Search Results

The appropriateness of the set of eight frontal stiffness coefficients used by the CRASH3 program to estimate vehicle deformation energy (and to subsequently derive estimates of vehicle delta-V) is examined. This examination consists of constructing so-called CRASH energy plots based on 402 frontal fixed barrier impact tests contained in the NHTSA's Vehicle Test Center Data Base (VTCDB) digital tape file. It is concluded that the use of category coefficients within the CRASH3 program can result in large delta-V errors, reaffirming the inappropriateness of this program for use in individual accident reconstructions. The use of the CRASH3 category stiffness coefficients is seen to generally overestimate vehicle energy absorption for vehicles with small amounts of frontal crush and to underestimate vehicle energy absorption for vehicles sustaining large crush.

The relatively rare occurrence of injury or fatality in fuel-fed fires has received considerable attention in automotive safety rulemaking and products liability litigation. The literature related to fatalities associated with fire is confirmed by recent FARS data, and there are no reliable field data which confirm a need for further injury-reducing effect related to FMVSS 301. NHTSA has acknowledged this by removing crash fire rulemaking from its priorities plan. The police-reported crash fire data now available must be supplemented with in-depth investigation by trained teams before informed judgements can be made regarding further safety improvements with respect to crash fire injury.

The NHTSA notices of proposed rulemaking on side impact protection have focused worldwide attention on one of the most difficult and frustrating efforts in automobile crash safety. Traditional vehicle design has evolved obvious structural contrasts between the side of the struck vehicle and the front of the striking vehicle. Protection of near-side occupants from intruding door structure is a most perplexing engineering challenge. Much useful and insightful engineering work has been done in conjunction with NHTSA's proposed rulemaking. However, there are many major engineering issues which demand further definition before reasonable side impact rulemaking test criteria can be finalized. This paper reviews recent findings which characterize the human factors, biomechanics, and occupant position envelope of the typical side impact crash victim.

An understanding of fundamental kinematic relationships among the several deforming surfaces of side-impacting bullet and target vehicle, occupant protection system and occupant is fundamental to rational design of crash injury counter-measures. Unfortunately, such understanding is not easy to achieve. Side impacts address the full range of bodily contacts and injuries in a way that challenges analysis. Each bodily area and organ requires individual consideration for adequate injury protection. This paper presents a simplified graphical analysis of occupant kinematics and injury exposure applied specifically to the NHTSA-proposed crabbed moving deformable barrier (MDB) compartment impact, as described in NHTSA's Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) for Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 214, issued in January of 1988 [NHTSA 1988 (1)*]. Projections are offered regarding the potential of thoracic injury counter-measures.

Collision Safety Engineering, Inc. (CSE), has developed a test prototype system to protect occupants during lateral impacts. It is an inflatable system that offers the potential of improved protection from thoracic, abdominal and pelvic injury by moving an impact pad into the occupant early in the crash. Further, it shows promise for head and neck protection by deployment of a headbag that covers the major target areas of B-pillar, window space, and roofrail before head impact. Preliminary static and full-scale crash tests suggest the possibility of injury reduction in many real-world crashes, although much development work remains before the production viability of this concept can be established. A description of the system and its preliminary testing is preceded by an overview of side impact injury and comments on the recent NHTSA Rule Making notices dealing with side-impact injury.

A crash pulse representative of the accident event is often requested in addition to the reconstructed speed, deltaV, and PDOF. One approach to crash pulse generation is to scale available test data to the accident condition. Scaling formulas for time and acceleration are derived based upon commonly available accident reconstruction information from the crush profiles, closing speed, and vehicle deltaV. Scaling is based upon the compression phase of the crash pulse. A crash test similar to the accident may not be readily available unless a crash test is performed that is designed to represent a specific accident. Available test results may not reproduce the accident but may approximate it in several important aspects. In such situations it is necessary to scale a reconstructed crash pulse from the most representative test available based upon the test parameters and the reconstruction estimates.

