Search Results

Objective: A friction rollover test was conducted as part of a rollover sensing project. This study evaluates vehicle and occupant responses in the test. Methods: A flat dolly carried a Saab 9-3 sedan laterally, passenger-side leading to a release point at 42 km/h (26 mph) onto a high-friction surface. The vehicle was equipped with roll, pitch and yaw gyros near the center of gravity. Accelerometers were placed at the vehicle center tunnel, A-pillar near the roof, B-pillar near the sill, suspension sub-frame and wheels. Five off-board and two on-board cameras recorded kinematics. Hybrid III dummies were instrumented for head and chest acceleration and upper neck force and moment. Belt loads were measured. Results: The vehicle release caused the tires and then wheel rims to skid on the high-friction surface. The trip involved roll angular velocities >300 deg/s at 0.5 s and a far-side impact on the driver’s side roof at 0.94 s. The driver was inverted in the far-side, ground impact.

Far-side occupants are not addressed in current government regulations around the world even though they account for up to 40% of occupant HARM in side impact crashes. Consequently, there are very few crash tests with far-side dummies available to researchers. Sled tests are frequently used to replicate the dynamic conditions of a full-scale crash test in a controlled setting. However, in far-side crashes the complexity of the occupant kinematics is increased by the longer duration of the motion and by the increased rotation of the vehicle. The successful duplication of occupant motion in these crashes confirms that a sled test is an effective, cost-efficient means of testing and developing far-side occupant restraints or injury countermeasures.

The biomechanical injury assessment for an occupant in a planar vehicle-to-vehicle collision often requires a kinematic analysis of impact-related occupant motion. This analysis becomes more complex when the collision force is eccentric to the center of gravity on a struck vehicle because the vehicle kinematics include both translation and potentially significant yaw rotational rates. This study examines the significance of vehicle yaw on occupant kinematics in eccentric (off-center) planar collisions. The paper describes the calculation of the instantaneous center of rotation (ICR) in a yawing vehicle post-impact and explores how mapping this quantity may inform an occupant’s trajectory when using a free particle “occupant” analysis. The study initially analyzed the impact-related occupant motion for all the outboard seat positions in a minivan using several hypothetical examples of eccentric vehicle-to-vehicle crash configurations with varying PDOF, delta-V, and yaw rate.

NHTSA has recently been petitioned to address the protection of second-row children in rear crashes due front seatback performance. The protection of children is important. However, it is more complex than assessing front seat performance in rear impacts. Viano, Parenteau (2008 [1]) analyzed cases of serious-to-fatally injured (MAIS 3+F) children up to 7 years old in the second row in rear impacts involving 1990+ model year vehicles using 1997-2005 NASS-CDS. They observed that intrusion was an important factor pushing the child forward into the back of the front seat, B-pillar or other front structure. To help assess whether stiffening the front seats would be beneficial for second-row child safety, the 2008 study was updated using more recent data and model year vehicles. In the present study, 1997-2015 NASS-CDS data were analyzed for serious-to-fatally (MAIS 3+F) injured 0- to 7-year old children in the second row with 1994+ model year vehicles.

Low-speed collisions between tractor-semitrailers and passenger vehicles may result in large areas of visible damage to the passenger vehicle, but often produce limited damage to the tractor-semitrailer. Despite this, such accidents may lead to assertions of serious injury to the tractor driver and/or sleeper compartment occupant. Research regarding the impact environment and resulting injury potential of the occupants during these types of impacts is limited. This research investigated driver and sleeper compartment occupant responses to relatively low-speed and low-acceleration impact events. Five crash tests involving impact between a tractor-semitrailer and a passenger car were conducted. The test vehicles were a van semitrailer pulled by a tractor and three identical mid-sized sedans. The occupants of the tractor included a human driver and an un-instrumented Hybrid III 50th-percentile-male anthropomorphic test device (ATD).

