Search Results

Rear impacts in the crash test data base compiled by the NHTSA are analyzed and compared to the CRASH3 rear stiffness coefficients. The CRASH3 values do not represent the test data adequately. This is because the values were derived from limited data, and because some of the rear moving barrier test data were miscoded as fixed barrier tests. A review of the larger NHTSA data base does not support the CRASH3 assumption that vehicles of similar size (wheelbase) have similar rear stiffness characteristics. Therefore, it is important when reconstructing individual accidents to use crash test data specific to the vehicles involved. Repeated rear fixed barrier test data on four vehicles are analyzed to study the data trend at speeds below and above the NHTSA test data. Constant stiffness and constant force models are compared and a combination of the two is shown to fit available test data.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has recently opened a rulemaking docket seeking comments on the design of automobile seats and their performance in rear Impacts. There are two philosophies of seat design: one advocates rigid seats, the other advocates seats which yield in a controlled manner. A review of the legislative history of seat back design standards indicates that yielding seats have historically been considered a better approach for passenger cars. The design characteristics of current production automobile seats are evaluated and show no significant changes over the past three decades. Concerns about the performance of rigid seat backs in real world rear impacts are discussed, specifically increased injury exposure due to ramping, rebound and out-of-position occupants.

Recent cadaver studies have provided data for the development of force and stiffness characteristics of the side of the human head. A Hybrid III Anthropomorphic Test Dummy (ATD) head was modified to allow direct measurement of impact forces on the parietal and temporal regions by recasting the upper left half of the skull and installing triaxial piezoelectric force transducers. Dynamic impact tests of this modified head were conducted and force/stiffness characteristics for the temporal and parietal areas were compared to existing data on cadaver subjects. It was found that the existing Hybrid III vinyl skin satisfactorily represents the force/stiffness characteristics of the human head in these areas. This modified Hybrid III dummy head was also impacted against typical interior components likely to be contacted during a side impact. The force and acceleration test results are presented.

The appropriateness of the set of eight frontal stiffness coefficients used by the CRASH3 program to estimate vehicle deformation energy (and to subsequently derive estimates of vehicle delta-V) is examined. This examination consists of constructing so-called CRASH energy plots based on 402 frontal fixed barrier impact tests contained in the NHTSA's Vehicle Test Center Data Base (VTCDB) digital tape file. It is concluded that the use of category coefficients within the CRASH3 program can result in large delta-V errors, reaffirming the inappropriateness of this program for use in individual accident reconstructions. The use of the CRASH3 category stiffness coefficients is seen to generally overestimate vehicle energy absorption for vehicles with small amounts of frontal crush and to underestimate vehicle energy absorption for vehicles sustaining large crush.

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.

An understanding of fundamental kinematic relationships among the several deforming surfaces of side-impacting bullet and target vehicle, occupant protection system and occupant is fundamental to rational design of crash injury counter-measures. Unfortunately, such understanding is not easy to achieve. Side impacts address the full range of bodily contacts and injuries in a way that challenges analysis. Each bodily area and organ requires individual consideration for adequate injury protection. This paper presents a simplified graphical analysis of occupant kinematics and injury exposure applied specifically to the NHTSA-proposed crabbed moving deformable barrier (MDB) compartment impact, as described in NHTSA's Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) for Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 214, issued in January of 1988 [NHTSA 1988 (1)*]. Projections are offered regarding the potential of thoracic injury counter-measures.

Understanding of events within the history of a crash, and estimation of the severity of occupant interior collisions depend upon an accurate assessment of crash duration. Since this time duration is not measured independently in most crash test reports, it must usually be inferred from interpretations of acceleration data or from displacement data in high-speed film analysis. The significant physical effects related to the crash pulse are often essential in reconstruction analyses wherein the estimation of occupant interior “second collision” or airbag sensing issues are at issue. A simple relation is presented and examined which allows approximation of the approach phase and separation phase kinematics, including restitution and pulse width. Building upon previous work, this relation allows straightforward interpretation of test data from related publicly available test reports.

Heavier, larger pickups and SUVs are bound to encounter lighter, smaller passenger vehicles in many future accidents. As the fleet has evolved to include more and more SUVs, their frontal structures are often indistinguishable from pickup fronts. Improvements in geometric compatibility features are crucial to further injury prevention progress in side impact. In corner crashes where modern bullet passenger car (PC) bumpers make appropriate geometrical overlap with target PC rocker panels, concentrated loads sometimes disrupt foam and plastic bumper corners, creating aggressive edges. In situations where sliding occurs along the structural interface, these sharp edges may slice through doors, panels and pillars. End treatments for such bumper beams should be designed to reduce this aggressive potential.

A decade ago, James, et.al. published a detailed study of the available NASS data on severe rear impacts, with findings that “… stiffened or rigid seat backs will not substantially mitigate severe and fatal injuries in rear impacts.” No field accident study has since been advanced which refutes this finding. Advocates of rigidized seat backs often point to specific cases of severe rear impacts in which MAIS 4+ injuries are associated with seat back deformation, coupled with arguments supporting stiffer seatback designs. These arguments are generally based upon laboratory experiments with dummies in normal seating positions. Recent field accident data shows that generally, in collisions where the majority of societal harm is created, yielding seats continue to provide benefits, including those associated with whiplash associated disorders (WAD).

The BSAN crash pulse model has been shown to provide useful information for restraint sensing evaluation and for structural force-displacement studies in flat fixed rigid barrier (FFRB) crashes. This paper demonstrates a procedure by which the model may be extended for use with central and offset vehicle to vehicle (VTV) crashes through appropriate combinations of vehicle parameters.

