Search Results

The Federal Side Impact Test Procedure prescribed by FMVSS 214, simulates a central, orthogonal intersection collision between two moving vehicles by impacting the side of the stationary test vehicle with a moving test buck in a crabbed configuration. While the pre- and post-impact speeds of the vehicles involved in an accident can not be duplicated using this method, closing speeds, vehicle damage, vehicle speed changes and vehicle accelerations can be duplicated. These are the important parameters for the examination of vehicle restraint system performance and the prediction of occupant injury. The acceptability of this method of testing is not as obvious for the reconstruction of accidents where the impact is non-central, or the angle of impact is not orthogonal. This paper will examine the use of crash testing with a single moving vehicle to simulate oblique or non-central collisions between two moving vehicles.

Thoracic injury criteria have been previously developed to predict thoracic injury for vehicle occupants as a function of biomechanical response. Historically, biomechanical testing of post-mortem human surrogates (PMHS) for injury criteria development has primarily been focused on mid-sized males. Response targets and injury criteria for other demographics, including small females, have been determined by scaling values from mid-sized males. The objective of this study was to explore the applicability of scaled injury criteria to their representative population. Two PMHS were subjected to a side-impact loading condition which replicates a near-side, MDB-to-vehicle impact for the driver. This was accomplished using the Advanced Side Impact System, or ASIS, on a HYGE sled. The sled acceleration matched the acceleration profile of an impacted vehicle, while the four pneumatic cylinders of the ASIS produced realistic door intrusion.

Many vehicles allow consumers to adapt the vehicle environment to their families’ needs by folding or removing one or more rear row seats. It is currently unclear how different seat configurations affect child restraint systems (CRS) installed in adjacent seats. The objective is to quantify CRS performance in far-side impacts when the seating position adjacent to the CRS is in its normal upright position, folded in half, or removed. Twelve tests were conducted. Second row seats from a recent model year minivan were obtained, including full size captain’s chairs from the outboard positions and narrow seats from the center position. Rear-facing (RF) and forward-facing (FF) CRS were installed one at a time in either the outboard or center position. The seating position adjacent to the CRS was set in either the standard upright position, folded in half, or removed. Far-side impacts were conducted at 10° anterior of pure lateral at 24.8 ± 0.2 g. The Q3s ATD was used for all tests.

Sled testing procedures should reflect a rigorous level of repeatability across trials and reproducibility across testing facilities. Currently, different testing facilities use various methods to set the harness tension for child restraint system (CRS) sled tests. The objective of this study is to identify which harness tightening procedure(s) produce tensions within a reasonable target range while showing adequate reproducibility, repeatability, and ease-of-use. Five harness tightening procedures were selected: A) FMVSS 213 procedure, B) a 3-prong tension gauge, C) ECE R44/R129 procedure, D) two finger method, and E) pinch test. Two CRS models were instrumented with a tension load cell in the harness system. Seven sled room operators were recruited to perform each of the five harness tightening procedures for ten repetitions apiece on both instrumented CRS using a Hybrid III 3-year-old.

The objective is to determine whether responses and injury risks for pediatric occupants in child restraint systems (CRS) are affected by vehicle seat cushion stiffness and fore/aft cushion length. Eighteen sled tests were conducted using the Federal Motor Vehicles Safety Standard (FMVSS) 213 frontal pulse (48 km/h). Seats from a recent model year vehicle were customized by the manufacturer with three different levels of cushion stiffness: compliant, mid-range, and stiff. Each stiffness level was quantified using ASTM D 3574-08 and all were within the realistic range of modern production seats. The usable length of each seat cushion was manipulated using foam spacers provided by the manufacturer. Two different seat lengths were examined: short (34.0 cm) and long (43.5 cm).

Side impacts are disproportionately injurious for children compared to other crash directions. Far side impacts allow for substantial translation and rotation of child restraint systems (CRS) because the CRS does not typically interact with any adjacent structures. The goal of this study is to determine whether minor installation incompatibilities between CRS and vehicle seats cause safety issues in far side crashes. Four non-ideal CRS installation conditions were compared against control conditions having good fit. Two repetitions of each condition were run. The conditions tested were: 1) rear-facing (RF) CRS installed with a pool noodle to create proper recline angle, 2) RF CRS with narrow base, 3) forward-facing (FF) CRS with gap behind back near seat bight (i.e., vehicle seat angle too acute for CRS), 4) FF CRS with gap behind back near top of CRS (i.e., vehicle seat angle too obtuse for CRS). Second row captain’s chairs were set up at 10° anterior of lateral.

This study examines the performance of rear-facing child restraint systems (RF CRS) in moderate severity rear impact sled tests. The study also investigates the effects of RF CRS features on CRS kinematics and anthropomorphic test device (ATD) injury metrics in this scenario. Twelve tests were conducted at a moderate severity rear impact sled pulse (approximately 28.2 km/h and 18.4 g). Four models of RF CRS were tested in the rear outboard positions of a sedan seat. The CRABI 12-month-old and Hybrid III 3-year-old ATDs were instrumented with head and chest accelerometers, head angular rate sensors, six-axis upper neck load cells, and a chest linear potentiometer (3-year-old only). The effects of carry handle position, occupant size, presence of anti-rebound bar, Swedish style tethering, and lower anchor vs. seat belt installation were investigated. Data were also compared to pediatric injury assessment reference values (IARV).

Child occupants have not been studied in far-side impacts as thoroughly as frontal or near side crash modes. The objective is to determine whether the installation method of child restraint systems (CRS) affects far-side crash performance. Twenty far-side impact sled tests were conducted with rear-facing (RF) CRS, forward-facing (FF) CRS, high-back boosters, and belt only. Each was installed on second row captain’s chairs from a recent model year minivan. Common CRS installation errors were tested, including using the seat belt in Emergency Locking Mode (ELR) instead of Automatic Locking Mode (ALR), not attaching the top tether, and using both the lower anchors (LA) and seat belt together. Correct installations were also tested as a baseline comparison. Q3s and Hybrid III 6-year-old (6yo) anthropomorphic test devices (ATDs) were used. Lateral displacements of the CRS and head were examined as well as injury metrics in the head, spine, and torso.