Search Results

Ford Motor Company introduced the automotive industry’s first second row inflatable seatbelt system in 2011. The system is currently available in the outboard seating positions of the second row of several Ford and Lincoln models. An important consideration for this system is the interaction with child restraint systems (CRS) when it is used to install a CRS or used in conjunction with belt position booster. A novel test methodology to assess the interaction of CRS with Ford and Lincoln inflatable seatbelts through frontal impact sled tests is explained. Details of test methods including construction of additional fixtures and hardware are highlighted. This procedure is designed to enable test labs capable of running Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 213 testing to adapt this test method, with minimal fabrication, by utilizing existing test benches.

Ford Motor Company introduced the inflatable seatbelt system in 2011 and the system is now available in the second row of several Ford and Lincoln models. An important consideration is the interaction of the inflatable seatbelt system with child restraint systems (CRS). A comprehensive series of frontal impact sled tests, using a standardized test method, was conducted to compare the performance of rear-facing-only CRS installed using an inflatable seatbelt to the same CRS installed using a standard seatbelt. CRS models from several manufacturers in the North American market were tested both with and without their bases. CRABI 12 month old or Hybrid III 3 year old anthropomorphic test devices (ATD) were restrained in the CRS. The assessment included the ability to achieve a satisfactory installation with the inflatable seatbelt, comparisons of ATD and CRS kinematics, CRS system integrity, and comparisons of ATD responses.

NHTSA estimates that more than half of the lives saved (168,524) in car crashes between 1960 and 2002 were due to the use of seat belts. Nevertheless, while seat belts are vital to occupant crash protection, safety researchers continue efforts to further enhance the capability of seat belts in reducing injury and fatality risk in automotive crashes. Examples of seat belt design concepts that have been investigated by researchers include inflatable, 4-point, and reverse geometry seat belts. In 2011, Ford Motor Company introduced the first rear seat inflatable seat belts into production vehicles. A series of tests with child and small female-sized Anthropomorphic Test Devices (ATD) and small, elderly female Post Mortem Human Subjects (PMHS) was performed to evaluate interactions of prototype inflatable seat belts with the chest, upper torso, head and neck of children and small occupants, from infants to young adolescents.

This study evaluated the biomechanical performance of a rear-seat inflatable seatbelt system and compared it to that of a 3-point seatbelt system, which has a long history of good real-world performance. Frontal-impact sled tests were conducted with Hybrid III anthropomorphic test devices (ATDs) and with post mortem human subjects (PMHS) using both restraint systems and a generic rear-seat configuration. Results from these tests demonstrated: a) reduction in forward head excursion with the inflatable seatbelt system when compared to that of a 3-point seatbelt and; b) a reduction in ATD and PMHS peak chest deflections and the number of PMHS rib fractures with the inflatable seatbelt system and c) a reduction in PMHS cervical-spine injuries, due to the interaction of the chin with the inflated shoulder belt. These results suggest that an inflatable seatbelt system will offer additional benefits to some occupants in the rear seats.

There has been much debate over “whiplash”-induced temporomandibular joint (TMJ) dysfunction following low-speed, rear-end automobile collisions. While several authors have reported TMJ injury based on case studies post collision, there has been little biomechanical evidence showing that rear-end impact was the primary cause of such injury. The purpose of this study was to measure the relative translation between the upper and lower incisors in cadavers subjected to low-speed, rear-end impacts. High-speed x-ray images used for this analysis were reported previously for the analysis of cadaveric cervical spine kinematics during low-speed, rear-end impacts. The cadavers were positioned at various seatback angles and body postures, producing an overall picture of various seating scenarios.