Search Results

A study of automotive seating comfort and related design factors was conducted, utilizing subjective techniques of seat comfort assessment and objective measures of the seat/subject interaction. Eight male subjects evaluated four different test seats during a short-term seating session and throughout a three-hour driving simulation. For the latter, subjects operated a static laboratory driving simulator, performing body-area discomfort evaluations at thirty-minute intervals. Cross-modality matching (CMM), a subjective assessment technique in which a stimulus is rated by matching to the level of another stimulus, was used during the long-term driving simulation to evaluate discomfort. Subject posture, muscle activity in the lower back and abdomen, and pressure levels at key support locations on the seat were monitored. In addition, a sonic digitizing system was used to record seat indentation contours and to characterize the subjects' spinal contours.

Frontal crashes (11-1 o'clock) were reviewed from the National Accident Severity Study file (NASS) for years 1980-87. Adult drivers and front right passengers, with lower extremity injuries of the pelvis, thigh, knee, leg or ankle/foot were reviewed. Analysis of age differences, injury contacts, and effectiveness of the 3-point restraint system were studied. Unrestrained drivers have a higher frequency of knee injuries than passengers, fewer leg injuries than passengers and both have the same frequency of ankle/foot injuries. Older unbelted drivers have more injuries to the pelvis, leg, and ankle/foot region than do young drivers. Passengers have more leg injuries. The instrument panel is the major contact for most of the lower extremity injuries. Lap/shoulder belts significantly reduce lower extremity injury frequency.

SAE Recommended Practice J941 describes the eyellipse, a statistical representation of driver eye locations, that is used to facilitate design decisions regarding vehicle interiors, including the display locations, mirror placement, and headspace requirements. Eye-position data collected recently at University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute (UMTRI) suggest that the SAE J941 practice could be improved. SAE J941 currently uses the SgRP location, seat-track travel (L23), and design seatback angle (L40) as inputs to the eyellipse model. However, UMTRI data show that the characteristics of empirical eyellipses can be predicted more accurately using seat height, steering-wheel position, and seat-track rise. A series of UMTRI studies collected eye-location data from groups of 50 to 120 drivers with statures spanning over 97 percent of the U.S. population. Data were collected in thirty-three vehicles that represent a wide range of vehicle geometry.

This paper presents an analysis of the NASS file (1980 - 1986). Cases were selected for near side impacts for drivers, i.e. left side of car, involving unrestrained adult drivers who were alone in the car, and who were not involved in any other collisions following the primary left side impact. Data analysis indicates that 11 % of the near side drivers had crush damage to only the passenger compartment, the ‘P’ zone, that the head, chest and abdomen predominate as the body areas of concern (AIS 3+ injuries), but that these injuries are sustained more often on structures other than the side interior.

NASS 80-88 passenger side impacts data were analyzed. Location of primary car damage using the CDC classification, the AIS for injury severity studies, and the interior contacts of the various body areas. Drivers alone, or with passengers were studied separately in both left and right side crashes. Direct impacts to the passenger compartment only are less frequent than to other CDC side zones. Driver interior contacts vary by body region but also by side impacted in the crash. The presence of an unrestrained front passenger appears to enhance driver injury level in left side crashes but the presence of a passenger, in right side crashes appears to moderate driver injury severity.

A new approach to driver seat-position modeling is presented. The equations of the Seating Accommodation Model (SAM) separately predict parameters of the distributions of male and female fore/aft seat position in a given vehicle. These distributions are used together to predict specific percentiles of the combined male-and-female seat-position distribution. The effects of vehicle parameters-seat height, steering-wheel-to-accelerator pedal distance, seat-cushion angle, and transmission type-are reflected in the prediction of mean seat position. The mean and standard deviation of driver population stature are included in the prediction for the mean and standard deviation of the seat-position distribution, respectively. SAM represents a new, more flexible approach to predicting fore/aft seat-position distributions for any driver population in passenger vehicles. Model performance is good, even at percentiles in the tails of the distribution.

