From an automotive safety occupant protection standpoint, effective occupant restraint requires a system capable of providing non-injurious occupant ride down of anticipated crash forces. This is not only the case for frontal collisions, where occupant restraint is provided primarily by seatbelts and airbags, but is also critical for other crash modes such as side impacts, rear impacts, rollovers, as well as multiple impact events. In the rear impact crash mode, occupant restraint is provided primarily by the seatbacks and to some extent the seatbelts. Foundationally, therefore, what becomes fundamental to the seatback's role in rear occupant protection is its ability to contain the occupant within the seat, preventing occupant ramping, as well as preventing the seat's, and/or its occupant's, dangerous intrusion into the rear occupant's survival space where contact with rear compartment components and/ or rear seated occupants can present a significant injury risk. An analysis is presented of a series of rear impact sled testing conducted by the authors that evaluates the timing, position and extent of the front seatback's reward displacement toward and into the rear occupant compartment as well as consideration of the front seat occupant' ramping potential and its injury potential relative to the rear compartment. Additionally, three other series of testing are presented which assess various seat designs occupant retention capabilities. Lastly, a matched-pair comparison test series is presented which evaluates occupant motion in rear impact with and without use of a typical vehicle body mounted 3-point seatbelt. Discussion of restraint system performance observed in all the testing is included along with ATD biofidelity and thigh-gap considerations. The data collected and presented includes accelerometer instrumentation and high speed video analysis.
Twenty-eight percent of traffic accidents in Japan are rear-end collisions, and of these, 13% are multiple collisions (three or more vehicles and/or roadside objects). A post-crash braking system enables the driver to stop the vehicle in a short distance after a rear-end collision to prevent secondary collisions. In this study, the effectiveness of a post-crash braking system was examined using a drive recorder database. In 64% of rear-end collisions, the driver's braking was interrupted after the collision. The stopping distance was estimated with time data from the drive recorder. We predict that the brake assist would be effective in preventing secondary collisions in 21% of cases.
This study investigates the protection offered by passive head-restraints with different stiffness and energy dissipation properties. For this purpose, computational multi-body models of a generic car seat and a biofidelic 50thpercentile male human for rear impact are used to study different seat designs and passive head-restraints. The validated seat-occupant model is also used in the design of two different car-seat models which are shown to effectively mitigate whiplash by utilising a crash-energy distribution technique. Five different passive head-restraints with varying stiffness (low-medium-high) and energy dissipation percentages (low-high) are successively attached to four different car-seat models. The simulation results indicate that the protection offered by head restraints is strongly dependent on the seat design. It has also been shown that the stiffness of the passive head-restraint has much more influence on whiplash-risk in comparison to its energy dissipation capacity.
Euro NCAP will start to test pedestrian Automatic Emergency Braking Systems (AEB) from 2016 on. Test procedures for these tests had been developed by and discussed between the AsPeCSS project and other initiatives (e.g. the AEB group with Thatcham Research from the UK). This paper gives an overview on the development process from the AsPeCSS side, summarizes the current test and assessment procedures as of March 2015 and shows test and assessment results of five cars that had been tested by BASt for AsPeCSS and the respective manufacturer. The test and assessment methodology seems appropriate to rate the performance of different vehicles. The best test result - still one year ahead of the test implementation - is around 80%, while the worst rating result is around 10%. Other vehicles are between these boundaries.
India is one of the leading countries reporting highest road accidents & related injuries. TMARG (Tata Motors Accident Research Group) has been recording crashes in association with M/s. Lokamanya Medical Foundation since 2011 with M/s, Amandeep Hospitals since Aug 2013. This study has highlighted some accident types not discussed extensively in literature. Trucks to Truck impacts " Cabin interaction with overhanging loadbody structures and Offset underside impacts for passenger vehicles are seen in significant numbers. The paper discusses these in more detail including severity.
