Search Results

This investigation addresses and evaluates: (1) belted drivers in frontal crashes; (2) crashes divided into low, medium, and high severity; (3) air-bag-equipped passenger vehicles separated into either model years 1985 - 1997 (with airbags) or model years 1998 - 2008; (4) rate of Harm as a function of crash severity and vehicle model year; and (5) injury patterns associated with injured body regions and the involved physical components, by vehicle model year. Comparisons are made between the injury patterns related to drivers seated in vehicles manufactured before 1998 and those manufactured 1998 or later. The purpose of this comparative analysis is to establish how driver injury patterns may have changed as a result of the introduction of more recent safety belt technology, advanced airbags, or structural changes.

A common injury type among foot and ankle injury is the Lisfranc trauma, or injury to the forefoot. The Lisfranc injury indicates abnormal alignment of the tarsal-metatarsal joints with the loss of their normal spatial relationships. In 2003, Smith completed a laboratory study of this injury mechanism at Wayne State University [1, 2]. He found Lisfranc trauma was correlated with impact force to the forefoot. He proposed a probability of injury function that is based on the applied force to the forefoot. This study examined the instrumentation in the foot of the dummies in the USA New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) and Insurance Institute of Highway Safety (IIHS) frontal crashes. Nineteen different passenger vehicles representing four different vehicle classes were selected based mostly on a large presence in the USA vehicle fleet. Both NCAP and IIHS crashed these nineteen makes and models.

Since 1994, the New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has compiled upper neck loads for the belt and air bag restrained 50th percentile male Hybrid III dummy. Over five years from 1994 to 1998, in frontal crash tests, NCAP collected upper neck data for 118 passenger cars and seventy-eight light trucks and vans. This paper examines these data and attempts to assess the potential for neck injury based on injury criteria included in FMVSS No. 208 (for the optional sled test). The paper examines the extent of serious neck injury in real world crashes as reported in the National Automotive Sampling System (NASS). The results suggest that serious neck injuries do occur at higher speeds for crashes involving occupants restrained by belts in passenger cars.

The research question investigated in this study is what are the key attributes of foot and ankle injury in the between-rail frontal crash? For the foot and ankle, what was the type of interior surface contacted and the type of resulting trauma? The method was to study with in-depth case reviews of NASS-CDS cases where a driver suffered an AIS=2 foot or ankle injury in between-rail crashes. Cases were limited to belted occupants in vehicles equipped with air bags. The reviews concentrated on coded and non-coded data, identifying especially those factors contributing to the injuries of the driver's foot/ankle. This study examines real-world crash data between the years 1997-2009 with a focus on frontal crashes involving 1997 and later model year vehicles. The raw data count for between-rail crashes was 732, corresponding to 227,305 weighted, tow-away crashes.

This paper is part of a four year study to systematically define side impact injury in terms of the kinetic response of a suitable anthropomorphic dummy. Last year a paper was presented at the Experimental Safety Vehicle Conference in Germany which analyzed side impact dummy response and injury prediction based on cadaver data generated by the Highway Safety Research Institute. These subjects were generally older than those discussed in the current paper. This paper includes data from a number of University of Heidelberg cadaver sled tests-including padding tests which we recently found to be (1) critical for a definitive analysis and (2) previously not available. Two advanced dummies, whose design specifications are based upon biomechanical data, are currently being evaluated by the biomechanical community. The two dummies are (1) a Side Impact Dummy (SID) designed by the Highway Safety Research Institute (HSRI) and (2) the Association Peugeot-Renault (APR) dummy from France.

This paper describes the results of a 2 year study into the field accident performances of two basic designs of energy-absorbing steering assemblies. The two basic designs are the axial-collapse type of steering column used in conjunction with a shear capsule and the self-aligning energy-absorbing steering wheel mounted on a nonstroking column. The study identifies major injury causation factors for these two types of steering assemblies. The analysis was performed on 161 accident cases selected for unrestrained drivers in frontal accidents in two vehicle types.

Frontal sled tests of the Part 572, APR, and Hybrid III dummies were conducted in a three-point restraint system at 50 km/hr velocity change. The tests were conducted to evaluate the dummy responses in a tightly controlled systems environment, and to compare the dummy responses to previously established cadaver responses from the same environment. The Hybrid III dummy measurement repeatability was found to be better than either the Part 572 or APR dummies, although the thoracic acceleration responses from all three are shown to be quite similar to cadavers. Correlation of the dummy measurements are made to a limited amount of both the cadaver data and accident data from the National Crash Severity Study.