This study was initiated to evaluate the performance of the SAE J826 3-D manikin in seats that span a range of cushion firmness and contour levels. The manikin measures of H-point location, seatback angle, and seatpan angle (measured using a modified-manikin procedure) are compared with the human measures of hip-joint-center (HJC) location, torso angle, and thigh angle for forty drivers. The results indicate that the manikin H-point provides a reasonably consistent, though somewhat offset, measure of driver HJC location for the range of seats tested. This study found that seats with the same manikin-measured seatback angle produce different occupant torso angles. The data also suggest that for a given vehicle seat, the manikin-measured seatback angle can be used to predict the change in torso angle produced by adjusting the seatback inclination.

Although driver-side airbag systems provide protection against serious head and chest injuries in frontal impacts, injuries produced by the airbag itself have also been reported. Most of these injuries are relatively minor, and consist primarily of skin abrasions and burns. Previous investigations have addressed the mechanisms of airbag-induced skin abrasion. In the current research, laboratory studies related to the potential for thermal burns due to high-temperature airbag exhaust gas were conducted. A laboratory apparatus was constructed to produce a 10-mm-diameter jet of hot air that was directed onto the leg skin of human volunteers in time-controlled pulses. Skin burns were produced in 70 of 183 exposures conducted using air temperatures ranging from 350 to 550°C, air velocities from 50 to 90 m/s, and exposure durations from 50 to 300 ms.

An appropriately contoured lumbar support is widely regarded as an essential component of a comfortable auto seat. A frequently stated objective for a lumbar support is to maintain the sitter's lumbar spine in a slightly extended, or lordotic, posture. Although sitters have been observed to sit with substantial lordosis in some short-duration testing, long-term postural interaction with a lumbar support has not been documented quantitatively in the automotive environment. A laboratory study was conducted to investigate driver posture with three seatback contours. Subjects† from four anthropometric groups operated an interactive laboratory driving simulator for one-hour trials. Posture data were collected by means of a sonic digitizing system. The data identify driver-selected postures over time for three lumbar support contours. An increase of 25 mm in the lumbar support prominence from a flat contour did not substantially change lumbar spine posture.

Prominent, longitudinally convex lumbar supports are frequently recommended for auto seats based on the assumption that such supports will induce sitters to choose postures with substantial lumbar lordosis. Lumbar lordosis has been associated with reduced spine loading as measured by pressure in the intervertebral disks. Data from a laboratory study of the influence of lumbar support on driving posture demonstrate that, on average, lumbar lordosis is not strongly affected by large increases in lumbar support prominence. These findings, and their implications for seat design, are reviewed.

Dynamic seat-position testing conducted recently at UMTRI on several different vehicles indicates that, in many cases, the current seating accommodation model represented in SAE J1517 does not accurately predict the distribution of driver seat positions. In general, J1517 tends to predict population percentile seat positions that are forward of observed percentile seat positions, and differences can be as much as 60 mm. It was hypothesized that vehicle factors other than seat height can have substantial and independent effects on driver seat position. The effects of steering-wheel position, seat height, seat-cushion angle, and transmission type on driver fore/aft seat position are being investigated, and results are being used to develop a new driver seating accommodation model called SAM.

In a review of 540 crashes in which the steering-wheel airbag deployed, 38% of the drivers sustained some level of upper extremity injury. The majority of these were AIS-1 injuries including abrasions, contusions and small lacerations. In 18 crashes the drivers sustained AIS-2 or-3 level upper extremity injuries, including fractures of the radius and/or ulna, or of the metacarpal bones, all related to airbag deployments. It was determined that six drivers sustained the fracture(s) directly from the deploying airbag or the airbag module cover. The remaining 12 drivers had fractures from the extremity being flung into interior vehicle structures, usually the instrument panel. Most drivers were taller than 170 cm and, of the 18 drivers, 10 were males.