The utilisation of secondary-safety systems to protect occupants has attained a very high level over the past decades. Further improvements are still possible, but increasingly minor progress is only to be had with a high degree of effort. Thus, a key aspect must be the impact to overall safety in an accident. If reliable information is available on an imminent crash, measures already taken in the pre-crash phase can result in a significantly great influence on the outcomes of the crash. With this background preventive measures are the key to a sustainable further reduction of the figures of crash victims on our roads. This paper aims to show a preventive approach that can contribute to lessening the consequences of a crash by creating an optimum interaction of measures in the fields of primary and secondary safety. To further enhance vehicle safety, driver assistant systems are already available that warn the driver of an imminent front-to-rear-end crash. The next step is to support him in his reactions or if he fails to react sufficiently, to even initiate an automatic braking when the crash becomes unavoidable. Automatic pre-crash braking can, in an ideal situation, fully prevent a crash or can significantly reduce the impact speed and thus the impact energy (and the severity of the accident). If a vehicle is being braked in the pre-crash phase, the occupants are already being pre-stressed by the deceleration. The information available about the imminent crash can be used to activate the belt tensioners and likewise other secondary safety systems in the vehicle right before the impact. The pre-crash deceleration also causes the front of the vehicle to dip. Conventional crash tests do not take this specific impact situation into consideration. This is why, for example, the influences of the pre-crash displacements of the occupants are not recorded in the test results. Furthermore, a reproducible representation of the benefit of the vehicle safety systems which prepare the occupants for the imminent impact is not possible. In order to demonstrate the functions of automated pre-crash braking and to investigate the differences during the impact as a consequence of the altered occupant positions as well as the initiation of force and deformations of the vehicle front, DEKRA teamed up with BMW to carry out a joint crash test with the latest BMW 5 series vehicle. It involved the vehicle braking automatically from a starting test speed of 64 km/h (corresponding to the impact speed set by Euro NCAP) down to 40 km/h. The test was still run by the intelligent drive system of the crash test facility. This required several modifications to be made to the test facility as well as to the vehicle. The paper will describe and discuss some relevant results of the crash test. In addition, the possible benefits of such systems will also be considered. The test supplemented the work of the vFSS working group (vFSS stands advanced Forward-looking Safety Systems).
The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe Informal Group on GTR No. 7 Phase 2 are working to define a build level for the BioRID II rear impact (whiplash) crash test dummy that ensures repeatable and reproducible performance in a test procedure that has been proposed for future legislation. This includes the specification of dummy hardware, as well as the development of comprehensive certification procedures for the dummy. This study evaluated whether the dummy build level and certification procedures deliver the desired level of repeatability and reproducibility. A custom-designed laboratory seat was made using the seat base, back, and head restraint from a production car seat to ensure a representative interface with the dummy. The seat back was reinforced for use in multiple tests and the recliner mechanism was replaced by an external spring-damper mechanism. A total of 65 tests were performed with 6 BioRID IIg dummies using the draft GTR No.7 sled pulse and seating procedure. All dummies were subject to the build, maintenance, and certification procedures defined by the Informal Group. The test condition was highly repeatable, with a very repeatable pulse, a well-controlled seat back response, and minimal observed degradation of seat foams. The results showed qualitatively reasonable repeatability and reproducibility for the upper torso and head accelerations, as well as for T1 Fx and upper neck Fx. However, reproducibility was not acceptable for T1 and upper neck Fz or for T1 and upper neck My. The Informal Group has not selected injury or seat assessment criteria for use with BioRID II, so it is not known whether these channels would be used in the regulation. However, the ramping-up behavior of the dummy showed poor reproducibility, which would be expected to affect the reproducibility of dummy measurements in general. Pelvis and spine characteristics were found to significantly influence the dummy measurements for which poor reproducibility was observed. It was also observed that the primary neck response in these tests was flexion, not extension. This correlates well with recent findings from Japan and the United States showing a correlation between neck flexion and injury in accident replication simulations and postmortem human subjects (PMHS) studies, respectively. The present certification tests may not adequately control front cervical spine bumper characteristics, which are important for neck flexion response. The certification sled test also does not include the pelvis and so cannot be used to control pelvis response and does not substantially load the lumbar bumpers and so does not control these parts of the dummy. The stiffness of all spine bumpers and of the pelvis flesh should be much more tightly controlled. It is recommended that a method for certifying the front cervical bumpers should be developed. Recommendations are also made for tighter tolerance on the input parameters for the existing certification tests.
