Search Results

A previous paper on this topic presented the use of design of experiments (DOE) to evaluate the sensitivity of vehicle dynamics simulation of the postimpact motion of a vehicle that included high initial rotational rates. That investigation involved only one software package and thus was confined to one simulation model for the purposes of developing and refining the analysis method rather than including a variety of simulation models for broader application. This paper expands the application of the method to investigate the comparative behavior and sensitivity of several other vehicle dynamic simulation models commonly used in the field of crash reconstruction. The software packages included in the studies presented in this paper are HVE (SIMON and EDSMAC4), PC-Crash and VCRware. This paper will present the results of the study, conducted using DOE, involving these models.

An important component of the process of the reconstruction of a vehicle crash involves the modeling of the motion of the vehicle(s) before and after a collision. Depending on the conditions, this motion might be modeled using a vehicle dynamics simulation program. In the simulated dynamics of vehicle motion, the tire forces are the predominant means by which the path of the vehicle is determined, with aerodynamic loads being the other force acting on the vehicle. Recent literature on this topic investigated the effect of the steer angle of the front wheels on the postimpact trajectory of a light vehicle for a large initial angular velocity. This paper looks more broadly at the modeling of light vehicle postimpact motion using vehicle dynamics simulation but for a wider range of factors. Design of experiments (DOE) is used to rank the effect of various physical factors of vehicle postimpact motion.

This paper presents a reconstruction technique in which nonlinear optimization is used in combination with an impact model to quickly and efficiently find a solution to a given set of parameters and conditions to reconstruct a collision. These parameters and conditions correspond to known or prescribed collision information (generally from the physical evidence) and can be incorporated into the optimized collision reconstruction technique in a variety of ways including as a prescribed value, through the use of a constraint, as part of a quality function, or possibly as a combination of these means. This reconstruction technique provides a proper, effective, and efficient means to incorporate data collected by Event Data Recorders (EDR) into a crash reconstruction. The technique is presented in this paper using the Planar Impact Mechanics (PIM) collision model in combination with the Solver utility in Microsoft Excel.

Little experimental data have been reported in the crash reconstruction literature regarding high-speed sideswipe collisions. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) conducted a series of high-speed, small overlap, vehicle-to-barrier and vehicle-to-vehicle crash tests for which the majority resulted in sideswipe collisions. A sideswipe collision is defined in this paper as a crash with non-zero, final relative tangential velocity over the vehicle-to-barrier or vehicle-to-vehicle contact surface; that is, sliding continues throughout the contact duration. Using analysis of video from 50 IIHS small overlap crash tests, each test was modeled using planar impact mechanics to determine which were classified as sideswipes and which were not. The test data were further evaluated to understand the nature of high-speed, small overlap, sideswipe collisions and establish appropriate parameter ranges that can aid in the process of accident reconstruction.

This research investigates the uncertainty in the calculation of the change in velocity, ΔV, and the crush energy, EC, due to variations in the computed values of crush stiffness coefficients, A and B (d₀ and d₁), and due to variations in the measurements of the residual crush, Ci, i = 1,...6, using the CRASH3 damage algorithm. An understanding of the nature of such uncertainties is of particular importance as both the ΔV and EC are frequently used as inputs to reconstruction methods and become variations in the reconstruction process. These variations lead to uncertainties in the results of the reconstruction which are generally the preimpact speed of one or both of the vehicles involved in the collision. This paper consists of three parts. The first investigates the uncertainty associated with the calculation of the stiffness coefficients A and B (d₀ and d₁).

Various vehicle dynamic simulation software programs have been developed for use in reconstructing accidents. Typically these are used to analyze and reconstruct preimpact and postimpact vehicle motion. These simulation programs range from proprietary programs to commercially available packages. While the basic theory behind these simulations is Newton's laws of motion, some component modeling techniques differ from one program to another. This is particularly true of the modeling of tire force mechanics. Since tire forces control the vehicle motion predicted by a simulation, the tire mechanics model is a critical feature in simulation use, performance and accuracy. This is particularly true for accident reconstruction applications where vehicle motions can occur over wide ranging kinematic wheel conditions. Therefore a thorough understanding of the nature of tire forces is a necessary aspect of the proper formulation and use of a vehicle dynamics program.

