In the European Project FIMCAR, a proposal for a frontal impact test configuration was developed which included an additional full width deformable barrier (FWDB) test. Motivation for the deformable element was partly to measure structural forces as well as to produce a severe crash pulse different from that in the offset test. The objective of this study was to analyze the safety performance of vehicles in the full width rigid barrier test (FWRB) and in the full width deformable barrier test (FWDB). In total, 12 vehicles were crashed in both configurations. Comparison of these tests to real world accident data was used to identify the crash barrier most representative of real world crashes. For all vehicles, the airbag visible times were later in the FWDB configuration. This was attributed to the attenuation of the initial acceleration peak, observed in FWRB tests, by the addition of the deformable element. These findings were in alignment with airbag triggering times seen in real world crash data. Also, the dummy loadings were slightly worse in FWDB compared to FWRB tests, which is possibly linked to the airbag firing and a more realistic loading of the vehicle crash structures in the FWDB configuration. Evaluations of the lower extremities have shown a general increasing of the tibia index with the crash pulse severity.
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.
Das Ziel des Forschungsprojekts "Quantifizierung der Passiven Sicherheit für Pkw-Insassen" besteht darin, Messergebnisse in Form von Dummybelastungswerten zu einem Sicherheitsindex zu verdichten. Zur Formulierung des dazu erforderlichen Bewertungsalgorithmus wurden folgende Zusammenhänge erarbeitet: 1. Beziehung zwischen Verletzungsschwere und Dummybelastungsgröße für relevante Körperteile, 2. Relevanzfaktoren zur Wichtung der Teilergebnisse und 3. Zusammenhang zwischen körperteilspezifischen Schutzkriterien und dem entsprechenden Erfüllungsgrad. Die wesentliche Aufmerksamkeit erforderte die Bereitstellung der Relevanzstruktur, da mit den einzelnen Relevanzfaktoren die gemessenen Belastungen entsprechend der Bedeutung der im realen Unfallgeschehen beobachteten Verletzungen bewertet werden sollten. Im Bereich der experimentellen Simulation lag das Hauptaugenmerk auf der Bereitstellung der Versuchsbedingungen, wobei die gesetzlich vorgeschriebenen Sicherheitsversuche zu berücksichtigen waren. Daraus ergab sich die Festlegung auf folgende Versuchskonstellationen: 1. Frontaler Wandaufprall, 2. Seitenaufprall einer fahrbaren Barriere auf den stehenden Pkw und 3. Kompatibilitätsversuch, bei dem ein Fahrzeug seitlich mit einem anderen Fahrzeug gleichen Typs kollidiert. Mit Hilfe eines erarbeiteten Bewertungsalgorithmus werden die versuchstechnisch gemessenen Belastungswerte normiert und der Bewertungsfunktion zugeführt. Die so ermittelten Erfüllungsgrade erhalten durch die Relevanzfaktoren eine unfallspezifische Wichtung und lassen sich über Teilsicherheitsindizes zu einem Gesamt-Sicherheitsindex zusammenfassen. Dieser Sicherheitsindex soll Aufschluss über das Niveau der inneren Sicherheit von Pkw geben.
This study updates previous IIHS studies comparing estimated delta Vs for crash tested vehicles to the distribution of estimated delta Vs in the National Automotive Sampling System (NASS) Crashworthiness Data System (CDS). The delta V estimates for 232 frontal crash tests at 64.4km/h into a deformable barrier with 40 percent overlap are compared with estimates from frontal offset crashes in the 1997-2004 NASS database. All delta V estimates were based on SMASH, the delta V estimating program used by NASS since 1997. Results indicated that for all vehicles tested by IIHS, SMASH delta Vs were, on average, 32 percent lower than impact speeds and about 28 percent lower than the expected delta V. Almost 80 percent of all real-world frontal crashes resulting in AIS 3+ injuries and just over 60 percent of all fatal crashes occur at or below the average estimated delta V calculated for crash tested vehicles.
Um die Verletztenschwere von ungeschützten Verkehrsteilnehmern bei der Kollision mit Personenkraftwagen zu reduzieren, sollte die Fahrzeugfront bestimmten Anforderungen entsprechen. Dazu wurde von der EEVC-WG 10 ein Testverfahren zur Prüfung der Pkw-Frontfläche vorgeschlagen. In dieser Untersuchung wurde der Nutzen an vermeidbaren Personenschäden geschätzt, der erzielt werden könnte, wenn alle Pkw diese Anforderungen erfüllten. Als Nutzen wurde das Reduktionspotential bei Getöteten, der mögliche Übergang von Schwerverletzten zu Leichtverletzten und von Leichtverletzten zu Unverletzten bewertet. Verletzungsminderungen innerhalb der Gesamtheit der Schwerverletzten konnten nicht bewertet werden. Auch die hohe Dunkelziffer der Verletzten ging nicht in die Rechnung ein. Daraus ergibt sich, dass der errechnete Nutzen eine Mindestgröße darstellt. Diese Größe wird stark beeinflusst von einer gegebenen Verteilung der Pkw-Kollisionsgeschwindigkeiten, denn ein Nutzenpotential des EEVC-WG-10-Testverfahrens kann nur für Kollisionsgeschwindigkeiten bis 40 km/h angenommen werden. Um mit einer verlässlichen Datenbasis zu arbeiten, wurde diese Untersuchung zunächst für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland (Gebietsstand vor dem 3. Oktober 1990) und das Jahr 1990 durchgeführt. Dafür errechnete sich ein Nutzenpotential pro neuzugelassenem Pkw in Höhe von 46 bis 63 DM (22 bis 31 ECU) nach deutschen Unfallkostensätzen oder 28 bis 36 ECU nach europäischen Durchschnittskostensätzen. Wirtschaftlich ist die Maßnahme, solange die Kosten pro neu zugelassenem Pkw (zum Preisstand 1990) diesen Betrag nicht übersteigen. Von diesem Ergebnis ausgehend, wurde dessen zeitliche und regionale Übertragbarkeit erörtert. Es ist wahrscheinlich, dass das Ergebnis für ganz Deutschland gilt, da die Maßnahme nicht vor dem Jahr 2000 eingeführt wird und die Vollausrüstung aller Pkw mit dem geforderten Fußgängerschutz erst 10 Jahre später erreicht ist. Aus Prognosen bis zum Jahre 2010 für die Entwicklung der Bevölkerungszahl (gleichbleibender Fußgängeranteil vorausgesetzt) und der Zahl der Pkw-Neuzulassungen lässt sich keine Änderung des Nutzenpotentials herleiten. Weil für andere EG-Länder die Verteilung der Kollisionsgeschwindigkeiten bei Fußgängerunfällen unbekannt ist, können die Wirksamkeitsannahmen dieser Untersuchung nicht auf andere Länder übertragen werden.
