Search Results

In rear-end collisions, the seatback provides primary occupant restraint during initial rearward motion of the occupant relative to the vehicle interior as the vehicle is accelerated forward by collision forces. When properly used, seat belts contribute to limiting occupant excursion and loading by working in concert with the seatback, as well as managing forward excursion on rebound after rear-end impacts. A lack of data evaluating the role of seat belt restraint component technology in limiting occupant motion and loading during high-severity rear-end impacts has been identified. This knowledge gap is particularly apparent for occupants who are not seated normally, in position, at the time of impact. Previous static pretensioner deployment tests suggest that different combinations of latch plate design and pretensioner deployment strategies might have different effects on occupant restraint.

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.

The role of seatback strength on occupant motion during rear-end collisions has been a focus of scientific investigation for decades. Despite being an integral component of the occupant restraint system, the role of seat belt restraints and the potential effect of various seat belt restraint system components, like pretensioners and latch plate design, on occupant motion and injury potential during rear-end collisions has received less attention. This study identifies and highlights what is currently understood about the role of seat belt restraints and components in rear-end collisions from the existing literature in detail for the first time. Previous studies that have investigated the role of pretensioning in occupant motion and loading did not provide detailed assessments of pretensioning effects on webbing loads and displacement, nor did they discuss the relationship between pretensioner deployment and latch plate design.

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.

Bollard systems are often used to separate errant vehicular travel from pedestrian and bicycle traffic. Various bollard systems are available for this function, including different installations, functional design, and protection levels. The security-type bollards are used primarily at high-security locations (e.g., military bases and other government installations) around the world. While a protocol exists for testing and rating security bollards, no such protocol or recommended practice or standard currently exists for non-security-type bollards. Non-security, concrete-filled bollards are commonly used by cities/states, local government organizations, and the private sector as “perceived impediments to access” to protect against slow-moving vehicles. There is a general lack of publically available test data to evaluate these non-security bollards and conventional installation procedures.

Occupant kinematics during rollover motor vehicle collisions have been investigated over the past thirty years utilizing Anthropomorphic Test Devices (ATDs) in various test methodologies such as dolly rollover tests, CRIS testing, spin-fixture testing, and ramp-induced rollovers. Recent testing has utilized steer maneuver-induced furrow tripped rollovers to gain further understanding of vehicle kinematics, including the vehicle's pre-trip motion. The current study consisted of two rollover tests utilizing instrumented test vehicles and instrumented ATDs to investigate occupant kinematics and injury response throughout the entire rollover sequences, from pre-trip vehicle motion to the position of rest. The two steer maneuver-induced furrow tripped rollover tests utilized a mid-sized 4-door sedan and a full-sized crew-cab pickup truck. The pickup truck was equipped with seatbelt pretensioners and rollover-activated side curtain airbags (RSCAs).

Extensive testing has been conducted to evaluate both the dynamic response of vehicle structures and occupant protection systems in rollover collisions though the use of Anthropomorphic Test Devices (ATDs). Rollover test methods that utilize a fixture to initiate the rollover event include the SAE2114 dolly, inverted drop tests, accelerating vehicle body buck on a decelerating sled, ramp-induced rollovers, and Controlled Rollover Impact System (CRIS) Tests. More recently, programmable steering controllers have been used with sedans, vans, pickup trucks, and SUVs to induce a rollover, primarily for studying the vehicle kinematics for accident reconstruction applications. The goal of this study was to create a prototypical rollover crash test for the study of vehicle dynamics and occupant injury risk where the rollover is initiated by a steering input over realistic terrain without the constraints of previously used test methods.

It is well known from field accident studies and crash testing that seatbelts provide considerable benefit to occupants in rollover crashes; however, a small fraction of belted occupants still sustain serious and severe neck injuries. The mechanism of these neck injuries is generated by torso augmentation (diving), where the head becomes constrained while the torso continues to move toward the constrained head causing injurious compressive neck loading. This type of neck loading can occur in belted occupants when the head is in contact with, or in close proximity to, the roof interior when the inverted vehicle impacts the ground. Consequently, understanding the nature and extent of head excursion has long been an objective of researchers studying the behavior of occupants in rollovers.

