Search Results

Injury to the lower extremity during an automotive crash is a significant problem. While the introduction of safety features (i.e. seat belts, air bags) has significantly reduced fatalities, lower extremity injury now occurs more frequently, probably for a variety of reasons. Lower extremity trauma is currently based on a bone fracture criterion derived from human cadaver impact experiments. These impact experiments, conducted in the 1960's and 70's, typically used a rigid impact interface to deliver a blunt insult to the 90° flexed knee. The resulting criterion states that 10 kN is the maximum load allowed at the knee during an automotive crash when certifying new automobiles using anthropomorphic dummies. However, clinical studies suggest that subfracture loading can cause osteochondral microdamage which can progress to a chronic and debilitating joint disease.

Injuries to the lower extremities are common during car accidents because the lower extremity is typically the first point of contact between the occupant and the car interior. While injuries to the knee, ankle and hip are usually not life threatening, they can represent a large societal burden through treatment costs, lost work days and a reduced quality of life. The aim of the current study was to specifically study injuries associated with the knee and to propose a methodology which could be used to prevent future knee injuries. To understand the scope of this problem, a study was designed to identify injury trends in car crashes for the years 1979-1995. The NASS (National Accident Sampling System) showed that 10% of all injuries were to the knee, second only to head and neck injuries. Most knee injuries resulted from knee-to-instrument panel contact. Subfracture injuries were most common (contusions, abrasions, lacerations) followed by gross fracture injuries.

Interior compartment doors are required by Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 201, to stay closed during physical head impact testing, and when subjected to specific inertia loads. This paper defines interior compartment doors, and shows examples of several different latches designed to keep these doors closed. It also explores the details of the requirements that interior compartment doors and their latches must meet, including differing requirements from automobile manufacturers. It then shows the conventional static method a supplier uses to analyze a latch and door system. And, since static calculations can't always capture the complexities of a dynamic event, this paper also presents a case study of one particular latch and door system showing a way to simulate the forces experienced by a latch. The dynamic simulation is done using Finite Element Analysis and instrumentation of actual hardware in physical tests.

In today's global economy, the automotive design engineer's responsibilities are made more complex by the differences between regulatory requirements of the various global markets. This paper compares instrument panel head impact requirements of FMVSS 201 with its European counterparts, ECE 21, and EEC/74/60, Interior Fittings. It describes the similarities and differences between these regulations and explains the unique requirements for each market. It then compares processes for development and validation testing in both markets. It also covers related topics like self-certification, witness testing, radii, projections, and interior compartment doors. The cockpit design engineer will gain an understanding of the factors involved in ensuring that their design fully meets the requirements of the subject regulations.

Since the 1960's, automotive seats have been designed and evaluated with tools and procedures described in the SAE Recommended Practice J826. The SAE J826 design template and testing manikin each have a torso with a flat lower back shape and with a single joint at the H-point. The JOHN models provide a more anatomically detailed representation of human shape and movement. The articulations of the JOHN torso (pelvic, lumbar, and thoracic) segments are coupled so that their relative positions are determined by a single parameter related to spinal curvature. This paper describes the development and use of the JOHN biomechanical models for seating design.

Occupant head impact simulations on automotive instrument panels (IP) are routinely performed as part of an integrated design process during the course of IP development. Based on the requirements (F/CMVSS, ECE), head impact zones on the IP are first established, which are then used to determine the various “hit” locations to be tested/analyzed. Once critical impact locations are identified, CAE simulations performed which is a repetitive process that involves computing impact angles, positioning the rigid head form with an assigned initial velocity and defining suitable contacts within the finite element model. A commercially available CAE process automation tool was used to automate these steps and generate a head impact simulation model. Once the input model is checked for errors by the automated process, it can be submitted to a solver without any user intervention for analysis and report generation.

This paper describes additional and more recent results from the DaimlerChrysler study of HANS that includes a sensitivity analysis of HANS performance to variations in crash dummy neck length and other impact test conditions. The objective of the tests was to determine the robustness of the HANS concept in a variety of conditions that might occur in actual use. The results show that the variations in test parameters do effect injury measures from the crash dummy, but HANS provides substantial reductions in injury potential in all cases compared to not using HANS. Also, no injuries were indicated with HANS.

Numerous studies have documented that lower extremity injury is second only to the head and face in automotive accidents. Such injuries are common because the lower extremity is typically the first point of contact between the occupant and the car interior. Of all lower extremity injuries, the knee is the most common site of trauma. This typically results from high speed contact with the instrument panel which can produce fracture and subfracture (contusions, lacerations, abrasions) level injuries. Current Federal safety guidelines use a bone fracture criterion which is based solely on a peak load. The criterion states that loads exceeding 10 kN will likely result in gross bone fracture. However, cadaver experiments have shown that increased contact area (via padding) over the knee can significantly increase the amount of load that can be tolerated before fracture or subfracture injury.

To provide contours for the new ASPECT manikin, the contours of the thighs and buttocks of mid-size male subjects were measured using a specially built chair. The subjects' body surfaces that were not in contact with the chair and their postures were measured using a video-based position measurement system. Using computer aided design methods, the measured contours were splined and sectioned relative to the local anatomical coordinates for each subject. These local sections were combined and analyzed, with comparison to SAE J826 manikin contours, to provide a thigh and buttocks contour for the ASPECT manikin that represent the mid-size male.

Seat factors are characteristics of seats that influence people's postures. Seat factors such as lumbar prominence and seat pan stiffnesses were defined and measured for a variety of automotive seats. Seat factors such as these serve as a basis for evaluating and comparing seats. They were useful for selecting seats and designing experiments for human subject testing in the ASPECT program. Seat factors are also candidates for independent variables in statistical posture prediction models. The Seat factors described in this paper were measured with the current J826 manikin. They will be redefined for use with the new ASPECT manikin.