This work aims at bringing evidence for mass incompatibility in frontal impact for cars built according to the UNECE R94 regulation. French national injury accidents database census for years 2005 to 2008 were used for the analysis. The heterogeneity of frontal self-protection among cars of different masses is investigated, as well as the partner protection parameter offered by these cars. The last part of the analysis deals with the estimation of the benefit, in terms of fatal and severe injuries avoided, if crashworthiness was harmonized for the whole fleet of vehicle. This calculation is done for France and is extended to all Europe.
In North America, frontal crash tests in both the regulatory environment and consumer-based safety rating schemes have historically been based on full-width and moderate-overlap (40%) vehicle to barrier impacts. The combination of improved seat-belt technologies, notably belt tensioning and load limiting systems, together with advanced airbags, has proven very effective in providing occupant protection in these crash modes. Recently, however, concern has been raised over the contribution of narrower frontal impacts, involving primarily the vehicle corners, to the incidence of fatality and serious injury as a result of the potential for increased occupant compartment intrusion and performance limitations of current restraint systems. Drawing on data documented in the National Automotive Sampling System (NASS)/ Crashworthiness Data System (CDS) for calendar years 1999 to 2012, the present study examines the characteristics of existing and proposed corner crash test configurations, and the nature of real-world collisions that approximate the test environments. In this analysis, particular emphasis is placed on crash pulse information extracted from vehicle-based event data recorders (EDR's).
Over the past two decades the popularity of consumer crash test programs, commonly referred to as New Car Assessment Programs (NCAP), has grown across the world. They are popular among government regulators as they afford a means of promoting safety innovations and levels of vehicle performance beyond those dictated by national standards. They also fulfill the demand for information regarding the safety ranking of vehicles among consumers contemplating the purchase of a new vehicle. There is no question that consumer crash test programs greatly influence vehicle design changes as well as accelerate the fitment of new safety features. The extent to which these changes can be expected to reduce serious and potentially fatal injuries will be influenced by how well the testing protocols and associated rating schemes correctly reflect the nature of the residual safety problem they seek to address. Drawing on data contained primarily in the US National Automotive Sampling System (NASS), the field relevance of current and proposed testing and rating protocols addressing frontal crash test protection is examined. Emphasis is placed on examining how accurately injury rates computed from the dummy responses measured in consumer crash tests correspond to actual injury rates observed in the field. Additional data from Canadian field investigations and US databases such as the National Motor Vehicle Crash Causation Survey (NMVCCS) are examined to see how well frontal airbag firing times, crush pulse durations and other determinants of injury are replicated in consumer testing protocols. This portion of the analysis draws on data obtained from Event Data Recorders (EDR) in both field collisions and staged tests of the same vehicle model. Vehicle rankings and overall frontal crash test ratings were found to be particularly sensitive to the choice of injury risk functions employed in the test. This was particularly true in the case of injury risk functions used to assess neck injury potential. Neck injury risk derived from Nij was found to show the least agreement with the field. Agreement between field chest injury rates and those derived from crash tests was improved considerably when chest injury risk functions for "older" occupants were employed. The paper concludes with a discussion of how different current testing protocols could be improved to enhance their field relevance.
An analysis of NASS and FARS was conducted to determine crash conditions that involved injuries that are not currently being directly addressed by vehicle safety standards or by consumer information test protocols. Analysis of both field data and US NCAP tests were conducted to determine the relative safety provided by seating position and by vehicle model year. Opportunities for improvements were determined by crash categories with large populations of injuries that were not addressed by safety tests or smaller numbers that were increasing in frequency. Areas of opportunities include improved occupant restrain in rollovers, improved frontal protection for rear seat occupants and improved fire prevention in frontal and rollover crashes.
The frontal crash is still an important contributor to deaths and serious injured resulting from road accidents in Europe. As the Hybrid-III dummy used in crash tests is over two decades old, the European Enhanced Vehicle-safety Committee is studying the potential for a new test device. Key is the availability of a well-defined set of requirements that identifies the minimum level of biofidelity required for an advanced frontal dummy. In this paper, a complete set of frontal impact biofidelity requirements, consisting of references , description of test conditions and corridors, is presented.