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.

The debate surrounding roof deformation and occupant injury potential has existed in the automotive community for over 30 years. In analysis of real-world rollovers, assessment of roof deformation and occupant compartment space starts with the post-accident roof position. Dynamic movement of the roof structure during a rollover sequence is generally acknowledged but quantification of the dynamic roof displacement has been limited. Previous assessment of dynamic roof deformation has been generally limited to review of the video footage from staged rollover events. Rollover testing for the evaluation of injury potential has typically been studied utilizing instrumented test dummies, on-board and off-board cameras, and measurements of residual crush. This study introduces an analysis of previously undocumented real-time data to be considered in the evaluation of the roof structure's dynamic behavior during a rollover event.

Rollover events involving multiple revolutions are dynamic, high-energy, chaotic events that may result in occupant injury. As such, there is ongoing discussion regarding methods that may reduce injury potential during rollovers. It has been suggested that increasing a vehicle's roof strength will mitigate injury potential. However, numerous experimental studies and published field accident data analyses have failed to show a causal relationship between roof deformation and occupant injury. The current study examines occupant kinematics and injury mechanisms during dolly rollover testing of a vehicle with a high roof strength-to-weight ratio (SWR = 4.8). String potentiometers and high-speed video cameras were used to capture and quantify the dynamic roof motion throughout the rollover. Instrumented Anthropomorphic Test Devices (ATDs) in the front occupant positions allowed for the assessment of occupant kinematics, loading, and injury mechanics during the rollover event.

Previous literature has shown that serious neck injury can occur during rollover events, even for restrained occupants, when the occupant's head contacts the vehicle interior during a roof-to-ground impact or contacts the ground directly through an adjacent window opening. Confusion about the mechanism of these injuries can result when the event is viewed from an accelerated reference frame such as an onboard camera. Researchers generally agree that the neck is stressed as a result of relative motion between head and torso but disagree as to the origin of the neck loading. This paper reviews the principles underlying the analysis of rollover impacts to establish a physical basis for understanding the source of disagreement and demonstrates the usefulness of physical testing to illustrate occupant impact dynamics. A series of rollover impacts has been performed using the Controlled Rollover Impact System (CRIS) with both production vehicles and vehicles with modified roof structures.

During a rollover accident the position of an occupant within a vehicle at the time of vehicle-to-ground contact affects the occupant's injury potential and injury mechanisms. During rollovers, the accelerations developed during the airborne phases cause an occupant to move away from the vehicle's center of mass towards the perimeter of the vehicle. The occupant is already in contact with vehicle structures during upper vehicle structure-to-ground impacts. The location and extent of the occupant-to-vehicle contacts and the times and locations at which the contacts occur depend upon a variety of factors including occupant size, initial position in the vehicle, restraint status, vehicle geometry, and rollover accident parameters. Onboard and offboard video of existing dolly rollover studies, specifically the “Malibu” studies, were examined to quantify the motion of the occupants' heads and determine the timing and locations of head contacts to the vehicle perimeter.

In this study, the occupant containment characteristics of automotive laminated safety glass in side window applications was evaluated through two full-scale, full-vehicle dolly rollover crash tests. The dolly rollover crash tests were performed on sport utility vehicles equipped with heat-strengthened laminated safety glass in the side windows in order to: (1) evaluate the capacity of laminated side window safety glass to contain unrestrained occupants during rollover, (2) analyze the kinematics associated with unrestrained occupants during glazing interaction and ejection, and (3) to identify laminated side window safety glass failure modes. Dolly rollovers were performed on a 1998 Ford Expedition and a 2004 Volvo XC90 at a nominal speed of 43 mph, with unbelted Hybrid II Anthropomorphic Test Devices (ATDs) positioned in the outboard seating positions.