The energy dissipated by the fracture of wooden utility poles during vehicle impacts is not currently well documented, is dependent upon non-homogenous timber characteristics, and can therefore be difficult to quantify. While there is significant literature regarding the static and quasi-static properties of wood as a building material, there is a narrow body of literature regarding the viscoelastic properties of timber used for utility poles. Although some theoretical and small-scale testing research has been published, full-scale testing has not been conducted for the purpose of studying the vehicle-pole interaction during impacts. The parameters that define the severity of the impact include the acceleration profile, vehicle velocity change, and energy dissipation. Seven full-scale crash tests were conducted at Exponent's Arizona test facility utilizing both moving deformable and non-deformable barriers into new wooden utility poles.

Objective: This study involved a number of different tests addressing theories for recliner and track release of front seats in rear impacts. It addresses the validity of the theories. Method: Several separate test series were conducted to address claims made about recliner and track release of front seats in rear impacts. The following theories were evaluated to see the validity of the issues: 1 Recliner teeth slipping with minimal damage to the teeth 2 Recliner teeth bypass by disengaging and re-engaging under load without damaging the teeth 3 Recliner shaft bending and torque releasing the recliners 4 Track release by heel loading 5 Track release with occupant load on the seat 6 Recliner handle rotation causing recliner release 7 Double pull body block tests Results: Many of the theories were found to be uncorroborated once actual test data was available to judge the merits of the issue raised. The laboratory tests were set-up to specifically address particular issues.

This study assesses front seat occupant responses in rear impacts with active head restraints (AHR) and conventional head restraints (CHR) using field accident data and test data from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS). 2003-2015 NASS-CDS data were analyzed to determine injury rates in 1997+ model year seats equipped with AHR and CHR. Results indicated that less than 4% of occupants were in seats equipped with AHR. Crashes of delta-V <24 km/h accounted for more than 70% of all exposed front seat occupants, irrespective of head restraint design. Rear crashes with a delta-V < 24 km/h included 35.6% fewer occupants who sustained a MAIS 1-2 injury overall and 26.4% fewer who sustained a MAIS 1-2 cervical injury in vehicles equipped with AHR compared to CHR. In IIHS 16 km/h rear sled tests, the biomechanical response of an instrumented BioRID was evaluated on seats with AHR and CHR. HIC15 and concussion risk were calculated from head acceleration data.

Obesity rates are increasing among the general population. This study investigates the effect of obesity on ejection and injury risk in rollover crashes through analysis of field accident data contained in the National Automotive Sampling System-Crashworthiness Data System (NASS-CDS) database. The study involved front outboard occupants of age 15+ years in 1994+ model year vehicle rollover crashes. Occupants were sorted into two BMI groups, normal (18.5 kg/m2 ≤ BMI < 25.0 kg/m2) and obese (BMI ≥30 kg/m2). Complete and partial ejection risks were first assessed by seating location relative to roll direction and belt use. The risk of serious-to-fatal injuries (MAIS 3+F) in non-ejected occupants were then evaluated. The overall risk for complete ejection was 2.10% ± 0.43% when near-sided and 2.65% ± 0.63% when far-sided, with a similar risk for both the normal and obese BMI groups.

This study assesses vehicle and occupant responses in six vehicle-to-vehicle high-speed rear impact crash tests conducted at the Exponent Test and Engineering Center. The struck vehicle delta Vs ranged from 32 to 76 km/h and the vehicle centerline offsets varied from 5.7 to 114 cm. Five of the six tests were conducted with Hybrid III ATDs (Anthropometric Test Device) with two tests using the 50th male belted in the driver seat, one test with an unbelted 50th male in the driver seat, one test with a 95th male belted in the driver seat, and one with the 5th female lap belted in the left rear seat. All tests included vehicle instrumentation and three tests included ATD instrumentation. The ATD responses were analyzed and compared to corresponding IARVs (injury assessment reference values). Ground-based and onboard vehicle videos were synchronized with the vehicle kinematic data and biomechanical responses.

