Search Results

Some rollover testing methodologies require specification of vehicle kinematic parameters including travel speed, vertical velocity, roll rate, and pitch angle, etc. at the initiation of vehicle to ground contact, which have been referred to as touchdown conditions. The complexity of the vehicle, as well as environmental and driving input characteristics make prediction of realistic touchdown conditions for rollover crashes, and moreover, identification of parameter sensitivities of these characteristics, is difficult and expensive without simulation tools. The goal of this study was to study the sensitivity of driver input on touchdown parameters and the risk of rollover in cases of steering-induced soil-tripped rollovers, which are the most prevalent type of rollover crashes. Knowing the range and variation of touchdown parameters and their sensitivities would help in picking realistic parameters for simulating controlled rollover tests.

Multiple laboratory dynamic test methods have been developed to evaluate vehicle crashworthiness in rollover crashes. However, dynamic test methods remove some of the characteristics of actual crashes in order to control testing variables. These simplifications to the test make it difficult to compare laboratory tests to crashes. One dynamic method for evaluating vehicle rollover crashworthiness is the Dynamic Rollover Test System (DRoTS), which simulates translational motion with a moving road surface and constrains the vehicle roll axis to a fixed plane within the laboratory. In this study, five DRoTS vehicle tests were performed and compared to a pair of unconstrained steering-induced rollover tests. The kinematic state of the unconstrained vehicles at the initiation of vehicle-to-ground contact was determined using instrumentation and touchdown parameters were matched in the DRoTS tests.

Steering control devices are used by people who have difficulty gripping the steering wheel. These devices have projections that may extend up to 14 cm toward the occupant. Testing indicated that contact with certain larger steering control devices with tall rigid projections could severely injure a driver in a frontal collision. In order to reduce this injury risk, an alternative, less injurious design was developed and tested. This design, which included replacing unyielding aluminum projections with compliant plastic ones, produced significantly lower peak contact pressure and less damage to the chest of a cadaver test subject, while maintaining the strength necessary to be useful.