Search Results

A kinematic analysis of the head-neck unit has been conducted in 37 simulated traffic accidents in order to investigate correlations between neck response and injuries. Belted fresh human cadavers in the age range 18 to 74 years have been used as front and rear-seat passengers. The analysed data included 23 frontal collisions, impact velocity 30 km/h, 50 km/h and 60 km/h, barrier impact and 14 90°-car to car lateral collisions with near-side passengers (6 cases) as well as far-side rear-seat passengers with an in-board upper anchoring point for the shoulder belt (8 cases). The head bending angle depended on the type of the collision. At the frontal collision, the mean head bending maxima amounted 79°, the evaluated mean angular velocity maxima and angular acceleration maxima corresponded to 41 rad/s and 2208 rad/s2, the mean maximum velocity in trajectory of the head was 10 m/s, the mean maximum acceleration along the path amounted 23 g.

This analysis is part of a retrospective real accident study of 670 occupants in 428 cars. In most cases the real accidents were reconstructed from police reports by means of photographs, accident drawings and descriptions of the damaged cars. In fatal crashes the cars, and in most cases the sites of the accidents were examined. Among 272 occupants involved in car side collisions, we found 41 belt protected near side front passengers, whose cars were impacted by another car with main impact points at the front passengers' doors and B-pillars. The analysis of the correlation between technical parameters of the real accidents and injuries of the passengers showed a high significant discrimination between MAIS and some regional AIS 0-3 on one hand, and MAIS and some regional AIS 4-6 on the other hand already for each of the technical variables EES, delta v and maximum deformation.

21 low velocity direct occipital and lateral head impacts were performed on 17 cadavers. Both damped and undamped impacts were performed at impact velocities of between 2.8 and 6.1 m/s. Head responses were measured using a 9-accelerometer array, and in 8 cases epidural pressure was measured at the contre-coup site. Base of skull and temporal fractures of AIS severity 3 or 4 were produced with undamped impacts at velocities greater than 4.0 m/s. Brain injuries were also observed; these were subdural and sub-arachnoid haematomas of AIS severity 3 or 4. Only minor cervical spine injuries were observed. Head responses were calculated from the 9-accelerometer array data. Linear centre of gravity head acceleration, HIC and angular accelerations are presented. Angular acceleration time-histories calculated with this method appear to be sensitive to local skull deformations and shock wave transmission.

Side impacts have been shown to produce a large portion of both serious and fatal injuries within the total automotive crash problem. These injuries are produced as a result of the rapid changes in velocity an automobile occupant's body experiences during a crash. Any improvement to the side impact problem will be brought about by means which will ultimately modify the occupant's rapid body motions to such a degree that they will no longer produce injuries of serious consequence. Accurate knowledge of both the body's motion and resulting injuries under a variety of impact conditions is needed to achieve this goal. Possession of this knowledge will then permit development of accurate anthropomorphic test devices and injury criteria which can be used to create effective injury countermeasures in vehicles.

Six European laboratories have evaluated the biomechanical response of the new advanced frontal impact dummy THOR-alpha with respect to the European impact response requirements. The results indicated that for many of the body regions (e.g., shoulder, spine, thorax, femur/knee) the THOR-alpha response was close to the human response. In addition, the durability, repeatability and sensitivity for some dummy regions have been evaluated. Based on the tests performed, it was found that the THOR-alpha is not durable enough. The lack in robustness of the THOR-alpha caused a problem in completing the full test program and in evaluating the repeatability of the dummy. The results have demonstrated that the assessment of frontal impact protection can be greatly improved with a more advanced frontal impact dummy. Regarding biofidelity and injury assessment capabilities, the THOR-alpha is a good candidate however it needs to be brought up to standard in other areas.