Although the number of road accident casualties in Europe (EU27) is falling the problem still remains substantial. In 2011 there were still over 30,000 road accident fatalities. Approximately half of these were car occupants and about 60 percent of these occurred in frontal impacts. The next stage to improve a car's safety performance in frontal impacts is to improve its compatibility. The objective of the FIMCAR FP7 EU-project was to develop an assessment approach suitable for regulatory application to control a car's frontal impact and compatibility crash performance and perform an associated cost benefit analysis for its implementation. This paper reports the cost benefit analyses performed to estimate the effect of the following potential changes to the frontal impact regulation: • Option 1 " No change and allow current measures to propagate throughout the vehicle fleet. • Option 2 " Add a full width test to the current offset Deformable Barrier (ODB) test. • Option 3 " Add a full width test and replace the current ODB test with a Progressive Deformable Barrier (PDB) test. For the analyses national data were used from Great Britain (STATS 19) and from Germany (German Federal Statistical Office). In addition in-depth real word crash data were used from CCIS (Great Britain) and GIDAS (Germany). To estimate the benefit a generalised linear model, an injury reduction model and a matched pairs modelling approach were applied. The benefits were estimated to be: for Option 1 "No change" about 2.0%; for Option 2 "FW test" ranging from 5 to 12% and for Option 3 "FW and PDB tests" 9 to 14% of car occupant killed and seriously injured casualties.
Thoracic injury is one of the predominant types of severe injuries in frontal accidents. The assessment of the injury risk to the thorax in the current frontal impact test procedures is based on the uni-axial chest deflection measured in the dummy Hybrid III. Several studies have shown that criteria based on the linear chest potentiometer are not sensitive enough to distinguish between different restraint systems, and cannot indicate asymmetric chest loading, which has been shown to correlate to increased injury risk. Furthermore, the measurement is sensitive to belt position on the dummy chest. The objective of this study was to evaluate the optical multipoint chest deflection measurement system "RibEye" in frontal impact sled tests. Therefore the sensitivity of the RibEyesystem to different restraint system parameters was investigated. Furthermore, the issue of signal drop out at the 6 th rib was investigated in this study.A series of sled tests were conducted with the RibEye system in the Hybrid III 50%. The sled environment consisted of a rigid seat and a standard production three-point seat belt system. Rib deflections were recorded with the RibEye system and additionally with the standard chest potentiometer. The tests were carried out at crash pulses of two different velocities (30 km/h and 64 km/h). The tests were conducted with different belt routing to investigate the sensitivity of chest deflection measurements to belt position on the dummy chest. Furthermore, different restraint system parameters were investigated (force limiter level, with or without pretensioning) to evaluate if the RibEye measurements provide additional information to distinguish between restraint system configurations . The results showed that with the RibEye system it was possible to identify the effect of belt routing in more detail. The chest deflections measured with the standard chest potentiometer as well as the maximum deflection measured by RibEye allowed the distinction to be made between different force limiter levels. The RibEye system was also able to clearly show the asymmetric deflection of the rib cage due to belt loading. In some configurations, differences of more than 15 mm were observed between the left and side areas of the chest. Furthermore, the abdomen insert was identified as source of the problem of signal drop out at the 6th rib. Possible solutions are discussed. In conclusion, the RibEye system provided valuable additional information regarding the assessment of restraint systems. It has the potential to enable the evaluation of thoracic injury risk due to asymmetric loading. Further investigations with the RibEye should be extended to tests in a vehicle environment, which include a vehicle seat and other restraint system components such as an airbag.
Thorax injury is one of main causes of serious injury in frontal collisions, especially for elderly car occupants. The anthropometric test device (ATD) THOR‐M provides chest deflection measurements at multiple locations, to assess the risk of thorax injury. For this purpose e, risk functions are needed that relate the potential criteria based on multipoint chest deflection measurement to in jury risk. Different thorax injury criteria and risk functions for THOR have been proposed [2‐3]. The criteria and functions are based on the traditional approach to developing injury risk functions using matched ATD and PMHS tests by relating the injury (number of fractures) to injury criteria. Regarding these studies, some limitations have been identified, in particular concerning the loading conditions of the data used (mainly 3‐point‐belt loading, high loading severity, out‐of‐date ATD versions. To extend the data set and overcome these limitations, a new approach for improved thorax injury criteria was applied within the EC‐funded project SENIORS. The new approach is based on matched frontal impact sled computer simulations with a model representing the latest THOR‐M ATD version, and matching simulations with a human body model (HBM) representing an elderly car occupant.
EEVC Working Group 15 (Compatibility Between Passenger Cars) has carried out research for several years thanks to collaborative project funded by the E.C. and also by exchanging results of projects funded by national programmes. The main collaborative activity of the EEVC WG15 for the last four years was a research project partly funded by the European Commission, where the group made the first attempt to investigate compatibility between passenger cars in a comprehensive research program. Accident, crash test, and mathematical modelling data were analysed. The main result was that structural incompatibilities were frequently found and identified as the main source of incompatibility problems but were not easy to quantify. Unfortunately as little vehicle information other than mass is recorded in most accident databases, most analyses have only been able to show the effect of mass or mass ratio. Common ideas to improve compatibility have been reached by this group and from discussion with other research groups. They will be investigated in the next phase, where research work will concentrate on the development of methods to assess compatibility of passenger cars. The main idea is that the prerequisite to improve crash compatibility between cars is to improve structural interaction. The most important issue is that improved compatibility must not compromise a vehicle- self protection. Test methods should lead to vehicles which show good structural interaction in car to car accidents. Test methods to prove good compatibility may be an adaptation of existing regulatory test procedures (offset deformable barrier test or full width test like in the USA) for frontal impact or may be new compatibility tests. Additional criteria, e.g. impact force distribution, and maximum vehicle deceleration or maximum vehicle impact force should result in compatible cars. Attempts will be made to estimate the benefit of a more compatible car fleet for the European Community.