Nine crash tests were conducted at various speeds on three vehicles in three locations under conditions that resulted in similar damage. The objective was to study the differences in crash pulse, deltaV, crush depth, and impact location with change in closing velocity from 20 to 55 mph. Three equal-weight Nissan Sentra vehicles were impacted in the front, rear, and side by an associated narrow object impact device. The three impactors were identically shaped, flat-faced, one-foot wide, and rigid; but each was designed to have a different weight (light, moderate, and heavy weight). The heavy, moderate, and light weight impactors collided with their associated test vehicle at low, medium, and high impacting speeds, respectively, in order to produce damage corresponding to a 20 mph BEV (Barrier Equivalent Velocity) in all nine tests. Impacts at the same location on the three vehicles produced nearly identical damage yet substantially differed in deltaV.

Damage analysis methods in accident reconstruction use an estimate of vehicle stiffness together with measured crush to calculate crush energy, closing speed, and vehicle delta-V. Stiffness is generally derived from barrier crash test data. The accident being reconstructed often involves one or more conditions for which vehicle stiffness is not well defined by existing crash tests. Massive moving barrier (MMB) testing is introduced as a tool to obtain additional and accident specific stiffness coefficients applicable for reconstruction. The MMB impacts a stationary vehicle of similar structure as the accident vehicle under accident-specific conditions like impact location, angle, over-ride / under-ride, offset and damage energy. A rigid or deformable structure is mounted to the front of the MMB, representative of the impacting structure in the accident. Four illustrative tests are presented.

Vehicle accident reconstruction methods based on deformation energy are argued to be an increasingly valuable tool to the accident reconstructionist, provided reliable data, reasonable analysis techniques, and sound engineering judgement accompany their use. The evolution of the CRASH model of vehicle structural response and its corresponding stiffness coefficients are reviewed. It is concluded that the deformation energy for an accident vehicle can be estimated using the CRASH model provided that test data specific to the accident vehicle is utilized. Published stiffness coefficients for vehicle size categories are generally not appropriate. For the purpose of estimating vehicle deformation energy, a straight-forward methodology is presented which consists of applying the results of staged crash tests. The process of translating crush profiles to estimates of vehicle deformation energies and velocities is also discussed.

Given two or more photos of an accident vehicle (non-stereo pairs such as police photos) an estimate of the deformation (crush) of the vehicle may be obtained by application of camera reverse-projection, using two or more cameras and an exemplar vehicle. A single camera technique familiar to accident scene investigators is modified for this application. The methodology is described within the context of an experiment comparing results obtained by camera reverse projection to actual measured crush. A method of displaying crush results known as “displacement vectors” is presented and examples are illustrated. The technique has been found useful for measurement of 3-dimensional crush.

The issues of front seat energy absorption and seat belt effectiveness are investigated first through the review of prior experimental and analytical studies of rear impact dynamics. These prior studies indicate that the current energy absorption characteristic of seats is a safety benefit. Prior efforts to construct a rigidized seat indicate that such designs are likely to be impractical due to excessive weight and cost. Additionally, these studies indicate that seat belts provide an important safety function in rear impacts. Static tests of production seats were conducted, added to an existing data base, and analyzed to better understand the strength and energy absorbing characteristics of production seats. Crash test results from the New Car Assessment Program as well as earlier test programs were analyzed to describe the response of occupants and seats in rear impact and the protective function of seat belts in such collisions.

The determination of appropriate friction coefficient values is an important aspect of accident reconstruction. Tire-roadway friction values are highly dependent on a variety of physical factors. Factors such as tire design, side force limitations, road surface wetness, vehicle speed, and load shifting require understanding if useful reconstruction calculations are to be made. Tabulated experimental friction coefficient data are available, and may be improved upon in many situations by simple testing procedures. This paper presents a technical review of basic concepts and principles of friction as they apply to accident reconstruction and automobile safety. A brief review of test measurement methods is also presented, together with simple methods of friction measurement to obtain more precise values in many situations. This paper also recommends coefficient values for reconstruction applications other than tire- roadway forces.

Based upon a review of the literature and new test data, the human and vehicle factors leading to head-to-roof contact in rollovers are quantified and illustrated. Vehicle design countermeasures and suggested areas of research are presented. Higher and stronger roofs and improved restraints must be analyzed as a system to evaluate the potential benefits in rollovers.

