Filtern
Erscheinungsjahr
Dokumenttyp
Schlagworte
- Deutschland (10)
- Germany (10)
- Conference (9)
- Injury (9)
- Konferenz (9)
- Verletzung (9)
- Anfahrversuch (8)
- Safety (8)
- Sicherheit (8)
- Frontalzusammenstoß (7)
- Head on collision (7)
- Child (6)
- Fahrzeug (6)
- Impact test (veh) (6)
- Kind (6)
- Vehicle (6)
- Bewertung (5)
- Compatibility (5)
- Evaluation (assessment) (5)
- Kompatibilität (5)
- Passives Sicherheitssystem (5)
- Schweregrad (Unfall, Verletzung) (5)
- Severity (accid, injury) (5)
- Unfall (5)
- Unfallrekonstruktion (5)
- Airbag (4)
- Benutzung (4)
- Insasse (4)
- Passive safety system (4)
- Use (4)
- Vehicle occupant (4)
- Accident (3)
- Analyse (math) (3)
- Analysis (math) (3)
- Error (3)
- Fehler (3)
- Interview (3)
- Reconstruction (accid) (3)
- Risk (3)
- Spinal column (3)
- Test (3)
- Versuch (3)
- Wirbelsäule (3)
- Accident reconstruction (2)
- Biomechanics (2)
- Biomechanik (2)
- Brustkorb (2)
- Car (2)
- Collision (2)
- Deformable barrier (impact test) (2)
- Deformation (2)
- Deformierbare Barriere (Anpralltest) (2)
- Fahrzeugsitz (2)
- Impact test (2)
- Improvement (2)
- Installation (2)
- Method (2)
- On the spot accident investigation (2)
- Pkw (2)
- Prüfverfahren (2)
- Risiko (2)
- Schlag (2)
- Schweregrad (Unfall (2)
- Seat (veh) (2)
- Shock (2)
- Simulation (2)
- Statistics (2)
- Statistik (2)
- Test method (2)
- Thorax (2)
- Untersuchung am Unfallort (2)
- Verbesserung (2)
- Verfahren (2)
- Verformung (2)
- Verletzung) (2)
- Zusammenstoß (2)
- accident (2)
- injury) (2)
- Adult (1)
- Age (1)
- Air bag (1)
- Air bag (restraint system) (1)
- Alter (1)
- Baumusterzulassung (1)
- Befreiung (Bergung) (1)
- Behinderter (1)
- Bemessung (1)
- Body (car) (1)
- Cause (1)
- Crash victim (1)
- Cyclist (1)
- Database (1)
- Datenbank (1)
- Dauer (1)
- Design (overall design) (1)
- Digital model (1)
- Disablement (1)
- Driver (1)
- Driving stability (1)
- Erste Hilfe (1)
- Erwachsener (1)
- Extrication (1)
- Fahrer (1)
- Fahrstabilität (1)
- Fatality (1)
- Fear (1)
- Finite element method (1)
- First aid (1)
- Forschungsarbeit (1)
- Forschungsbericht (1)
- Fracture (bone) (1)
- Furcht (1)
- Fußgänger (1)
- Gefahr (1)
- Gewicht (1)
- Hearing (1)
- Human factor (1)
- Hörvermögen (1)
- Ignition algorithms (1)
- Injury risk (1)
- Karosserie (1)
- Knochenbruch (1)
- Langfristig (1)
- Long term (1)
- Menschlicher Faktor (1)
- Methode der finiten Elemente (1)
- Montage (1)
- Motorcyclist (1)
- Motorradfahrer (1)
- Numerisches Modell (1)
- Official approval (1)
- Optimierung (1)
- Optimizing (1)
- Overlapping (1)
- Pedelec (1)
- Pedestrian (1)
- Post crash (1)
- Radfahrer (1)
- Research project (1)
- Research report (1)
- Safety belt (1)
- Safety fence (1)
- Schallpegel (1)
- Schutz (1)
- Schutzeinrichtung (1)
- Seite (1)
- Severity (accid (1)
- Severity (acid (1)
- Sicherheitsgurt (1)
- Side (1)
- Sound level (1)
- Stand der Technik (Bericht) (1)
- Standardisierung (1)
- Standardization (1)
- Stapedius reflex (1)
- Stapediusreflex (1)
- State of the art report (1)
- Technische Vorschriften (Kraftfahrzeug) (1)
- Time (1)
- Tödlicher Unfall (1)
- Unfallfolgemaßnahme (1)
- Unfallopfer (1)
- Ungeschützter Verkehrsteilnehmer (1)
- Ursache (1)
- Vehicle regulations (1)
- Verkehr (1)
- Verkehrssicherheit (1)
- Verletzungsrisiko (1)
- Vulnerable road user (1)
- Weight (1)
- Zeit (1)
- Zündalgorithmen (1)
- pedelec riders (1)
- road safety (1)
- traffic (1)
- Überdeckung (1)
Institut
Frontal impact is still the most relevant impact direction in terms of injury causation amongst car occupants. Especially for car-to-car frontal impacts the mass ratio between the involved vehicles has a significant impact on the injury risk (the heavier the opponent car the higher the injury risk). In order to address this issue frontal Mobile Deformable Barrier test procedures have been developed world-wide (for example the MPDB procedure that was fully described during the FIMCAR Project). The objective of this study was to investigate how vehicles of different weight classes perform in a mobile barrier test procedure compared to a fixed barrier test procedure (the full width rigid