Bewertung der Fahrzeug-Fußraumintrusionen beim Offset Frontaltest gegen das Verformungselement
(1998)
In den Tests nach dem neuen Frontaltestverfahren (Entwürfe ECE R.94 sowie Richtlinie 96/79/EG und Ergänzung zu RL 70/156/EWG) entstehen hohe Verformungen der Fußräume der Versuchsfahrzeuge. Die Bewertung der Gefährdung der Insassen durch Intrusion, vorwiegend der Spritzwand begleitet von heftigen Bewegungen der Pedale, soll durch am Dummy zu messende Schutzkriterien erfolgen. Es ist vorgesehen, an den Dummies die Verschiebung des Schienbeins gegen das Knie, die Längskraft im Unterschenkel und den sogenannten Tibia Index zu messen. Um dieses zu ermöglichen, mussten an den vorhandenen Dummy-Unterschenkeln konstruktive Änderungen vorgenommen werden. Über die Herleitung der Schutzkriterien, Fragen bei der Anwendung dieser Kriterien sowie die technischen Einzelheiten und die Zertifizierung der neuen Dummy-Unterschenkel, welche die erforderlichen Messungen erlauben, wird berichtet.
Internationale Aktivitäten der Forschung auf dem Gebiet "Passive Sicherheit von Kraftfahrzeugen"
(2000)
Eine Fülle von Aktivitäten ist derzeit auf den Gebieten Frontal- und Seitenstoß zu beobachten, die in Europa auf den beiden entsprechenden EG-Richtlinien aufbauen. Das EEVC führt seine Arbeiten, an denen die Automobilindustrie beteiligt ist, fort; hier sind insbesondere die Arbeiten zum Seitenstoß (Kopfaufprall und Barrierenvergleich) zu nennen. Auf weltweiter Ebene beginnen die Arbeiten der IHRA (International Harmonised Research Activities) in ein konkretes Stadium der Zusammenarbeit einzutreten. Auf dem Gebiet der Seitenkollision ist längerfristig ein neues Testverfahren geplant, in das der von ISO entwickelte WORLD-SID einbezogen werden soll. Es gibt derzeit viele ernsthafte Bemühungen der Forschung um Harmonisierung. Auch wenn es nicht zu einer weltweiten Harmonisierung kompletter Regelungen kommt, so gibt es doch Hoffnung auf eine weltweite Harmonisierung von definierten Teilbestimmungen in speziellen Regelungen, so zum Beispiel bezüglich der Testmethode, der Versuchspuppen und der Bewertung der Schutzkriterien. Der Name des EEVC, European Enhanced Vehicle-safety Committee, steht für die Weiterentwicklung der Fahrzeugsicherheit. Die beteiligten Regierungen sind überzeugt, dass moderne Technologien neue Möglichkeiten eröffnen, um die Sicherheit der Kraftfahrzeuge weiter zu verbessern.
Im Rahmen des weltweiten ESV-Programmes (Enhanced Safety of Vehicles) werden seit mehreren Jahren internationale Forschungsbemühungen unternommen (International Harmonized Research Activities, IHRA), um im Vorfeld der Gesetzgebung die wissenschaftlichen Grundlagen gemeinsam zu erarbeiten. Ziel der IHRA-Arbeiten ist es, auf der Grundlage dieser Forschungsergebnisse die Harmonisierung der Vorschriften zu erleichtern. Eine besondere Aktivität bezieht sich auf Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS). Im vorliegenden Beitrag wird die Aufgabe dieser IHRA-ITS-Arbeiten geschildert, sowie der derzeitige Stand der Forschungsbemühungen beschrieben. Es zeigt sich, dass die beschriebene Sicherheitsbewertung eine Fülle von Fragestellungen aufwirft und weitere Forschungsanstrengungen erfordert. Die zukünftigen Bemühungen sind darauf gerichtet, in internationaler Zusammenarbeit und Arbeitsteilung die als besonders wichtig erkannten Themen zur Bewertung der fahrzeugseitigen Fahrerassistenzsysteme zu bearbeiten.
This paper provides an overview of the research work of the European Enhanced Vehicle-safety Committee (EEVC) in the field of crash compatibility between passenger cars. Since July 1997 the EC Commission is partly funding the research work of EEVC. The running period of this project will be two years. The progress of five working packages of this research project is presented: Literature review, Accident analysis, Structural survey of cars, Crash testing, and Mathematical modelling. According to the planned time schedule the progress of research work is different for the five working packages.
As set out in the Terms of Reference, the objective of European Enhanced Vehicle-safety Committee (EEVC) Working Group (WG) 15 Car Crash Compatibility and Frontal Impact is to develop a test procedure(s) with associated performance criteria for car frontal impact compatibility. This work should lead to improved car to car frontal compatibility and self protection without decreasing the safety in other impact configuration such as impacts with car sides, trucks, and pedestrians. Since 2003, EEVC WG 15 served as a steering group for the car-to-car activities in the "Improvement of Vehicle Crash Compatibility through the development of Crash Test Procedures" (VC-COMPAT) project that was finalised at the end of 2006 and partly funded by the European Commission. This paper presents the research work carried out in the VC-COMPAT project and the results of its assessment by EEVC WG 15. Other additional work presented by the UK and French governments and industry " in particular the European industry - was taken into consideration. It also identifies current issues with candidate testing approaches. The candidate test approaches are: - an offset barrier test with the progressive deformable barrier (PDB) face in combination with a full width rigid barrier test - a full width wall test with a deformable aluminium honeycomb face and a high resolution load cell wall supplemented by the forces measured in the offset deformable barrier (ODB) test with the current EEVC barrier. These candidate test approaches must assess the structural interaction and give information of frontal force levels and compartment strength for passenger vehicles. Further, this paper presents the planned route map of EEVC WG 15 for the evaluation of the proposed test procedures and assessment criteria.