Wheels and tires on vehicles, are often directly (or indirectly) involved in collisions with other vehicles or fixed objects. In this study, the effects of the pneumatic tire and rim, as it contributes to a dynamic collision, was isolated and studied. A total of 15 mounted tires of various common sizes were selected to conduct 35 dynamic impact tests into the flat face of an instrumented concrete barrier. The tires and rims used in the tests ranged from heavy truck, light truck, down to common passenger vehicle tires. Each of the 15 tires and rims were impact tested individually to failure in order to explore the dynamic response and performance of pneumatic tires in collisions. Of the 35 tests, 28 were conducted with a single tire and rim configuration and 7 tests were conducted simulating a dual truck tire configuration. It was determined that the coefficient of restitution for 22 of the tire impacts into the rigid flat faced barrier were remarkably similar, around 0.9 ± 0.1.

The CRASH3 computer program, a well known and useful tool in accident reconstruction, is shown to be innaccurate by comparison with car-to-car crash test data. Claims for accuracy of about 10 percent cannot be validated. Both the impact model and the damage only model yield results which are in error. Cases involving error well in excess of 20 percent are demonstrated. These inaccuracies are due primarily to the omission of terms in the formulation of the energy equation and to the sensitivity of the solution to the input estimate of principle-direction-of-force.

Objective: This study analyzes rear sled tests with a 95th% male and 5th% female Hybrid III dummy in various seating positions on ABTS (All Belt to Seat) seats in severe rear impact tests. Dummy interactions with the deforming seatback and upper body extension around the seat frame are considered. Methods: The 1st series involved an open sled fixture with a Sebring ABTS seat at 30 mph rear delta V. A 95th% Hybrid III dummy was placed in four different seating positions: 1) normal, 2) leaning inboard, 3) leaning forward and inboard, and 4) leaning forward and outboard. The 2nd series used a 5th% female Hybrid III dummy in a Grand Voyager body buck at 25 mph rear delta V. The dummy was leaned forward and inboard on a LeSabre ABTS or Voyager seat. The 3rd series used a 5th% female Hybrid III dummy in an Explorer body buck at 26 mph rear delta V. The dummy was leaned forward and inboard on a Sebring ABTS or Explorer seat.

Rollover accidents are responsible for a significant percentage of crash injuries. Increasing seat belt restraint use is the most effective way to reduce rollover injuries. Injuries to restrained occupants are also of interest. It has been suggested that head/neck injuries are caused by roof crush, and that modification to roof structures and seat belt systems would lead to a substantial reduction in severe rollover injuries. Field accident data and rollover testing are used to evaluate the relationship between roof crush, seat belt design, and severe rollover injuries.

The relationship between occupant crash injury and occupant compartment intrusion is seen in the perspectives of the velocity-time analysis and the NCSS statistical data for two important accident injury modes, lateral and rollover collisions. Restraint system use, interior impacts, and vehicle design features are considered. Side impact intrusion is analyzed from physical principles and further demonstrated by reference to staged collisions and NCSS data. Recent publications regarding findings of the NCSS data for rollovers, as well as the NCSS data itself, are reviewed as a background for kinematic findings regarding occupant injury in rollovers with roof crush.

Occupant simulation models have been used to study trends or specific design changes in “typical” accident modes such as frontal, side, rear, and rollover. This paper explores the usage of the Articulated Total Body Program (ATB) as an accident reconstruction tool. The importance of model validation is discussed. Specific areas of concern such as the contact model, force-deflection data, occupant parameters, restraint system models, head/neck loadings, padding, and intrusion are discussed in the context of accident reconstruction.

Understanding occupant kinematics is an important part of accident reconstruction, particularly with respect to injury causation. Injuries are generally sustained as the occupant interacts with the vehicle interior surfaces and is rapidly accelerated to the struck component's post-impact velocity. This paper describes some methods for assessing occupant kinematics in a collision, and discusses their limitations. A useful technique is presented which is based on free-body analysis and can be used to establish an occupant's path of motion relative to the vehicle, locate the point of occupant contact, and determine the occupant's velocity relative to that contact location.