and offset deformable barrier test). Beyond that, the influence of vehicle mass and vehicle deformation on injuries was evaluated based on real world accident data. Five vehicle types were selected and tested in a fixed offset test procedure (ODB), a full width rigid barrier test procedure (FWRB) and a mobile offset test procedure (MPDB). For the accident analyses data from the German In-Depth Accident Study (GIDAS) was evaluated with a focus on MAIS 2+ injured belted front row car (UN-R 94 compliant cars) occupants in frontal impact accidents. Test data indicates higher dummy loadings, in particular for the head acceleration and chest acceleration, in the MPDB test for the vehicles with a mass lighter than the trolley (1,500 kg) compared to the FWRB test. The trend of increased vehicle stiffness (especially illustrated by tests with the MPDB and small cars) shows the need of a further improvement of passive restraint systems to reduce the occupant loading and with it the injury risk. The analyzed GIDAS data confirm the higher injury risk for occupants in cars with an accident weight of less than 1,500 kg compared to those with a crash weight above 1,500 kg in car-to-car and car-to-object or car-to-HGV, respectively. Furthermore the injury risk increases with decreasing mass ratio (i.e., the opponent car is heavier) in car-to-car accidents. Independent from the higher injury risk, the risk for passenger compartment intrusion in frontal impact appears not to be independent on the crash weight of the car.
The goal of the project FIMCAR (Frontal Impact and Compatibility Assessment Research) was to define an integrated set of test procedures and associated metrics to assess a vehicle's frontal impact protection, which includes self- and partner-protection. For the development of the set, two different full-width tests (full-width deformable barrier [FWDB] test, full-width rigid barrier test) and three different offset tests (offset deformable barrier [ODB] test, progressive deformable barrier [PDB] test, moveable deformable barrier with the PDB barrier face [MPDB] test) have been investigated. Different compatibility assessment procedures were analysed and metrics for assessing structural interaction (structural alignment, vertical and horizontal load spreading) as well as several promising metrics for the PDB/MPDB barrier were developed. The final assessment approach consists of a combination of the most suitable full-width and offset tests. For the full-width test (FWDB), a metric was developed to address structural alignment based on load cell wall information in the first 40 ms of the test. For the offset test (ODB), the existing ECE R94 was chosen. Within the paper, an overview of the final assessment approach for the frontal impact test procedures and their development is given.
In general the passive safety capability is much greater in newer versus older cars due to the stiff compartment preventing intrusion in severe collisions. However, the stiffer structure which increases the deceleration can lead to a change in injury patterns. In order to analyse possible injury mechanisms for thoracic and lumbar spine injuries, data from the German Inâ€Depth Accident Study (GIDAS) were used in this study. A twoâ€step approach of statistical and caseâ€byâ€case analysis was applied for this investigation. In total 4,289 collisions were selected involving 8,844 vehicles, 5,765 injured persons and 9,468 coded injuries. Thoracic and lumbar spine injuries such as burst, compression or dislocation fractures as well as soft tissue injuries were found to occur in frontal impacts even without intrusion to the passenger compartment. If a MAIS 2+ injury occurred, in 15% of the cases a thoracic and/or lumbar spine injury is included. Considering AIS 2+ thoracic and lumbar spine, most injuries were fractures and occurred in the lumbar spine area. From the case by case analyses it can be concluded that lumbar spine fractures occur in accidents without the engagement of longitudinals, lateral loading to the occupant and/or very severe accidents with MAIS being much higher than the spine AIS.