At the 2001 ESV-Conference the EEVC working group on compatibility (WG 15) reported the first phase of the research work to investigate the major factors influencing compatibility between passenger cars. Following this, WG15 performed an interim study, which was partly subventioned by the European Commission, the results of which are reported in this paper. In the next phase of work, it is intended to complete the development of a suite of test procedures and associated performance criteria to assess the compatibility of passenger cars in frontal impacts The main areas of work for the interim study were: - in depth accident data analysis - the development of methods to assess the potential benefit of improved compatibility - crash testing. The accident analysis identified the major compatibility problems to be poor structural interaction, stiffness mismatching and compartment strength. Different methods to assess the potential benefit of improved compatibility were applied to in depth accident data. Full scale crash testing including a car to car test was performed to help develop the following candidate compatibility test procedures: - a full width wall test with a deformable aluminium honeycomb face and a high resolution load cell wall - an offset barrier test with the EEVC barrier face and a high resolution load cell wall - an offset barrier test with the progressively deformable barrier (PDB) face. The results of the interim study will be presented in detail and the proposed methodology of the next phase to complete the development of a suite of test procedures for the assessment of car to car compatibility in frontal impacts will be outlined
In most of developed countries, the progress made in passive safety during the last three decades allowed to drastically reduce the number of killed and severely injured especially for occupants of passenger cars. This reduction is mainly observed for frontal impacts for which the AIS3+ injuries has been reduced about 52% for drivers and 38% for front passengers. The stiffening of the cars' structure coupled with the generalization of airbags and the improvement of the seatbelt restraint (load limiter, pretension, etc.) allowed to protect vital body regions such as head, neck and thorax. However, the abdomen did not take advantage with so much success of this progress. The objective of this study is to draw up an inventory on the abdominal injuries of the belted car occupants involved in frontal impact, to present adapted counter-measures and to assess their potential effectiveness. In the first part the stakes corresponding to the abdominal injuries will be defined according to types of impact, seat location, occupants' age and type of injured organs. Then, we shall focus on the abdominal injury risk curves for adults involved in frontal impact and on the comparisons of the average risks according to the seat location. In the second part we will list counter-measures and we shall calculate their effectiveness. The method of case control will be used in order to estimate odds ratio, comparing two samples, given by occupants having or not having the studied safety system. For this study, two type of data sources are used: national road injured accident census and retrospective in-depth accident data collection. Abdominal injuries are mainly observed in frontal impact (52%). Fatal or severe abdominal occupant- injuries are observed at least in 27% of cases, ranking this body region as the most injured just after the thorax (51%). In spite of a twice lower occupation rate in the back seats compared to the front seats, the number of persons sustaining abdominal injuries at the rear place is higher than in the front place. In recent cars, the risk of having a serious or fatal abdominal injury in a frontal impact is 1.6% for the driver, 3.6% for the front passenger and 6.3% for the rear occupants. The most frequently hurt organs are the small intestine (17%), the spleen (16%) and the liver (13%). The most common countermeasures have a good efficiency in the reduction of the abdominal injuries for the adults: the stiffness of the structure of the seats allows decreasing the abdominal injury risk from 54% (driver) to 60% (front occupant), the seatbelt pretensioners decrease also this risk from 90% (driver) to 83% (front passenger).
The European Enhanced Vehicle-safety Committee wants to promote the use of more biofidelic child dummies and biomechanical based tolerance limits in regulatory and consumer testing. This study has investigated the feasibility and potential impact of Q-dummies and new injury criteria for child restraint system assessment in frontal impact. European accident statistics have been reviewed for all ECE-R44 CRS groups. For frontal impact, injury measures are recommended for the head, neck, chest and abdomen. Priority of body segment protection depends on the ECE-R44 group. The Q-dummy family is able to reflect these injuries, because of its biofidelity performance and measurement capabilities for these body segments. Currently, the Q0, Q1, Q1.5, Q3 and Q6 are available representing children of 0, 1, 1.5, 3 and 6 years old. These Q-dummies cover almost all dummy weight groups as defined in ECE-R44. Q10, representing a 10 year-old child, is under development. New child dummy injury criteria are under discussion in EEVC WG12. Therefore, the ECE-R44 criteria are assessed by comparing the existing P-dummies and new Q-dummies in ECE-R44 frontal impact sled tests. In total 300 tests covering 30 CRSs of almost all existing child seat categories are performed by 11 European organizations. From this benchmark study, it is concluded that the performance of the Q-dummy family is good with respect to repeatability of the measurement signals and the durability of the dummies. Applying ECE-R44 criteria, the first impression is that results for P- and Q-dummy are similar. For child seat evaluation the potential merits of the Q-dummy family lie in the extra measurement possibilities of these dummies and in the more biofidelic response.
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.
