Refine Your Search

Search Results

Viewing 1 to 12 of 12
Technical Paper

Single Vehicle Wet Road Loss of Control; Effects of Tire Tread Depth and Placement

When an automobile is driven on wet roads, its tires must remove water from between the tread and road surfaces. It is well known that the ability of a tire to remove water depends heavily on tread depth, water depth and speed, as well as other factors, such as tire load, air pressure and tread design. It is less well known that tire tread depth combined with placement can have an adverse effect on vehicle handling on wet roads. This paper investigates passenger car handling on wet roads. Flat bed tire testing, three-dimensional computer simulation and skid pad experimental testing are used to determine how handling is affected by tire tread depth and front/rear position of low-tread-depth tires on the vehicle. Some skid pad test results are given, along with corresponding simulations. A literature review also is presented. Significant changes in tire-road longitudinal and lateral friction are shown to occur as speed, tread depth and water depth vary, even before hydroplaning occurs.
Technical Paper

Validation of DyMESH for Vehicle vs Barrier Collisions

A new three-dimensional collision simulation algorithm, called DyMESH (Dynamic MEchanical SHell) was recently introduced.[1]* This paper presents a validation of DyMESH for vehicle vs. barrier collisions. The derivation of the three-dimensional force vs. crush relationship was described previously.[1] Here the application of three-dimensional force vs. crush curves using the outlined methodology is shown to be effective. Nonlinear force versus crush relationships are introduced for use in DyMESH. Included are numerous DyMESH collision simulations of several types of vehicles (e.g., light and heavy passenger car and sport utility) compared directly with experimental collision test results from various types of barrier tests (e.g., full frontal, angled frontal, and offset frontal). The focus here is not on the vehicle’s change in velocity, but on the acceleration vs. time history.
Technical Paper

An Overview of the EDSMAC4 Collision Simulation Model

The EDSMAC simulation model has been in widespread use by vehicle safety researchers since its introduction in 1985. Several papers have been published that describe the model and provide validations of its use. In 1997, the collision and vehicle dynamics models were extended significantly. The main control logic was also extended and generalized. The resulting model was named EDSMAC4. This paper describes the EDSMAC4 model with particular attention to the extensions to the original algorithms. The paper also provides a validation of the new model by direct comparison to staged collision experiments and the results from the previous EDSMAC model.
Technical Paper

Case Studies Involving the Use and Non-Use of Seatbelts

This paper presents the case study results of several actual motor vehicle accidents which occurred in the western U.S. Each case was analyzed to determine the characteristics of impact to the vehicle and the resulting occupant injuries. The most frequent injury was facial laceration from impacting the windshield. The main benefit of restraint systems lies in their ability to reduce or prevent contact between the occupant and the interior during the crash.
Technical Paper

An Overview of the Way EDCRASH Computes Delta-V

The two procedures, DAMAGE and OBLIQUE IMPACT, which are used by EDCRASH for computing delta-V, are described in detail. Enhancements in EDCRASH Version 4 which improve the DAMAGE method of computing delta-V are also described. The advantages and disadvantages of each method are explored, and the numerical and graphical output and use of warning messages are reviewed. In general, it was found the two methods are complimentary: The DAMAGE procedure is best-suited for the conditions in which the OBLIQUE IMPACT procedure is least-suited, and vice-versa.
Technical Paper

An Overview of the Way EDSMAC Computes Delta-V

The EDSMAC personal computer program for use by accident investigators is described. The input data requirements are reviewed. The general calculation procedures are discussed and the specific procedures for computing delta-V are explained in detail. The method, based on equalizing the force between the vehicles at all times during the impact phase, is seen to be simple in concept but extremely complex in practice. The numerical and graphical output and warning messages are reviewed. Applications of the program are illustrated. The major benefit of EDSMAC is the ability, using graphics, to provide an analytical method illustrating how an accident may, or may not, have occurred.
Technical Paper