Airbags sind ein wichtiger Bestandteil der passiven Sicherheitsausstattung von Fahrzeugen, haben sich in den letzten 30 Jahren stark weiterentwickelt und somit die Schutzwirkung für die Insassen weiter erhöht. Ziel dieser Arbeit ist es, auf Basis verschiedener Datensätze die Schutzwirkung von modernen Airbagsystemen aufzuzeigen und weiteres Opimtierungspotential offenzulegen. Dabei wurde der Fokus auf die Analyse von Realunfalldaten und Verletzungen durch Airbags und deren Schallpegel gesetzt.
Daten aus dem Unfallgeschehen im Straßenverkehr wurden auf Basis von GIDAS- und NASS-Daten ausgewertet. Mittels der ausgewerteten GIDAS-Daten konnte gezeigt werden, dass bei einem Delta-v von ca. 20 km/h bereits 50 % aller Airbags ausgelöst wurden, welches nicht den Erwartungshorizont der Auslöseschwelle von 25 bis 30 km/h nach KLANNER et al. (2004) entspricht. Außerdem wurde ein Trend erkannt, der zeigt, dass bei neueren Fahrzeugen die Anzahl der Airbagzündungen in einem Unfall steigt. Eine statistische Auswertung von airbaginduzierten Verletzungen ergab, dass keine statistisch signifikanten Ergebnisse in Bezug auf airbaginduzierte Verletzungen entnommen werden konnten, allerdings konnten in den analysierten Fällen leichte Verletzungen identifiziert werden, die durch die Airbagzündung verursacht wurden. Die festgestellten Verletzungen waren beispielsweise Schürfwunden, Prellungen und Verbrennungen bis maximal 2. Grades. Es wurden 14 Einzelfälle analysiert bei denen die Verletzungsschwere höher war, als es die Unfallschwere erwarten ließ. Davon waren elf Unfälle durch schlechte strukturelle Interaktion gekennzeichnet, beispielsweise Unterfahren, zentraler Stoß oder Stoß außerhalb der Längsträger. Im vorliegenden GIDAS-Datenmaterial und in der Analyse von MHH Patientinnen- und Patientendaten konnten Einzelfälle, bei denen es zu Hörschädigung in Folge einer Airbagzündung kam, identifiziert werden, allerdings konnte keine statistisch signifikante Verbindung zwischen Airbagzündung und einer Hörschädigung festgestellt werden.
Auf Basis der analysierten GIDAS-Fälle wurde eine Versuchsmatrix entwickelt, um die aufgezeigten Probleme mittels experimenteller Unfallrekonstruktion und akustischer Messungen zu adressieren. In der Unfallrekonstruktion mit zentralem Baumaufprall konnte gezeigt werden, dass bei dem vorliegenden Fall eine frühere Airbagzündung das Brustverletzungsrisiko hätte senken können und somit die vorliegende Brustverletzung wahrscheinlich vermieden hätte. In dem analysierten Auffahrunfall mit einer Unterfahrensituation konnte gezeigt werden, dass die Airbagauslösung unnötig war, da das Verletzungsrisiko durch die Airbagzündung nicht reduziert wurde. In diesem Fall hätte eine unterdrückte Airbagzündung die Hörschädigung des Fahrers verhindert.
Im Rahmen der durchgeführten akustischen Messungen wurden systematische Messungen von Schallpegeln in Fahrzeugen während eines Unfalls und im Stand gemessen. Es konnte gezeigt werden, dass die Crashbegleitgeräusche der Fahrzeugdeformation ausreichen, um den Stapediusreflex auszulösen, dadurch ist das Risiko einer Hörschädigung gering – trotz Pegel von über 160 dB. Das Risiko für eine Hörschädigung steigt mit der Anzahl der gezündeten Airbags durch die kurze Aneinanderreihung von Knallereignissen trotz ausgelösten Stapediusreflex. Auch bei frühen Zündzeitpunkten steigt das Risiko einer Hörschädigung, da der Stapediusreflex noch nicht ausgelöst ist oder sich in der Anschwellphase befindet und somit seine Schutzwirkung nicht komplett entfalten kann.
