Search Results

For prescribed test conditions, a procedure is given for estimating the response characteristics of an arbitrary chosen standard subject based on the measured responses of subjects with different physical characteristics. Simple model analysis is used to develop the relationships between the subjects' responses and their physical characteristics. This analysis assures dimensional correctness among the critical parameters. The technique is applied to force-time data obtained by the Association Peugeot-Renault for lateral thoracic impacts of cadaver specimens. An averaged, normalized response curve is given for each of two impact conditions. A response corridor is prescribed for each average curve. These corridors can be used to assess the efficacy of various proposed thoracic side impact test devices exposed to similar impact conditions.

The purpose of this study was to investigate approaches evaluating the performance of safety systems in crash tests and by analytical simulations. The study was motivated by the need to consider the adequacy of injury criteria and tolerance levels in FMVSS 208 measuring safety performance of restraint systems and supplements. The study also focused on additional biomechanical criteria and performance measures which may augment FMVSS 208 criteria and alternative ways to evaluate dummy responses rather than by comparison to a tolerance level. Additional analysis was conducted of dummy responses from barrier crash and sled tests to gain further information on the performance of restraint systems. The analysis resulted in a new computer program which determined several motion and velocity criteria from measurements made in crash tests.

A study of air bag deployments has indicated that some occupant injury was “unexpected” and might have been related to loading by the inflating bag. Laboratory studies have found “high” loads on surrogates when they are out of a normal seating position and in the path and against an inflating air bag (out-of-position). The current study evaluated laboratory methods for assessing the significance of deployment loads and the interaction mechanics for the situation of an occupant located near or against a steering wheel mounted air bag. Analysis of the field relevance of the results must consider not only factors relating to the assessment of injury risk, but also exposure frequency. The highest responses for the head, neck, or torso were with that body region aligned with and against the air bag module. The risk of severe injury was low for the head and neck, but high when the torso was against and fully covering the air bag module.

Blunt impacts to the back of the torso can occur in vehicle crashes due to interaction with unrestrained occupants, or cargo in frontal crashes, or intrusion in rear crashes, for example. Six pendulum tests were conducted on the back of an instrumented 50th percentile male Hybrid III ATD (Anthropomorphic Test Device) to determine kinematic and biomechanical responses. The impact locations were centered with the top of a 15-cm diameter impactor at the T1 or at T6 level of the thoracic spine. The impact speed varied from 16 to 24 km/h. Two 24 km/h tests were conducted at the T1 level and showed repeatability of setup and ATD responses. The 16 and 24 km/h tests at T1 and T6 were compared. Results indicated greater head rotation, neck extension moments and neck shear forces at T1 level impacts. For example, lower neck extension was 2.6 times and 3.8 times greater at T1 versus T6 impacts at 16 and 24 km/h, respectively.

Purpose: This study investigates NASS-CDS data on basilar skull fractures by crash type and injury source for various crash scenarios to understand the injury risks, injury mechanisms and contact sources. Methods: 1993-2008 NASS-CDS data was used to study basilar skull fractures in adult front occupants by crash type and injury source. Injury risks were determined using weighted data for occupants with known injury status in 1994+ model year vehicles. In-depth analysis was made of far-side occupants in side impacts and rear crashes using the NASS electronic cases. Results: Basilar skull fractures occur in 0.507 ± 0.059% of rollovers and 0.255 ± 0.025% of side impacts. The lowest risk is in rear impacts at 0.015 ± 0.007%. The most common contact source is the roof, side rails and header (39.0%) in rollovers, the B-pillar (25.8%) in side impacts and head restraint (55.3%) in rear crashes.

The effect of muscular response on occupant dynamics was studied in human volunteers exposed to low level impact acceleration. The study includes identification of muscular response, correlation of electromyographic activity with reaction force, and investigation of the effects of muscular restraint during impact. Human volunteers were subjected to −Gx impact acceleration in a simulated automobile environment while EMG activity of various lower extremity muscles was monitored. The seat and floor pan were supported on load cells which measured all restraining forces. Nine–accelerometer modules and high-speed photography were used to measure kinematics. Identical runs were made with an embalmed cadaver and dummy for comparison. Static EMG and force traces as well as dynamic results for various acceleration levels are presented. Differences between tensed and relaxed states are compared and discussed as to EMG response, force levels, and head kinematics.

