Search Results

Side impact pendulum tests were conducted on Eurosid I and Biosid to assess the biofidelity of the thorax, abdomen and pelvis, and determine injury tolerance levels. Each body region was impacted at 4.5, 6.7, and 9.4 m/s using test conditions which duplicate cadaver impacts with a 15 cm flat-circular 23.4 kg rigid mass. The cadaver database establishes human response and injury risk assessment in side impact. Both dummies showed better biofidelity when compared to the lowest-speed cadaver response corridor. At higher speeds, peak force was substantially higher. The average peak contact force was 1.56 times greater in Biosid and 2.19 times greater in Eurosid 1 than the average cadaver response. The Eurosid I abdomen had the most dissimilar response and lacks biofidelity. Overall, Biosid has better biofidelity than Eurosid I with an average 21% lower peak load and a closer match to the duration of cadaver impact responses for the three body regions.

Thirty-seven SID side impact sled tests were performed using a rigid wall and a padded wall with fourteen different padding configurations. The Thoracic Trauma Index (TTI) and Average Spine Acceleration (ASA) were measured in each test. TTI and ASA were evaluated in terms of their ability to predict injury in identical cadaver tests and in terms of their ability to predict the harm or benefit of padding of different crush strengths. SID ASA predicted the injury seen in WSU-CDC cadaver tests better than SID TTI. SID ASA predicted that padding of greater than 20 psi crush strength is harmful (ASA > 40 g's). SID TTI predicted that padding of greater than 20 psi crush strength is beneficial (TTI < 85 g's). SID TTI predicts the benefit of lower impact velocity. However, SID ASA appears more useful in assessing the harm or benefit of door padding or air bags.

The purpose of this paper is to address abdominal injury and response in cadaver whole body side impacts and abdominal injury risk functions in SID and BIOSID in whole body impacts. Side impact sled tests were performed at Wayne State University using cadavers, SID and BIOSID, with response measured at the shoulder, thorax, abdominal and pelvic levels. The data at the abdominal level are presented here. These data provide further understanding of abdominal tolerance and response in lateral impact and the ability of side impact dummies to predict abdominal injury. In addition, the padding data provide insight into tolerable armrest loads.