeds with HYGE sled tests (Δ V=15 km/h, 25 km/h). At Δ V=25 km/h or less, the BioRID and HYIII dummies showed clear differences in their response to a rear-end collision, and the BioRID showed higher biofidelity than the HyIII in this condition.

Regarding THOR-50AM dummy lower extremities (hereafter referred to as ""THOR''and ""THOR-LX'') developed as an assembly of lower extremities for next-generation dummies in frontal impact test, we have conducted a series of tests as follows. HYGE sled tests with a toe-board simulating the impact upon intrusion into the vehicle compartment around the occupant feet, dummy dropping tests with two different postures; one is the upright posture with the knees set straight and another is the posture with the knees bent, in order to apply impact loads and to measure/evaluate the impact response characteristics.

The structural differences between the Thor-NT and Thor-FT dummies, which have been proposed as next-generation dummies for frontal crash tests, were examined and the differences in dynamic response were verified by testing. Tests were performed on a HYGE sled simulating a frontal crash at an impact speed of 56 km/h. The 3-point seatbelt plus air bag combination was adopted as the restraint mechanism. Differences in characteristics of the two dummies in the neck, thorax, and abdomen were found by calibration tests. Test results showed that the variation in shape of the abdominal area of the pelvis generates some disparity in the flexion of the thorax and abdomen.

Improvements for pedestrian head protection in a car-pedestrian accident have been discussed in several countries. Test methods for evaluating head protection have been proposed, and most are sub-systems using rigid headforms with or without headskin. In those tests, HIC is used as a criterion for head protection. This paper discusses the test conditions and requirements of the headform impact test. The influence of different test conditions and their importance on head impact test requirements, were verified. The primary items cited are as follows: (1) The results of the rigid headform were similar to that of the human cadaver skull in cases without skull fractures. Consequently, the rigid headform can be used for the impactor simulating a condition without skull fracture. (2) In the cases of HIC≤1000, the force-deformation curves of the hoodtops showed similar characteristics with maximum dynamic deformations over 60mm. (3) Impactor mass affected the maximum acceleration and HIC.

A total of eight low-speed, rear-end impact tests using two Post Mortem Human Subjects (PMHS) in a seated posture are reported. These tests were conducted using a HYGE-style mini-sled. Two test conditions were employed: 8 kph without a headrestraint or 16 kph with a headrestraint. Upper-body kinematics were captured for each test using a combination of transducers and high-speed video. A 3-2-2-2-accelerometer package was used to measure the generalized 3D kinematics of both the head and pelvis. An angular rate sensor and two single-axis linear accelerometers were used to measure angular speed, angular acceleration, and linear acceleration of T1 in the sagittal plane. Two high-speed video cameras were used to track targets rigidly attached to the head, T1, and pelvis. The cervical spine kinematics were captured with a high-speed, biplane x-ray system by tracking radiopaque markers implanted into each cervical vertebra.

Sled tests were conducted with some seats which had different characteristics to understand the relationships between occupant motion and seat characteristics in lowspeed rear impacts. The position of the head restraint and the stiffness distribution of the seatback were selected as parameters expressing seat characteristics. Volunteer’s cervical vertebral motions were photographed with an x-ray cineradiographic system at a speed of 90 frames/sec as well as the visible motions of dummy’s and volunteer’s were recorded. The results indicated the head restraint position and upper seatback stiffness influenced occupant motions. Correlations between visible motions, such as ramping-up, retraction and extension, were also analyzed and some correlations were found.