A “central” theory for the biomechanics of brain injury is proposed that includes the construct that acceleration of the head, per se, is not the proximate cause of injury. Rather, rapid motion of the skull causes displacement of the hard bony structures of the head against the soft tissues of the brain, which lag in their motion due to inertia and loose coupling to the skull. Relative displacement between brain and skull produces deformation of brain tissue and stretching of bridging veins, which contribute to the tissue-level causes of brain injury. The first step in an accurate interpretation of brain injury risk in dummies involves the measurement of the three-dimensional components of translational and rotational acceleration of the head.

An objective, biomechanically based assessment is made of the risks of life-threatening brain injury of frontal crash test results. Published 15 ms HIC values for driver and right front passenger dummies of frontal barrier crash tests conducted by Transport Canada and NHTSA are analyzed using the brain injury risk curve of Prasad and Mertz. Ninety-four percent of the occupants involved in the 30 mph, frontal barrier compliance tests had risks of life-threatening brain injury less than 5 percent. Only 3 percent had risks greater than 16 percent which corresponds to 15 ms HIC > 1000. For belt restrained occupants without head contact with the interior, the risks of life-threatening brain injury were less than 2 percent. In contrast, for the more severe NCAP test condition, 27 percent of the drivers and 21 percent of the passengers had life-threatening brain injury risks greater than 16 percent.

Side impact tests were conducted on the EUROSID and SID to assess their biofidelity compared to the response requirements of the international Standards Organization. The body regions evaluated were the head, neck, thorax, shoulder, abdomen, and pelvis. Test conditions and data normalization procedures are outlined in the report. Data plots are given which compare the impact response of each dummy to the ISO requirements. The EUROSID gave humanlike responses for most tests involving padded surface impacts, but its responses were not humanlike for rigid surface impacts. Overall, the EUROSID responses were more humanlike than the responses of the SID.

Current finite element models of head impact involve a geometrically simplified fluid-filled shell composed of homogeneous, linear and (visco) elastic materials as the primary surrogate of the human skull and brain. The numerical procedure, which solves the mechanical response to impact, requires and presumes continuity of stress and displacement between elements, a defined boundary condition simulating the neck attachment and a known forcing function. Our critical review of the models discussed, primarily, the technical aspects of the approximations made to simulate the head and the limitations of the proposed analytical tools in predicting the response of biological tissue. The following critical features were identified as major factors which compromised the accuracy and objectivity of the models: - The brain was approximated by a fluid contained in an elastic or rigid shell with no provision for relative motion between the shell and fluid.

The legends of Table 6 and Table 7, found on pages 924 and 925, did not properly reference multiple characters used within the tables.

This technical paper presents the results of biomechanical testing conducted on the ES-2 dummy by the Occupant Safety Research Partnership and Transport Canada. The ES-2 is a production dummy, based on the EuroSID-1 dummy, that was modified to further improve testing capabilities as recommended by users of the EuroSID-1 dummy. Biomechanical response data were obtained by completing a series of drop, pendulum, and sled tests that are outlined in the International Organization of Standardization Technical Report 9790 that describes biofidelity requirements for the midsize adult male side impact dummy. A few of the biofidelity tests were conducted on both sides of the dummy to evaluate the symmetry of its responses. Full vehicle crash tests were conducted to verify if the changes in the EuroSID-1, resulting in the ES-2 design, did improve the dummy's testing capability. In addition to the biofidelity testing, the ES-2 dummy repeatability, reproducibility and durability are discussed.

In 1995, new seat specifications were adopted by GM to provide high retention and improve occupant safety in rear crashes. With more than five years of phase-in of high retention (HR) seats, an analysis of FARS was undertaken to determine the initial field performance of HR seats in preventing fatalities. The 1991-2000 FARS was sorted for fatal rear-impacted vehicles. Using a VIN decoder, GM vehicles with HR front seats were sorted from those with baseline (pre-HR) seats. The fatal rear-impacted vehicle crashes were subdivided into several groups for analysis: 1) single-vehicle rear impacts, 2) two-vehicle rear crashes involving light striking vehicles, and 3) two-vehicle crashes involving heavy trucks and tractor-trailers, and multi-vehicle (3+) rear crashes.

For several decades, there has been a debate on the safety merits of yielding and rigidized (stiff) seats. In 1995, GM adopted requirements for high retention seats and introduced a new generation of yielding seatbacks. These seats have the same stiffness as the yielding seats of the 1980s and early 1990s, but have a strong frame structure and recliners to substantially limit seatback rotation in severe rear crashes. The yielding behavior is given by compliance of the seat suspension across the side structures and an open perimeter frame, which allows the occupant to penetrate into the seatback. The purpose of this study is to compare the energy transfer characteristics and occupant dynamics of yielding and stiff seats in 35 km/h and 16 km/h rear crashes. Based on benchmarking tests, the stiff seatback is defined as one having a 40 kN/m stiffness in rearward loading by a Hybrid dummy.