The objective of this study was to analyze available anthropomorphic test device (ATD) responses from KARCO rear impact tests and to evaluate an injury predictive model based on crash severity and occupant weight presented by Saczalski et al. (2004). The KARCO tests were carried out with various seat designs. Biomechanical responses were evaluated in speed ranges of 7-12, 13-17, 18-23 and 24-34 mph. For this analysis, all tests with matching yielding and stiff seats and matching occupant size and weight were analyzed for cases without 2nd row occupant interaction. Overall, the test data shows that conventional yielding seats provide a high degree of safety for small to large adult occupants in rear crashes; this data is also consistent with good field performance as found in NASS-CDS. Saczalski et al.'s (2004) predictive model of occupant injury is not correct as there are numerous cases from NASS-CDS that show no or minor injury in the region where serious injury is predicted.

Many published studies have characterized walking and running speeds of young children. However, there is a paucity of data on the cycling speeds of very young children (4 to 5 years old). The purpose of this study was to obtain an estimate of cycling speed for boys and girls both who are learning to ride bicycles (i.e., younger children who still ride with training wheels) and who have already learned to ride bicycles (i.e., slightly older children who no longer use training wheels). A sample of 32 child riders (17 boys, 15 girls; 17 four-year-olds who still ride with training wheels, 15 five-year-olds who do not) were asked to ride a short pre-defined distance at their usual speed when riding, and again at their highest speed. We found that while age and experience can differentiate riders, there were only small differences between boys’ and girls’ speeds in either age group.

The objective of this study was to analyze rear crashes for the risk of serious injury (AIS 3+) by delta V. Rear impacts were analyzed for occupants sitting in front seats of light vehicles. Data was obtained from NASS-CDS for calendar years 1991-2004. Tow-away crashes with ≤15 mph rear delta V account for 67% of rear impacts and 15% of serious injury. Even for crashes <30 mph delta V, the risk for serious injury is only 0.24% (less than 1 per 420 exposed occupants). Risks increase for higher delta Vs. Individual cases in the 1997-2004 NASS-CDS electronic database were reviewed for serious injury in crashes with ≤15 mph delta V and ≥35 mph for light vehicles with calendar year >1996 to better understand injury mechanisms. Nine cases were available where a front-seat occupant was seriously injured in ≤15 mph rear delta V impact. Most cases involved older occupants, some of whom had stenosis of the cervical spine.

As the deployment of automated vehicles (AVs) on public roadways expands, there is growing interest in establishing metrics that can be used to evaluate vehicle operational safety. The set of Operational Safety Assessment (OSA) metrics, that include several safety envelope-type metrics, previously proposed by the Institute of Automated Mobility (IAM) are a step towards this goal. The safety envelope OSA metrics can be computed using kinematics derived from video data captured by infrastructure-based cameras and thus do not require on-board sensor data or vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I) connectivity, though either of the latter data sources could enhance kinematic data accuracy. However, the calculation of some metrics includes certain vehicle-specific parameters that must be assumed or estimated if they are not known a priori or communicated directly by the vehicle.

Vehicle rear structure stiffness has increased as a result of the requirements in the FMVSS 301R, which has also corresponded to an increase in front-row seat strength. This study evaluates the structural behavior and occupant response associated with production-level seats equipped with body-mounted D-rings, and very stiff all-belt-to-seat (ABTS) in a group of 12 deceleration sled tests. A double-haversine pulse with approximately 100-msec duration was used for all tests, with peak accelerations of approximately 19 g for the 40 km/h (25 mph) tests and peak accelerations of 28 g for the 56 km/h (35 mph) test. This generic pulse was designed to represent a severe rear impact crash involving vehicles with stiffer rear structures. The tests compared occupant responses and resulting structural deformation of an original equipment manufacturer (OEM) production-level driver seat from a pickup and a very stiff modified ABTS. Both seating systems were equipped with dual recliners.