In the vast majority of impacts involving light vehicles, traditional impulse-momentum collision models can be used to analyze the mechanics of two colliding vehicles. However, these models cannot handle the multiple degrees of freedom associated with articulated (pin-connected) vehicles. In addition, collisions involving one or two articulated vehicles may not satisfy the basic assumptions of these traditional collisions models. In particular, the assumption that impulses of external forces (such as tire-road friction) are negligible compared to the impulse developed over the crash surface may not be valid. The large masses, long dimensions, the presence of the pinned joint, or all of these factors, may necessitate special considerations and more flexible model capabilities. This paper lists the assumptions that underlie the application of the principle of impulse and momentum to a planar collision between rigid bodies.

Residual damage caused during a collision has been related through the use of crush energy models and impact mechanics directly to the collision energy loss and vehicle velocity changes, ΔV1 and ΔV2. The simplest and most popular form of this crush energy relationship is a linear one and has been exploited for the purpose of accident reconstruction in the well known CRASH3 crush energy algorithm. Nonlinear forms of the relationship between residual crush and collision energy also have been developed. Speed reconstruction models that use the CRASH3 algorithm use point mass impact mechanics, a concept of equivalent mass, visual estimation of the Principle Direction of Force (PDOF) and a tangential correction factor to relate total crush energy to the collision ΔV values. Most algorithms also are based on an assumption of a common velocity at the contact area between the vehicles.

The force distributed over the contact patch between a tire and a road surface is typically modeled in component form for dynamic simulations. The two components in the plane of the contact patch are the braking, or traction force, and the steering, or side or cornering force. A third force distributed over the contacts patch is the normal force, perpendicular to the road surface. The two tangential components in the plane of the road are usually modeled separately since they depend primarily on independent parameters, wheel slip and sideslip. Mathematical expressions found in the literature for each component include exponential functions, piecewise linear functions and the Bakker-Nyborg-Pacejka equations, among others. Because braking and steering frequently occur simultaneously and their resultant tangential force is limited by friction, the two components must be properly combined for a full range of the wheel slip and sideslip parameters.

The algorithm used in the third version of the Calspan Reconstruction of Accident Speeds on the Highway (CRASH3) and planar impact mechanics are both used to calculate energy loss and velocity changes of vehicle collisions. They (intentionally) solve the vehicle collision problem using completely different approaches, however, they should produce comparable results. One of the differences is that CRASH3 uses a correction factor for estimating the collision energy loss due to tangential effects whereas planar impact mechanics uses a common velocity condition in the tangential direction. In this paper, a comparison is made between how CRASH3 computes the energy loss of a collision and how this same energy loss is determined by planar impact mechanics.

Recently an increase in interest has occurred in automotive powerplant mounting. Evidence of this growth is the increase in the number of publications on the topic. The majority of this renewed interest has come from predicting and understanding the response of hydraulic engine mounts and the application of optimization techniques to the problem of powertrain vibration isolation, and occasionally to the combination of these two topics. However, it appears that these analytical techniques have been sufficiently developed and correlated to actual powertrain systems to have found widespread use by the automotive manufacturers. Subject to timing and packaging constraints, the more traditional mounting system design strategies are typically utilized. These strategies include natural frequency placement, torque axis mounting and elastic axis mounting. This paper presents a comprehensive review of these three strategies including a discussion of the assumptions associated with each method.

Hydraulic engine mounts are used in the automotive industry because they offer frequency and amplitude response characteristics superior to the conventional elastomeric engine mount. This response is well established but is not fully understood. Numerous articles have attempted to explain the complex behavior of these mounts using linear theory. This paper uses the same linear models developed in previous papers, but offers a more fundamental explanation of the system response using these previously derived two degree of freedom models. In addition, the source of engine vibrations and their corresponding frequency ranges are explained in detail. Techniques borrowed from control systems are used to interpret system response and terminology used in the automotive industry to describe the behavior of hydraulic engine mounts is clarified. Validation of the two degree of freedom model is made by comparison with experimental data.

Automobile accident reconstruction and vehicle collision analysis techniques generally separate vehicle collisions into three different phases: pre-impact, impact and post-impact. This paper will concern itself exclusively with the modeling of the impact phase, typically defined as the time the vehicles are in contact. Historically, two different modeling techniques have been applied to the impact of vehicles. Both of these techniques employ the impulse-momentum formulation of Newton's Second Law. The first relies exclusively on this principle coupled with friction and restitution to completely model the impact. The second method combines impulse-momentum with a relationship between crush geometry and energy loss to model the impact. Both methods ultimately produce the change in velocity. ΔV, and other pertinent information about a collision.