Purpose: This study presents cases of fracture-dislocation of the thoracic spine in extension during severe rear impacts. The mechanism of injury was investigated. Methods: Four crashes were investigated where a lap-shoulder-belted, front-seat occupant experienced fracture-dislocation of the thoracic spine and paraplegia in a severe rear impact. Police, investigator and medical records were reviewed, the vehicle was inspected and the seat detrimmed. Vehicle dynamics, occupant kinematics and injury mechanisms were determined in this case study. Results: Each case involved a lap-shoulder-belted occupant in a high retention seat with ≻1,700 Nm moment or ≻5.5 kN strength for rearward loading. The crashes were offset rear impacts with 40-56 km/h delta V involving under-ride or override by the impacting vehicle and yaw of the struck vehicle. In each case, the occupant's pelvis was restrained on the seat by the open perimeter frame of the seatback and lap belt.

The Human Mechanical Simulation Subcommittee of the Human Biomechanics and Simulation Standards Committee of the Society of Automotive Engineers took on the task of defining test procedures and associated response guidelines to be used to assess the level of biofidelity of side impact dummies that are being developed. This paper describes the results of their efforts. Guidelines are provided for assessing the levels of biofidelity of dummies that represent 6-, 12-, and 18-month-old infants, 3-, 6-, and 10-year-old children, and of dummies that represent a small female, midsize male and large male adults. These guidelines were developed by normalizing the side impact biofidelity guidelines that were established by the International Standards Organization for the head, neck, shoulder, thorax, abdomen and pelvis of the midsize adult male.

A relationship between the risk of significant thoracic injury (AIS ≥ 3) and Hybrid III dummy sternal deflection for shoulder belt loading is developed. This relationship is based on an analysis of the Association Peugeot-Renault accident data of 386 occupants who were restrained by three-point belt systems that used a shoulder belt with a force-limiting element. For 342 of these occupants, the magnitude of the shoulder belt force could be estimated with various degrees of certainty from the amount of force-limiting band ripping. Hyge sled tests were conducted with a Hybrid III dummy to reproduce the various degrees of band tearing. The resulting Hybrid III sternal deflections were correlated to the frequencies of AIS ≥ 3 thoracic injury observed for similar band tearing in the field accident data. This analysis indicates that for shoulder belt loading a Hybrid III sternal deflection of 50 mm corresponds to a 40 to 50% risk of an AIS ≥ 3 thoracic injury.

The primary purpose of this parameter study was to carefully document occupant dynamics in well-controlled sled tests for comparison with simulated responses from the MVMA-2D analytical model. The test involved a Part 572 dummy exposed to a frontal deceleration while on a bucket seat and restrained by a lap-shoulder belt system. The length of belt webbing was incrementally increased from a snug configuration by as much as 30 cm. The addition of webbing increased the forward excursion, velocity, and acceleration of the head, chest, and hip without affecting the peak tension in the belt segments of the restraint system. Belt tension was identified as a poor measure of the horizontal load on the chest due to significant reaction forces in the lateral and vertical direction at the belt anchorages.

Sled tests were conducted at farside oblique angles of 15°, 45°, and 75° with a Part 572 dummy restrained by a conventional driver lap/shoulder belt system or a preinflated driver inflatable restaint. Occupant dynamics were compared in similar tests where an inboard energy absorbing lateral restraint of the upper torso was or was not used. It can be concluded that the seat wing improves the control of the dummy's dynamics in oblique impacts by directing the occupant's motion more forward into the restraint system, thereby taking more advantage of the restraining potential of the shoulder belt or inflatable restraint in controlling the deceleration of the dummy and enhancing the benefit of the restraint system. However, additional factors associated with the use of a seat wing remain to be investigated including the effect of impact force on the occupant, interaction with out-of-position occupants and comfort/convenience.

In the early 1980's a series of tests was conducted simulating rear-end crashes. The tests demonstrated that a conventional automotive bucket seat adequately retains an unbelted dummy on the seat for rear-end impacts up to 6.4 m/s and 9.5 g severity. For this severity of impact the total rearward rotation of the seatback is less than 60° from the vertical and is associated with a normal acceleration of the dummy's chest into the seatback of up to 10 g. The tangential acceleration of the dummy, which may induce riding up the seat, was generally less than the normal component so that the occupant was prevented from sliding up the deflected seatback. The bucket seat provided adequate containment and control of occupant displacements for each of the initial seatback angles of 9°, 22°, and 35°.