A series of seventy-two pendulum-type impact tests were performed on six NHTSA Side Impact Dummies (SID) to assess dummy repeatability and reproducibility. A quantity called the Normalized Integral Square Error (NISE) is used to quantify the difference between acceleration responses from repeat tests. Limits for the NISE are developed to define acceptable differences in terms of phase shift, amplitude, and shape. Results indicate that the SID is repeatable in all of the test cases considered and fairly reproducible in 90° lateral impacts although this is not shown conclusively. Before the testing could be performed it was necessary to correct several durability problems with the SID that were identified while early production versions of the dummy were being tested. These modifications are described briefly.

Since 1976, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has pursued biomechanical research concerning lateral impacts to automotive occupants. These efforts have included (a) the generation of an experimental data base containing both detailed engineering and physiological responses of human surrogates experiencing lateral impacts, (b) the analysis of this data base to develop both an injury index linking the engineering parameters to an injury severity level and response corridors to guide in the design of a test dummy, and (c) the development and refinement of a side impact test dummy suitable for use in safety systems development and evaluation. The progress of these efforts has been periodically reported in the literature [1-17]* and these references document the evolutionary trail NHTSA has followed over the duration of this research program.

Nineteen sled impact tests were conducted simulating a frontal collision exposure for an unrestrained driver. The deceleration sled buck configuration utilized the passenger compartment of a late model compact passenger vehicle, a rigid driver's seat, and a custom fabricated energy-absorbing steering column and wheel assembly. Sled impact velocities ranged from 24.1 to 42.6 km/hr. The purpose of the study was to investigate the kinematic and kinetic interaction of the driver and the energy-absorbing steering assembly and their relationship to the thoracic/abdominal injuries produced. The similarities and differences between human cadaver and anthropomorphic dummy subjects were quantified.

The frontal crash standard in the USA specifies that the full front of a vehicle impact a rigid barrier. Subsequently, the European Union developed a frontal crash standard that requires 40 percent of the front of a vehicle to impact a deformable barrier. The present study conducted paired crashes of vehicles using the full-frontal barrier procedure and the 40 percent offset deformable barrier procedure. In part, the study was to examine the feasibility of adding an offset test procedure to the frontal crash standard in the USA. Frontal-offset and full-frontal testing was conducted using both the mid-size (50th percentile male Hybrid III) and the small stature (5th percentile female Hybrid III) dummies. Five vehicle models were used in the testing: Dodge Neon, Toyota Camry, Ford Taurus, Chevrolet Venture and Ford Contour. In the crash tests, all dummies were restrained with the available safety belt systems and frontal air bags.

Since model year 1983, one hundred and seventy five light trucks, vans, and sport utility vehicles (LTVs) have been included in the New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) frontal crash tests. In this frontal test, vehicles are crashed at 35 mph such that the entire front impacts against a rigid, fixed barrier. Instrumented anthropometric dummies are placed in the driver and right front passenger seats. Accelerometers are placed on the vehicle to record the response of the structure during the crash. A number of recent papers have examined the compatibility of LTVs and cars in vehicle-to-vehicle collisions. The studies in these papers, generally, consider three factors for vehicle-to-vehicle compatibility: (1) mass, (2) stiffness, and (3) geometry. On June 5, 1998, Transport Canada and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration held a forum entitled “Transport-NHTSA International Dialogue on Vehicle Compatibility,” in Windsor, Canada.

According to the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS, 1995-2004), over 20 percent of fatal frontal crashes are into fixed narrow objects such as trees and utility poles in real world crashes. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) has studied the frontal pole impact test since 2005, conducting a series of tests using passenger cars that are rated “Good” from the IIHS frontal offset test. Passenger cars were impacted into a 10-inch-diameter rigid pole at 64-kph. The alignment of the pole along the centerline of the vehicles in frontal impact was varied to study the influence on dummy injury metrics. This paper evaluates the frontal center pole test conducted by the IIHS. The IIHS tests 21 crashes impacted by the rigid pole using 5 vehicle models with two dummies in the front seat. Intrusions and dummy readings were reviewed according to the frontal offset rating criteria of the IIHS for structural performance and injury measurement.

A number of tests conducted under the sponsorship of the FAT were reported in papers at two previous Stapp Conferences and an Experimental Safety Vehicle Conference. These tests featured human cadavers and three different Anthropomorphic Test Devices (ATD) designed for use in lateral impacts. Test subjects were placed in Opel car bodies and impacted laterally by CCMC moving deformable barriers. In the previous papers, the reported responses of the human cadavers had wide variability and none of the ATD's studied featured good biofidelity. In this effort, a reexamination of the available data was undertaken and the process and results of applying different analysis techniques to the cadaver data, which resulted in significantly reduced scatter and variability, are discussed. Comparisons of the impact responses of the cadavers and the NHTSA developed Side Impact Dummy are also made.