Since a number of human models have been developed it appears sensible to use these models also in the accident analysis. Especially the understanding of injury mechanisms and probably even injury risk curves can be significantly improved when interesting accidents are reconstructed using human body models. However, an important limitation for utilising human models for accident reconstruction is the effort needed to develop detailed FE models of the accident partners or to prepare the human model reconstruction by running physical accident reconstructions. The proposed approach for using human models for accident reconstruction is to use simplified and parametric car models. These models can be adapted to the crash opponents in a fast and cost effective way. Although, accuracy is less compared to detailed FE models, the relevant change in velocity can be simulated well, indicating that the computation of a detailed crash pulse is not needed. Two frontal impact test accidents that were reconstructed experimentally and using the parametric car models are indicating sufficient correlation of the adapted parametric car models with the full scale crash reconstructions. However, further developments of the parametric models to be capable for the use in lateral impacts and rear impacts are needed. For the PC Crash simulation runs the output sampling rate is too large to allow sufficient analysis. In addition the performance appears to be too general.
The fact that ADAC Air Rescue handles approximately 4,000 road accident missions every year gave rise to set up an accident research programme for which ADAC Air Rescue provides its data. This data is of initial informational quality and will be supplemented by data from the police, experts, fire brigades as well as hospitals and forensic institutes. Although the number of cases is still rather low, certain tendencies can be identified. The causes for most accidents occur when joining or intersecting traffic, followed by speeding in road bends and tailgating. Many accidents involve HGV rear end collisions, often causing serious injuries, considerable damage and technical problems for the rescue operations. With regard to the various impact types, it has become obvious that most of the extremely serious injuries are inflicted during a passenger car side impact. In addition, access to and removal of trapped passengers is becoming more and more complicated, partly due to the increasing use of high-strength materials, and rescue operations tend to be more time consuming.
Seit Anfang der 70er Jahre kann im Bereich der passiven Sicherheit eine stetige Verbesserung durch die Abnahme der im Verkehr verletzten und getöteten Personen beobachtet werden. Weitere fahrzeugtechnische Optimierungen zur Verbesserung von Selbst- und Partnerschutz, unterstützt und forciert durch flankierende legislative Maßnahmen, sind durchzuführen, wobei parallel die Effizienz bereits getroffener Maßnahmen zu prüfen ist. In der Pilotstudie wird der Versuch gemacht, ausgehend von bekannten Erkenntnissen der Unfallanalyse, das Gesamtunfallgeschehen Pkw zu realitätsbezogenen, in ihren Wirkungsmechanismen gleichartigen Unfallkonstellationen zusammenzufassen. Die Reduzierung auf wenige Kollisionstypen schafft die Möglichkeit zur Erarbeitung von Testbedingungen. Die im Test nachzufahrenden Unfallkonstellationen und die statisch/dynamische Untersuchung einzelner Fahrzeugkomponenten dokumentieren sich in physikalischen Messwerten und fahrzeugbezogenen Größen. Ein Bewertungssystem addiert die Messwerte auf und versieht sie mit relevanzproportionalen Wichtungsfaktoren zu einem Sicherheitsgrad. Praktische Bedeutung hat das Projekt zum Beispiel für die quantitative Ermittlung des Sicherheitsfortschrittes innerhalb eines Zeitraumes von 10 bis 15 Jahren, der Untersuchung von Sicherheitskomponenten und der Effizienzüberprüfung legislativer Sicherheitsverordnungen etc.
Annually within the European Union, there are over 50,000 road accident fatalities and 2 million other casualties, of which the majority are either the occupants of cars or other road users in collision with a car. The European Commission now has competency for vehicle-based injury countermeasures through the Whole Vehicle Type Approval system. As a result, the Commission has recognised that casualty reduction strategies must be based on a full understanding of the real-world need under European conditions and that the effectiveness of vehicle countermeasures must be properly evaluated. The PENDANT study commenced in January 2003 in order to explore the possibility of developing a co-ordinated set of targeted, in-depth crash data resources to support European Union vehicle and road safety policy. Three main work activity areas (Work Packages) commenced to provide these resources. This paper describes some of the outcomes of Work Package 2 (WP2, In-depth Crash Investigations and Data Analysis). In WP2, some 1,100 investigations of crashes involving injured car occupants were conducted in eight EU countries to a common protocol based on that developed in the STAIRS programme. This paper describes the purposes, methodology and results of WP2. It is expected that the results will be used as a co-ordinated system to inform European vehicle safety policy in a systematic, integrated manner. Furthermore, the results of the data analyses will be exploited further to provide new directions to develop injury countermeasures and regulations.
The paper presents a methodology for the benefit estimation of several secondary safety systems for pedestrians, using the exceptional data depth of GIDAS. A total of 667 frontal pedestrian accidents up to 40kph and more than 500 AIS2+ injuries have been considered. In addition to the severity, affected body region, exact impact point on the vehicle, and the causing part of every injury, the related Euro NCAP test zone was determined. One results of the study is a detailed impact distribution for AIS2+ injuries across the vehicle front. It can be stated, how often a test zone or vehicle part is hit by pedestrians in frontal accidents and which role the ground impact plays. Basing on that, different secondary safety measures can be evaluated by an injury shift method concerning their real world effectiveness. As an example, measures concerning the Euro NCAP pedestrian rating tests have been evaluated. It was analysed which Euro NCAP test zones are the most effective ones. In addition, real test results have been evaluated. Using the presented methodology, other secondary safety like the active bonnet (pop-up bonnet) or a pedestrian airbag measures can be evaluated.