Mit den analysierten Daten konnte gezeigt werden, dass die Schutzwirkung von Airbags unumstritten ist, allerdings wurde Optimierungspotential in den Zündalgorithmen offengelegt. Das gilt für Unfälle mit schlechter struktureller Interaktion und daraus resultierendem nicht optimalen Zündzeitpunkt und für eine unnötige Airbagauslösung bei geringer Unfallschwere. Weiteres Optimierungspotential zur Reduzierung des Verletzungsrisikos besteht bei Airbags hinsichtlich ihres Potentials Schürfwunden, Prellungen, Verbrennungen und Hörschäden zu verursachen.
Airbags are, together with the three-point belt, the most effective passive safety equipment of vehicles. However, literature shows that sound pressure levels of up to 170 dB can occur during airbag deployment. A literature review revealed no systematic experimental data on possible hearing loss by airbag deployment, that also takes any other crash accompanied noise into account, such as deformation and impact noise. Also the rising number of airbags per vehicle resulting in a higher number of deployed airbags in an accident was not addressed with respect to hearing loss. Thus, an extensive test matrix of noise measurements during airbag deployments was conducted including onboard measuring during crashes and static measurements. Dynamic and static experiments with single and multiple airbag deployments were conducted. The results of this study show, that in the analyzed crash constellations the acoustic emission of the collision as well as the car deformation can trigger the stapedius reflex before the airbag deployment. The stapedius reflex protects the inner ear at least partially in case of dangerous sound levels. However, it seems that multiple airbag deployments in a short sequence pose a considerable risk for hearing impairments despite the fully contracted stapedius muscle. Further and in line with Price et al. (2013) it was found that the risk of hearing loss is lower with closed windows. The analysis of patient and accident data showed no link between airbag deployment and hearing loss. This might be caused by low case numbers of reported hearing loss problems up to now. In conclusion the results show that a singular analysis of the sound pressure of airbag deployments without crash accompanied noises is not sufficient as the protective effect of the stapedius reflex is neglected. Still, successive airbag deployments in a short timeframe raise the risk of hearing loss. Further investigation on hearing impairment due to airbag deployment and triggering of the stapedius reflex is needed and the data acquisition of accidents and patients should consider hearing loss aspects.
When assessing the consequences of accidents normally the injury severity and the damage costs are considered. The injury severity is either expressed within the police categories (slight injury, severe injury or fatal injury) or the AIS code that rates the fatality risk of a given injury. Both injury metrics are assessing the consequences of the accident directly after the accident. However, not all consequences of accidents are visible directly after the accident and the duration of the consequences are different. Besides a physiological reduction of functionality social and psychological implications such as reduced mobility options, problems to continue the original job etc. are happening. In order to assess long term consequences of accidents the MHH Accident Research Unit established a brief questionnaire that is distributed to accident involved people of the Hannover subset of the GIDAS data set approx. one year after the accident beginning with the accident year 2013. The basic idea of using a brief questionnaire (in fact only one page) is to obtain a relatively large return rate because the questionnaire appears to be simple and quickly answered. This appears to be important because it is believed that the majority of accident involved people will not report long term consequences. In order to allow a more detailed survey amongst those responders that are reporting long term consequences they are asked for a written consent for the additional questionnaire that will be distributed at a time that is not yet defined. Long term consequences are reported for all addressed areas, medical, physiological, psychological and sociological by people without injuries, with minor injuries and with severe injuries.
To improve vehicle safety in frontal collisions, the crash compatibility between the colliding vehicles is crucial. Compatibility aims to improve both the self and partner protection properties of vehicles. Although compatibility has received worldwide attention for many years, no final assessment approach has been defined. Within the Frontal Impact and Compatibility Assessment Research (FIMCAR) project, different frontal impact test procedures (offset deformable barrier [ODB] test as currently used for Economic Commission for Europe [ECE] R94, progressive deformable barrier test as proposed by France for a new ECE regulation, moveable deformable barrier test as discussed worldwide, full-width rigid barrier test as used in Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard [FMVSS] 208, and full-width deformable barrier test) were analyzed regarding their potential for future frontal impact legislation. The research activities focused on car-to-car frontal impact accidents based on accident investigations involving newer cars. Test procedures were developed with both a crash test program and numerical simulations. The proposal from FIMCAR is to use a full-width test procedure with a deformable element and compatibility metrics in combination with the current offset test as a frontal impact assessment approach that also addresses compatibility. By adding a full-width test to the current ODB test it is possible to better address the issues of structural misalignment and injuries resulting from high acceleration accidents as observed in the current fleet. The estimated benefit ranges from a 5 to 12 percent reduction of fatalities and serious injuries resulting from frontal impact accidents. By using a deformable element in the full-width test, the test conditions are more representative of real-world situations with respect to acceleration pulse, restraint system triggering time, and deformation pattern of the front structure. The test results are therefore expected to better represent real-world performance of the tested car. Furthermore, the assessment of the structural alignment is more robust than in the rigid wall test.
