Search Results

This paper reports injury load HYGE sled test data and Madymo crash simulation data, all with a Hybrid III 50%ile male dummy. Six frontal crashes and two rear impacts were performed to determine the effect that the CBM Seat has on injury load data in direct comparison to the original equipment seats (OES), The test series began with a frontal 12g sled crash pulse with CBM Seats less pretensioners compared to OES seats with pretensioners. It shows that the CBM seat reduced the maximum head trajectory by 10°, neck Moment by 48% and femur loads by 60%. In frontal 20 g sled crash pulses without belt pretensioners, the CBM seats yielded 40% lower forces (-2kN to −1.2kN) compared with pretensioners cases. While with pretensioners, they showed a 42% reduction in HIC values (187 to 107). In a Madymo 30g crash with CBM, belt and airbag, the HIC was 30% lower than with OES seats, from 478 to 368 with CBM.

The Counter Balanced Motion (CBM) design utilizes the seat cushion as a crash safety restraint. Just as the air bag becomes a cushion to absorb deceleration forces on the upper body, the seat cushion is used to absorb deceleration forces on the lower body. Crash simulations of the CBM yield a 33 to 70% reduction in injury loads to the chest and legs. This brings applied forces below bone and joint failure loads. In addition, impact loads applied to the lower leg become negligible by retracing the feet away from the toe pan and Head Injury Criterion values are reduced 13 to 30%. The appearance and posture alignment of seats equipped with the CBM mechanism are identical to current production seats. Figure 1. This paper describes the CBM Seat mechanics, design and function. The functional capabilities are verified by three different, independently performed approaches: 1. dynamic analysis, 2. sled tests, and 3. Madymo crash simulations.