This study examined occupant and seat responses with ABTS (all-belts-to-seat) in rear end collisions. Some have claimed improved ABTS seat performance and retention in rear impacts than conventional seats. ABTS seats tend to have higher ultimate yield strengths than conventional yielding seats. Most ABTS seats have asymmetric seatback stiffness due to the need for additional structure on one side of the seat to support shoulder belt loads. Many designs use a single-side recliner and single stanchion that anchors the D-ring. This asymmetry results in twisting of the seatback in severe rear impacts. Seatback twist can allow the occupant to move away from the shoulder belt. Rearward pull tests on ABTS seats also demonstrates seatback twisting and in some cases large drops in load during the test. The added strength and stiffness of ABTS seats lead to designs that are vulnerable to sudden force drops from separated parts.

The Society of Automotive Engineers Light Vehicle Exterior Sound Committee recognizes the value of preserving historical knowledge regarding the standards developed and reviewed by the committee. To memorialize the knowledge gained and lessons learned over the years, the current committee reached out to the chair of the committee during its formative years, Mr. Richard Schumacher, to discuss the rationale and reasoning for many of the early decisions made regarding vehicle sound standards. This work preserves those discussions and relates the history of some of the most commonly used sound level standards. In this paper and presentation, the formation of the committee is discussed, particularly in relation to EPA’s original concern with vehicle noise, as well as the alignment between SAE standards and ISO standards for vehicle noise measurements. The role of the committee is examined, and the review process for SAE vehicle sound standards is explained.

This paper provides an overview of rollover crash safety, including field crash statistics, pre- and rollover dynamics, test procedures and dummy responses as well as a bibliography of pertinent literature. Based on the 2001 Traffic Safety Facts published by NHTSA, rollovers account for 10.5% of the first harmful events in fatal crashes; but, 19.5% of vehicles in fatal crashes had a rollover in the impact sequence. Based on an analysis of the 1993-2001 NASS for non-ejected occupants, 10.5% of occupants are exposed to rollovers, but these occupants experience a high proportion of AIS 3-6 injury (16.1% for belted and 23.9% for unbelted occupants). The head and thorax are the most seriously injured body regions in rollovers. This paper also describes a research program aimed at defining rollover sensing requirements to activate belt pretensioners, roof-rail airbags and convertible pop-up rollbars.

Through testing conducted by multiple facilities, it has been observed that the class of compact two-person vehicles designed exclusively for off-road operation known as Recreational Off-Highway Vehicles (ROVs) exhibit a range of steady-state handling characteristics - including both understeer and understeer transitioning to oversteer as measured in circle-turn tests similar to those set forth in SAEJ266. This handling characteristic is different from on-road passenger cars and light trucks which, under all but heavy loading conditions, exhibit linear range and limit understeer steady-state cornering behavior. Limit understeer is considered desirable for on-road vehicles because it provides a directionally stable and generally predictable control response. In the research presented in this paper, the handling qualities, including controllability, of a ROV which was modified to have different steady-state handling characteristics ranging from understeer to oversteer is examined.

This study analyzed FMVSS 301 rear impact tests with an instrumented rear-seat dummy. NHTSA conducted 15 FMVSS 301 rear crash tests with an instrumented and belted 50th Hybrid III dummy in the rear seat. In series 1, there were three repeat tests with the Jeep Liberty and two others, but no onboard camera view. In series 2, there were 8 tests with 2003-2005 MY (model year) vehicles that had rear head restraints. In series 3, there were two tests with 2004-2005 MY vehicles that did not have rear head restraints. There was an onboard camera view of the rear occupant in series 2 and 3. The dummy responses were evaluated and compared to relevant IARVs (injury assessment reference values). Based on the HRMD, the average height of the rear head restraints was 80.4 ± 3.4 cm (31.6″ ± 1.3″) above the H-point. In series 1, the delta V was 24.4 ± 2.0 km/h (15.2 ± 1.3 mph).