A series of 16 sled impact tests was conducted at the Highway Safety Research Institute sled facility to evaluate the effectiveness of restraint devices and systems currently being used to transport school-bus and wheelchair-seated handicapped children. A sled impact pulse of 20 m.p.h. and 16 G's was used for all tests. Eight tests involved wheelchairs in forward-facing and side-facing orientations for head-on and 33-degree oblique impacts. Another eight tests involved forward-facing bus seats for head-on and 33-degree oblique impacts. The results generally point out the ineffectiveness of many currently used devices and systems for protecting the child in a bus collision. In six of the eight bus seat tests the dummy's head struck the back of the bus seat in front. This was primarily because of a lack of upper-torso restraint.

A sample population of 51 male and 57 female subjects ranging in age from 18 to 78 years was assembled and tested in six different vehicles for preferred seat positions under non-driving and driving conditions. Volunteer subjects were selected by age, stature, and weight criteria in order to match the U.S. adult population to the extent practical. Preliminary analyses of these data suggest that on a total sample basis there is little difference between seat positions selected under non-driving and driving conditions, but that individuals may show significant differences. The small differences in group mean positions observed in this study may be due to a seat belt and/or an initial seat position factor. Post-drive seat position results were analyzed in a variety of ways to identify factors that may influence a person's preferred seat position.

On-scene investigations of 104 fatal accidents involving 136 fatalities have shown that ejection from the vehicle was the leading cause of the fatalities. The data indicate that the majority of these victims could have survived by the use of the simple lap seat belt. The steering assembly -- the end of the steering column or steering wheel proper -- was the leading cause of the fatalities among drivers. The majority of these driver fatalities could not have been saved even with the seat belt-shoulder harness restraint. Other than death by ejection, the instrument panel was the leading cause of death of the front seat passengers, most of whom could have survived by using seat belts. Impacts to the door caused invasion of the passenger compartment, and most occupants would have died even if restraints had been used. To decrease the number of fatal injuries from automobile accidents, future designs of automobile interiors must include adequate crash attenuation features.

Investigations of 1967 and 1968 model cars indicate that the injuries sustained by driver impacts to the steering assembly are markedly reduced because of the energy absorbing steering column. Drivers, however, are sustaining facial injuries from impact to the steering wheel rim even in low speed crashes. In more severe head-on collisions, the driver is compressing the energy absorbing column and is striking his face on the upper padded instrument panel in front of the steering wheel. Relatively severe facial fractures are sustained by impacting this portion of the panel.

This paper presents examples of passenger car crashes with 3-point restrained front seat occupants. Detailed case capsule descriptions that include car make and model, injury descriptions and severity, and contacts producing the injuries.

The side impact, recently and currently the subject to of much debate, controversy and proposed NHTSA rule making, is a difficult type of crash to significantly reduce serious injuries and fatalites. Results from real-world crash investigations presents a confusing picture for the near-side passenger compartment crash. A direct relationship between the amount of crush and injury severity levels (MAIS) is not apparent. Exemplar cases of tow-a-way/injury crashes are presented at all AIS injury level of drivers in crashes with direct driver door crush damage.

A review of the UM series and of NCSS, NASS, CPIR and FARS Files, as well as Michigan accident data files was undertaken, as well as a review of the NTSB “Rear Seat Study”. From these files rear seat occupany is approximately 10%, with children 6 years of age or less being 1/5th of these. About 50-60% of those in the sear seat are adults. Most of the injuries are at the lower AIS levels, with adults being more seriously injured. Of the more serious or fatal injuries, the head and face predominate by far, in all types of crashes involving unrestrainded rear seat occupants. When belts are worn there are few seriously or fatally injured rear occupants and of these, the abdominal area predominates. From available data, rear lap-belted passengers have the same MAIS level (or less) when compared to their front seat lap-shoulder belted counterparts.