Injury probability functions for pedestrians and bicyclists based on real-world accident data
(2017)
The paper is focusing on the modelling of injury severity probabilities, often called as Injury Risk Functions (IRF). These are mathematical functions describing the probability for a defined population and for possible explanatory factors (variables) to sustain a certain injury severity. Injury risk functions are becoming more and more important as basis for the assessment of automotive safety systems. They contribute to the understanding of injury mechanisms, (prospective) evaluation of safety systems and definition of protection criteria or are used within regulation and/or consumer ratings. In all cases, knowledge about the correlation between mechanical behavior and injury severity is needed. IRFs are often based on biomechanical data. This paper is focusing on the derivation of injury probability models from real world accident data of the GIDAS database (German In-depth Accident Study). In contrast to most academic terms there is no explicit term definition or definition of creation processes existing for injury probability models based on empirical data. Different approaches are existing for such kind of models in the field of accident research. There is a need for harmonization in terms of the used methods and data as well as the handling with the existing challenges. These are preparation of the dataset, model assumptions, censored/unknown data, evaluation of model accuracy, definition of dependent and independent variable, and others. In the presented study, several empirical, statistical and phenomenological approaches were analyzed regarding their advantages and disadvantages and also their applicability. Furthermore, the identification of appropriate prediction parameters for the injury severity of pedestrians has been considered. Due to its main effect on injuries of pedestrians and bicyclists, the importance of the secondary impact has also been analyzed. Finally, the model accuracy, evaluated by several criteria, is the rating factor that gives the quality and reliability for application of the resulting models. After the investigation and evaluation of statistical approaches one method was chosen and appropriate prediction variables were examined. Finally, all findings were summarized and injury risk functions for pedestrians in real world accidents were created. Additionally, the paper gives instructions for the interpretation and usage of such functions. The presented results include IRFs for several injury severity levels and age groups. The presented models are based on a high amount of real world accidents and describe very well the injury severity probability of pedestrians and bicyclists in frontal collisions with current vehicles. The functions can serve as basis for the evaluation of effectiveness of systems like Pedestrian-AEB or Bicycle-AEB.
The following paper presents the nature and mechanism of injuries sustained in frontal impacts, focusing on car to car impacts. It was found that the body regions most frequently sustaining severe to fatal injuries were the legs and the thorax. The nature and mechanism of the injury sustained was investigated only for the thorax injuries, due to their potentially life threatening nature. The analysis revealed that the most frequent cause of the injury recorded was the seatbelt for low severity injuries and the front structure of the vehicle for higher severity injuries. An analysis of the effect of load limiter technology in the restraint system showed that the proportion of occupants who sustained "no thorax injury" did not increase when a load limiter was fitted to the restraint system. However, a decrease in the "organ" and "organ and skeletal" injuries was observed in the load limiter sample. Sample size and variation mean that these findings are not conclusive.
In line with the new definition introduced by the European Commission (EC), the number of seriously injured road casualties in Germany for 2014 is assessed in this study. The number of MAIS3+ casualties is estimated by two different methodological approaches. The first approach is based on data from the German Inâ€Depth Accident Study (GIDAS), which is closely related to the German Road Traffic Accident Statistics. The second approach is based on data from the German TraumaRegister DGU-® (TRâ€DGU), which includes many more hospitals but not all MAIS3+ injuries.
The National Highways Development Project in India is aimed at upgrading over 12,000 km of national highways from 2-lane undivided roads to 4-lane divided roads. With nearly 40% of fatal crashes being reported on national highways, the effect of this project on road safety needs to be assessed. Researchers carried out on-site crash investigations and in-depth crash data collection for a period of 45 to 60 days on four 2-lane undivided highways and a 4-lane divided highway. Based on 76 crashes examined, researchers found a shift of crash pattern from head-on collisions on undivided 2- lane highways to front-rear collisions on divided 4-lane highways. This paper presents the methodology, analysis of crashes examined, and the critical safety problems identified for greater consideration in future highway development projects. This paper also highlights the need and significance of in-depth crash investigations to understand local traffic conditions and problems in India.
Today, Euro NCAP is a well established rating system for passive car safety. The significance of the ratings must however be evaluated by comparison with national accident data. For this purpose accidents with involvement of two passenger cars have been taken from the German National Road Accident Register (record years 1998 to 2004) to evaluate the results of the NCAP frontal impact test configuration. Injury data from both drivers involved in frontal car to car collisions have been sampled and have been compared, using a "Bradley Terry Model" which is well established in the area of paired comparisons. Confounders " like mass ratio of the cars involved, gender of the driver, etc. " have been accounted for in the statistical model. Applying the Bradley Terry Model to the national accident data the safety ranking from Euro NCAP has been validated (safety level: 1star <2 star <3 star <4 star). Significant safety differences are found between cars of the 1 and 2 star category as compared to cars of the 3 and 4 star category. The impact of the mass ratio was highly significant and most influential. Changing the mass ratio by an amount of 10% will raise the chance for the driver of the heavier car to get better off by about 18%. The impact of driver gender was again highly significant, showing a nearly 2 times lower injury risk for male drivers. With regard to the NCAP rating drivers of a high rated car are more than 2 times more probable (70% chance) to get off less injured in a frontal collision as compared to the driver of a low rated car.
The increase in light duty trucks (LDT) on the road in the US is a safety concern because of their aggressivity, or risk they present to occupants of cars, especially in side impacts. We use FARS data to look at fatality trends in frontal and side impacts between cars and LDT. FARS data is also used to determine risk, or fatalities per registered vehicle, imposed on car drivers from other vehicle types. We use NASS CDS data to investigate sources of serious injuries in vehicles with side impact. These sources of injury are categorized into three major groups: 1) contact without intrusion, 2) contact with intrusion, and 3) restraints. We find a greater fraction of intrusion related injuries in cars struck on their side by SUV or pick-up trucks than when they are struck by other cars.