For the assessment of vehicle safety in frontal collisions, the crash compatibility between the colliding vehicles is crucial. Compatibility compromises both the self protection and the partner protection properties of vehicles. For the accident data analysis, the CCIS (GB) and GIDAS (DE) in-depth data bases were used. Selection criteria were frontal car accidents with car in compliance with ECE R94. For this study belted adult occupants in the front seats sustaining MAIS 2+ injuries were studied. Following this analysis FIMCAR concluded that the following compatibility issues are relevant: - Poor structural interaction (especially low overlap and over/underriding) - Compartment strength - Frontal force mismatch with lower priority than poor structural interaction In addition injuries arising from the acceleration loading of the occupant are present in a significant portion of frontal crashes. Based on the findings of the accident analysis the aims that shall be addressed by the proposed assessment approach were defined and priorities were allocated to them. The aims and priorities shall help to decide on suitable test procedures and appropriate metrics. In general it is anticipated that a full overlap and off-set test procedure is the most appropriate set of tests to assess a vehicle- frontal impact self and partner protection.
The share of high-tensile steel in car bodies has increased over the last years. While occupant safety has generally benefited from this measure, there is a potential risk that, as a result, rescue time may increase considerably. In more than 60% of all car occupant fatalities a technical rescue has been necessary. These are in particular those cases where occupants die immediately at the accident scene. Therefore, in these cases "rescue time" is a very sensitive parameter. In addition to the general analysis of the need of technical rescue and the actual rescue time depending on model years, the injury pattern of occupants requiring technical rescue will be analysed to provide advice for rescue teams. Furthermore, a detailed analysis of rescue measures for the most popular car models depending on the safety cell design is given.
Within the process of integrating passenger airbags in the vehicle fleet a problem of compatibility between the passenger airbag and rear-facing child restraint systems was recognised. Especially in the US several accidents with children killed by the passenger airbag were recorded. Taking into account these accidents the deactivation of a present passenger airbag is mandatory if a child is carried in a rear-facing child restraint system at the front passenger seat in all member states of the European Union. This rule is in force since the deadline of 2003/20/EC at the latest. In the past a passenger airbag either could not be disabled or could only be disabled by a garage. Today there are a lot of different possibilities for the car driver himself to disable the airbag. Solutions like an on/off-switch or the automatic detection of a child restraint system are mentioned as an example. Taking into account the need for the deactivation of front passenger airbags two types of misuse can occur: transportation of an infant while the airbag is (still) enabled and transportation of an adult, while the airbag is disabled, respectively. Within a research project funded by BASt both options of misuse were analysed utilising two different types of surveys amongst users (field observations and interviews, Internet-questionnaires). In addition both analysis of accident data and crash tests for an updated assessment of the injury risk caused by the front passenger airbag were conducted. Both surveys indicate a low risk of misuse. Most of the misuse cases were observed in older cars, which offer no easy way to disable the airbag. For systems, which detect a child seat automatically, no misuse could be found. The majority of misuses in cars equipped with a manual switch were caused by reasons of oblivion. Also the accident analysis indicates a minor risk of misuse. From more than 300 cases of the GIDAS accident sample that were analysed, only 24 children were using the front passenger seat in cars equipped with a front passenger airbag. In most of these cases the airbag was deactivated. When misuse occurred the injury severity was low. However, when analysing German single accidents the fatality risk caused by the front passenger airbag became obvious. From the technical point of view, there were important changes in the design of passenger airbags in recent years. Not only volume and shape were modified, but also the mounting position of the entire airbag module was changed fundamentally. Even if these findings do not allow obtaining general conclusions, a clear tendency of less danger by airbags could be identified. For future vehicle development a safe combination of airbags and rear faced baby seats seems to be possible in the long term. This would mean that both types of misuse could be eliminated. For parents an easier use of child seat and car would be the result.