In reconstruction of on-roadway vehicle accidents, tire-road surface friction coefficient, mu (μ), can be estimated using a variety of available data. Common ranges and values for μ are used in calculations forming the foundation for most accident reconstruction techniques. When the roadway surface is gouged or disrupted by vehicle components, accounting of dissipated energy can be successful where supporting force data exists. Roadway gouge forces can vary widely depending upon such factors as road surface construction, surface temperature, and the velocity and geometry of the gouging mechanism. Such dissipated energy can be significant in accounting of total reconstruction energy. This paper presents experiments aimed at quantifying gouge force by controlled pavement gouging tests.

Biomechanical data are often assumed to be doubly censored. In this paper, this assumption is evaluated critically for several previously published sets of data. Injury risk functions are compared using simple logistic regression and using survival analysis with 1) the assumption of doubly censored data and 2) the assumption of right-censored (uninjured specimens) and uncensored (injured) data. It is shown that the injury risk functions that result from these differing assumptions are not similar and that some experiments will require a preliminary assessment of data censoring prior to finalizing the experimental design. Some types of data are obviously doubly censored (e.g., chest deflection as a predictor of rib fracture risk), but many types are not left censored since injury is a force-limiting phenomenon (e.g., axial force as a predictor of tibia fracture). Guidelines for determining the censoring for various types of experiment are presented.

This paper presents a load distribution-specific viscoelastic structural characterization of the Hybrid III 50th percentile male anthropomorphic test dummy thorax. The dummy is positioned supine on a high-speed material testing machine and ramp-and-hold tests are performed using a distributed load, a hub load, and a diagonal belt load applied to the anterior thorax of the dummy. The force-deflection response is shown to be linear viscoelastic for all loading conditions when the internal dummy instrumentation is used to measure chest deflection. When an externally measured displacement (i.e., a measurement that includes the superficial skin material) is used for the characterization, a quasilinear viscoelastic characterization is necessary. Linear and quasilinear viscoelastic model coefficients are presented for all three loading conditions.

The reconstruction of accidental impacts to the side structure of one or more accident vehicles often incorporates estimates of the energy absorbed by laterally struck vehicle(s). Such estimates generally involve considerably more issues than does the assessment of frontal or rear impact deformation energy. The sides of vehicles are, compared to the usual striking object, relatively broad, and they contain zones of varying stiffness supported by collapsible box structures. Side stiffnesses can vary widely, depending upon impact geometry. Most side impact crash tests that can readily be used to make estimates of side stiffness have been conducted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).

While vehicular rear pole impacts are rare, they do occur, and can be very serious. General accident reconstruction methods, which derive vehicle stiffness values from rear barrier crash tests, over-predict the impact speed for these types of pole impacts. Thirteen pole crash tests were run into the rear-ends of four 4-door, front-wheel drive sedans. Repeated crash testing was used on three of the vehicles. Two 1988 Acura Legends, which have one of the highest stiffness values from FMVSS 301 Rear Compliance crash testing, a 1988 Honda Civic, which has one of the softest rear-end stiffnesses, and a 1986 Ford Taurus were tested. The repeated crash testing methodology was validated using one of the 1988 Acura Legends and a previously published Ford Taurus test. Residual crush was measured using maximum crush, point-to-point, longitudinal full-width, and longitudinal reduced-width methodologies. Crush was found to be linearly related to impact speed.

Field experience has consistently indicated that lap-only belts and lap-shoulder belts perform well and about equally in prevention of fatalities and serious injuries in the rear seating positions. Analyses based on overall usage and injury figures from the Fatal Analysis Reporting System (FARS), double-pair analysis of FARS data, and still older data bases have shown that, in the rear outboard seating positions, injury rates are about the same for lap-only and lap-shoulder belted crash occupants. Although sparse, recently available field data from the 1988-2001 National Analysis Sampling System / Crashworthiness Data System (NASS/CDS) files confirm the finding that, when used by rear seat occupants, lap-only belts perform about equally with lap-shoulder belts as countermeasures for serious and fatal injury in severe frontal crashes.

This paper presents a method of automobile collision analysis based on conservation of momentum. The analysis is applied to the collision of two two-dimensional bodies, either or both of which may be attached to a trailer. Newton's laws of motion are employed to determine changes in linear and angular velocities for the two-dimensional colliding bodies. Knowing the masses and rotational inertias and the initial velocities of all bodies at impact, the post-impact velocities can be calculated if appropriate constraints are applied to the bodies' post-collision motion. Various motion constraints, including lock-up, slip, and restitution are examined, and a methodology for modeling vehicle motion experienced during a collision is presented. The full set of basic equations characterizing this conservation-of-momentum analysis is presented with sufficient detail to allow their implementation on a programmable calculator or personal computer.

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.

Accident data suggest that a significant percentage of rear impacts involve occupants seated in other than a “Normal Seated Position”. Pre-impact acceleration due to steering, braking or a prior frontal impact may cause the driver to move away from the seat back prior to impact. Nevertheless, virtually all crash testing is conducted with dummies in the optimum “Normal Dummy Seated Position”. A series of 7 rear impact sled tests, having a nominal AV of 21 mph, with Hybrid III dummies positioned in the “Normal Dummy Seated Position”, “Out of Position” and slightly “Out of Position” is presented. Tests were performed on yielding production Toyota and Mercedes Benz seats as well as on a much stiffer modified Ford Aerostar seat. Available Hybrid III upper and lower neck as well as torso instrumentation was used to analyze and compare injury potential for each set of test parameters.