Nowadays airbags are part of the standard equipment in almost all new cars. While airbags are saving an increasing number of people from severe injuries and death in moderate and high speed crashes, they do not completely prevent dashboard injuries. The most common mechanism in dashboard injuries is a posteriorly directed force to the proximal tibia with the knee flexed. This may occur during a motor vehicle frontal impact accident when a knee of the driver or the front-seat passenger strikes the dashboard. The posterior force can be combined with a abducting or rotational force leading to concomitant lateral or posterolateral injury. Car and airbag manufacturers therefore develop special inflatable systems to reduce the impact force in dashboard injuries. Every new inflatable system, however, has to be evaluated in out of position situations in which the system might cause injuries to certain body areas. Therefore, we investigated a new kneebag system in different critical seating positions of post mortem test subjects (PMTS). The tested knee airbag module is a folded airbag (18 litre volume) which is installed below the lower section of the instrument panel of a passenger car. Using four PMTS (2 male, 2 female, age 36"67) the following positions were tested: normal seating position, knee flexed >90 degrees and knee flexed <60 degrees in static deployment tests with direct contact. In addition a dynamic test (48.8kph, AAMA-pulse) was carried out with the PMTS belted in a normal seating position. The inflation phase and the impact of the system on the knee/lower leg were analysed by high speed videos. After the test the lower legs of the PMTS were examined by Xray and autopsy. All soft tissue injuries and bone fractures were recorded. All the tests could be evaluated. Except some superficial skin lesions in the impact area no fracture of the bones around the knee and no knee ligament and tendon injuries were observed. Neither video analysis nor autopsy of the PMTS showed any critical contact injuries caused by the inflation process of the bag. Therefore, it can be concluded that in the tested seating positions which are the most critical for the knee area the knee bag system is safe.
The improvement of passive car security devices led to a reduction of injuries, especially of the head, the neck and the torso mainly due to the airbag function. The passenger's foot and ankle could not profit from this development. Some investigators even reported a progression of leg injuries (1). In this study, we investigated a current collective of patients with foot and ankle fractures or severe soft tissue injuries in relation with defined crash parameters. Special interest was paid to the car's footwell.
Sedan type vehicles in which adult rear seat passengers were present and which were involved in frontal collisions were investigated, and the influence of unbelted rear seat passengers on the injuries of front seat occupants was studied. Unbelted rear seat passengers move forward during impact. It was observed that there were not only cases in which front seat occupants sustained injuries caused by direct contact with rear seat passengers, but also cases where front seat occupants received severe injuries due to additional force from rear seat passengers, either impacting directly or indirectly as a result of deformation of the front seat. Severe injuries of front seat occupants were observed in the latter cases. This research validates the importance of seat-belt use for rear seat passengers, not only to protect themselves but also to mitigate injuries of front seat occupants.
Der Anteil von Geländefahrzeugen an der Gesamtzahl von Personenkraftwagen betrug im Juli 1991 in den alten Bundesländern ca. 1,1 Prozent. Nach eigenen Erhebungen sind etwa 62 Prozent der Geländefahrzeuge mit einem Frontschutzbügel ausgestattet. Der Bundesminister für Verkehr hat die BASt beauftragt zu prüfen, ob solche Konstruktionen einen Einfluss auf die Verletzungen bei Kollisionen mit Fußgängern und Zweiradbenutzern haben. Dazu wurde das Datenmaterial der Unfallerhebung der Medizinischen Hochschule Hannover ausgewertet und die um fahrzeugtechnische Angaben ergänzten Unfalldaten aus Nordrhein-Westfalen betrachtet. Weiterhin wird von Komponententests berichtet, die den Anprall menschlicher Körperteile an das Fahrzeug simulieren. Mit den Ergebnissen dieser Untersuchung wurde ein Frontschutzbügel hergestellt, der weniger aggressiv gegenüber ungeschützten Verkehrsteilnehmern ist. Zur Quantifizierung der Gefährdung von Fußgängern wurden zwei gängige Geländefahrzeugtypen mit und ohne Frontschutzbügel gemäß dem Prüfvorschlag der EEVC-WG 10 zur Bestimmung der Fußgängerverträglichkeit von Pkw-Frontflächen getestet. Die Ergebnisse aus den Versuchsreihen wurden mit Ergebnissen aus Versuchen an normalen Pkw verglichen.Es kann festgestellt werden, dass bei einem Unfall mit Kopfanprall eines Kindes an ein mit Frontschutzbügel ausgestattetes Geländefahrzeug bei 20 km/h mit gleichen Kopfbelastungen zu rechnen ist, wie bei einem Unfall mit 30 km/h mit einem Geländefahrzeug ohne Frontschutzbügel, beziehungsweise mit 40 km/h mit einem normalen Pkw. Für den Hüftanprall eines Erwachsenen an die Haubenkante ist bei einer Fahrzeuggeschwindigkeit von 25 km/h bei einem Fahrzeug mit Frontschutzbügel mit gleichen Belastungen zu rechnen, wie bei einem Unfall mit einem Fahrzeug ohne Frontschutzbügel bei 40 km/h (Pkw oder Geländewagen). Für die Belastungen des Knies eines Erwachsenen lässt sich keine Verschlechterung durch montierte Frontschutzbügel ableiten.
The number of injuries sustained by car occupants involving the head, thorax, spine, pelvis and the upper limbs have been reduced significantly during recent years. This is probably due to better safety features in the cars, especially the availability and usage of safety belts, airbags etc. Therefore one can notice clinically a relative increase in survivors of severe frontal crashes, but many of them have injuries to the lower extremities. To verify this, we analyzed the foot and ankle injuries of front seat passengers.