Three-Dimensional Reconstruction and Simulation of Motor Vehicle Accidents

This paper describes the use of 3-D technologies for reconstructing and simulating motor vehicle accidents involving humans (occupants and pedestrians) and vehicles (passenger cars, pickups, vans, multi-purpose vehicles, on-highway trucks and vehicle-trailers). All examples involve three-dimensional environments, including road crowns, hills, curbs and embankments - any geometrical feature resulting in three-dimensional motion. Various reconstruction and simulation models are illustrated. The features and limitations of each model are addressed. Issues involving data requirements, preparation of 3-D models and presentation techniques (numeric, graphic and video animation) are also explored.
Technical Paper

An Overview of the HVE Developer's Toolkit

A substantial programming effort is required to develop a human or vehicle dynamics simulator. More than half of this effort is spent designing and programming the user interface (the means by which the user supplies program input and views program output). This paper describes a pre-programmed, 3-dimensional (3-D), input/output window-type interface which may be used by developers of human and vehicle dynamics programs. By using this interface, the task of input/output programming is reduced by approximately 50 percent, while simultaneously providing a more robust interface. This paper provides a conceptual overview of the interface, as well as specific details for writing human and vehicle dynamics programs which are compatible with the interface. Structures are provided for the human, vehicle and environment models. Structures are also provided for events, interface variables, and the output data stream.
Technical Paper

An Overview of the HVE Human Model

Developers of human dynamics simulation software inherently use a mathematical/physical model to represent the human. This paper describes a pre-programmed, object-oriented human model for use in human dynamics simulations. This human model is included as part of an integrated simulation environment, called HVE (Human-Vehicle-Environment), described in previous research. The current paper first provides a general overview of the HVE user and development environments, and then provides detailed specifications for the HVE Human Model. These specifications include definitions for model parameters (supported human types and human properties, such as dimensions, inertias, joints and injury tolerances). The paper also provides detailed specifications for the HVE time-dependent human output group parameters (kinematics, joints, contacts, belts and airbags).
Technical Paper

An Overview of the HVE Vehicle Model

Developers of vehicle dynamics simulation software inherently use a mathematical/physical model to represent the vehicle. This paper describes a pre-programmed, object-oriented vehicle model for use in vehicle dynamics simulations. This vehicle model is included as part of an integrated simulation environment, called HVE (Human-Vehicle-Environment), described in previous research [1,2] *. The current paper first provides a general overview of the HVE user and development environments, and then provides detailed specifications for the HVE Vehicle Model. These specifications include definitions for model parameters (supported vehicle types; vehicle properties, such as dimensions, inertias, suspensions; tire properties, such as dimensions and inertias, mu vs slip, cornering and camber stiffnesses; driver control systems, such as engine, transmission/differential, brakes and steering; restraint systems, such as belts and airbags).
Technical Paper

SIMON: A New Vehicle Simulation Model for Vehicle Design and Safety Research

SIMON is a new vehicle dynamic simulation model. Applications for SIMON include single- and multi-unit vehicle handling simulation in severe limit maneuvers (including rollovers) and 3-dimensional environments. Applications also include vehicle-to-vehicle and vehicle-to-barrier collisions. This paper provides the technical background for the SIMON engineering model. The 3-dimensional equations of motion used by the model are presented and explained in detail. The calculations for suspension, tire, collision, aerodynamic and inter-vehicle connection forces and moments are also developed. The integration of features available in the HVE Simulation Environment, such as DyMESH, the Driver Model, Brake Designer and Steer Degree of Freedom, is also explained. Finally, assumptions and limitations of the model are presented.
Technical Paper

The Simulation of Driver Inputs Using a Vehicle Driver Model

Traditional vehicle simulations use two methods of modeling driver inputs, such as steering and braking. These methods are broadly categorized as “Open Loop” and “Closed Loop”. Open loop methods are most common and use tables of driver inputs vs time. Closed loop methods employ a mathematical model of the driving task and some method of defining an attempted path for the vehicle to follow. Closed loop methods have a significant advantage over open loop methods in that they do not require a trial-and-error approach normally required by open loop methods to achieve the desired vehicle path. As a result, closed loop methods may result in significant time savings and associated user productivity. Historically, however, closed loop methods have had two drawbacks: First, they require user inputs that are non-intuitive and difficult to determine. Second, closed loop methods often have stability problems.