Occupant ejection may occur during planar and rollover collisions. These ejections can be associated with serious/fatal injuries. Occasionally, occupants will allege that they were wearing a seatbelt immediately before the ejection occurred. Some accident investigators have opined that a seatbelt became disengaged due to collision forces and/or occupant interactions, leaving the occupant essentially unrestrained and exposed to ejection from the vehicle. We present three case studies of collisions with documented seatbelt disengagement at or during the collision, as well as three controlled tests. The release of the seatbelt was always associated with dire consequences for the occupant's outboard upper extremity. Evidence of seatbelt webbing interaction with the occupant was always evident, and the interaction of the belt with the vehicle interior trim was also apparent.

While previous studies have recognized and demonstrated the upward and outward occupant motion that occurs during the airborne phase of rollover and estimated the resulting head excursion using static and dynamic approaches, the effect of roll rate on restrained occupant head excursion has not been comprehensively evaluated. Moffatt and colleagues recently examined head excursions for near- and far-side occupants resulting from steady-state roll velocities using a laboratory fixture and both Hybrid III anthropomorphic test dummies (ATD) and human volunteers. To expand upon that study, a MADYMO computational model of a rolling airborne vehicle was developed to more thoroughly evaluate the effects of roll rate on occupant kinematics and head excursion. The interior structure of the vehicle used by Moffatt et al. was modeled, and the ATD kinematics observed in that experimental study were used to validate the computational models of the current study.

Three rollcaged and three production roof vehicles were exposed to matched-pair rollover impacts using the Controlled Rollover Impact System (CRIS). The roof-to-ground contacts were representative of severe impacts in previous rollover testing and real world rollovers. The seat belted dummies measured nearly identical head impacts and neck loads with or without the rollcage, despite significant roof crush in the production roof vehicles. Roof crush had no measurable influence on the severity of the head accelerations and neck loads.

To date, the most commonly used rollover test device has been the rollover dolly described in the SAE J2114 recommended practice, which is commonly referred to as the “208 rollover dolly.” However, for a number of reasons, the rollover dolly has never been accepted as a standard for rollover testing. One of the primary limitations of the rollover dolly has been the controllability of the first roof-to-ground impact. A new rollover test device, known as the Controlled Rollover Impact System (CRIS), was presented at the SAE Congress in March 2001. This device allows the roll, pitch, and yaw angles, roll rate, translational velocity, and drop height of the vehicle to be specified for the first roof-to-ground impact. One objective of the current study was to compare the vehicle dynamics produced by each test device using an Econoline-350 van as the test vehicle.

An estimated fifty percent of automobile accident fatalities occur at night. When investigating these accidents, the question often arises as to whether the lamps were on or off at impact. One approach to answering this question is to inspect the lamp for damage evidence that can be compared to research or previous investigations. Articles addressing automotive lamp examination can be found in the literature dating back prior to 1960; however, only a relatively few of these articles have incorporated experimental work. The articles that have experimentally studied the shock load characteristics of automotive tail lamps have: 1) based conclusions on acceleration data far removed from the lamps, or 2) have made assumptions as to what the “actual” accelerations are at the tail lamp itself.

Considerable research has been dedicated to establishing the amount of energy absorbed during different types of collisions. In the early 1960’s, motor vehicle manufacturers began conducting barrier crash tests consistent with SAE suggested procedures. This allowed investigators to establish the amount of energy that went into metal deformation in the tested vehicle. Over the years, there have been many advances in establishing the amount of crush energy in a particular accident, including the development of several computer programs. Four two-vehicle, single-moving rear-impact crash tests were conducted to compare the effect of override and offset. Override comparisons were made using a moving, rigid barrier or a heavy truck as the impactor, and each pair of tests having either offset or full rear engagement. All four tests were conducted using a like make and model four-door sedan as the target vehicle. Each test had the same available crush energy for the car.