Search Results

The U.S. Department of Transportation-sponsored Crash Injury Research and Engineering Network (CIREN) program offers a reasonable look at the efficacy of second-generation air bags. This paper examines the data from the William Lehman Injury Research Center (WLIRC). The WLIRC data is a near census of crashes in the Miami-Dade region with occupants that appear to be severely injured. The percentage of deaths among trauma patients in the WLIRC data as a function of delta-V for first-generation air bags was higher than expected at lower delta-V's. There were nine driver fatalities at delta-V's of less than 20 mph (four involving short stature occupants, four with elderly occupants, and one due to significant intrusion and/or vehicle incompatibility). The data supported NHTSA's conclusion that first-generation air bags were too aggressive for occupants in close proximity to the deploying air bag and too aggressive for older persons.

While the present air bag systems have been shown to be highly effective in high severity crashes, undesirable side effects have been reported in some low severity events. The inflation rate of the airbag during deployment has been cited as a factor which induces injuries. A rapid airbag deployment rate is advantageous to provide protection to occupants in severe crashes. On the other hand, airbag aggressivity associated with the high inflation rate can increase injuries in the lower severity crashes. The injury producing forces from the airbag increase as the occupant position becomes closer to the bag at the time of deployment. This paper describes the results of an analytical study to evaluate chest injury measures for reduced inflation rates of a Taurus type air bag in a variety of crash modes. A detailed nonlinear finite element model of an unfolding airbag and a 50th percentile male Hybrid III dummy are used in conjunction with a test buck to simulate frontal crashes.

The National Automotive Sampling System’s Crashworthiness Data System (NASS CDS) was used to study rear occupant injuries in frontal crashes. The risks of injury for the rear passengers of different age groups were calculated and compared to the risks of injury for the front occupants. Furthermore, the risks of injury were investigated for the rear and front adult occupants over model years of vehicles. Distribution of injuries among body regions and vehicle contact points were also investigated for the rear adult occupants. While the rear occupants were more protected than the front occupants in most of the groups studied, an increasing trend was observed in the risk of injury of the rear adult occupants over the model years of the vehicles.

In this study, the level of protection offered to rear seat occupants in frontal crashes is investigated. The Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) and National Automotive Sampling System Crashworthiness Data System (NASS CDS) databases were used for the analyses. The investigation focused on: 1- estimating the fatality protection effectiveness of the rear seat position relative to the right front seat position, using the double paired comparison method, 2- evaluating the effect of control group selection method on effectiveness predictions, and 3- identifying trends in rear seat occupant protection over model years of vehicles. By applying a uniform control group to the double paired comparison analysis of FARS data, this study suggests that all ages of occupants are safer in the rear seat than in the right front seat. Effectiveness estimates ranged from 5.9% to 82% for different age groups of occupants.