Die UNECE Regelung R58 regelt die Beschaffenheit und die Installation von Heckunterfahrschutzsystemen an schweren Güterkraftfahrzeugen, deren Ziel die Verbesserung der Kompabilität zwischen Pkw-Frontstrukturen und Lkw-Hecks ist. Dennoch verunglücken laut amtlicher Unfallstatistik allein in Deutschland rund 30 Pkw-Insassen in Heckauffahrunfällen auf Lkw tödlich, da diese Vorrichtungen hinsichtlich Einbauhöhe und Steifigkeit den Anforderungen des realen Unfallgeschehens nicht genügen. Das Ziel dieser Studie ist eine quantitative Abschätzung der möglichen Reduzierung der Verletzungsschwere mit Hilfe eines statistischen Modells, die durch eine Anpassung der geltenden Bestimmungen und die damit verbundenen technischen Veränderungen des bereits vorgeschriebenen Heckunterfahrschutzes zu erreichen wäre. In einer Nutzen-Kosten-Analyse wird die Wirtschaftlichkeit dieser Modifizierungen mit einem idealen Notbremsassistenten verglichen. Die Untersuchung orientiert sich dabei an den aktuell in der UN-ECE WP29/GRSG in Genf diskutierten Vorschlägen zur Anpassung der ECE-R58. Das verwendete ordinale Probit-Modell stellt einen Zusammenhang zwischen der Verletzungsschwere im auffahrenden PKW und erklärenden Größen her, in diesem Fall der kinetischen Energie des unterfahrenden Pkws und der strukturellen lnteraktion zwischen Lkw-Heck und Pkw-Front. Diese Maßnahmen könnten demnach 53 - 78% der Getöteten sowie 27 - 49% der Schwerverletzten bei diesen Unfallkonstellationen reduzieren, was pro Jahr 20 Getöteten und 95 Schwerverletzten entsprechen würde. Somit würde eine Modifikation einer bestehenden passiven Schutzmaßnahme an jährlich 100.000 neuzugelassenen Lkw und Anhängern bereits 20 Getötete adressieren. Im Vergleich dazu müssten jährlich 3 Millionen Pkw mit zusätzlicher Sensorik und Aktuatorik für einen idealen Notbremsassistenten ausgestattet werden, um im Idealfall alle Heckauffahrunfälle von Pkw auf andere Pkw oder Lkw und damit 53 Getötete zu vermeiden. Daher fällt auch das Nutzen-Kosten-Verhältnis deutlich zugunsten des verbesserten Heckunterfahrschutzes aus.
Rear-end collisions are the most frequent same and opposite-direction crashes. Common causes include momentary inattention, inadequate speed or inadequate distance. While most rear-end collisions in urban traffic only result in vehicle damage or slight injuries, rear-end collisions outside built-up areas or on motorways usually cause fatal or serious injuries. Driver assistance systems that detect dangerous situations in the longitudinal vehicle direction are therefore an essential safety plus. In view of this, for ADAC, systems that alert drivers to dangerous situations and initiate autonomous braking complement ESC as one of the most important active safety features in modern vehicles. The aim of ADAC is to provide consumers with technical advice and competent information about the systems available on the market. Reliable comparative tests that are based on standardised test criteria may provide motorists with important information and help them make a buying decision. In addition, they raise consumer awareness of the systems and speed up their market penetration. The assessment must focus on as many aspects of effectiveness as possible and include not only autonomous braking but also collision warning and autonomous brake assist. The work of the ADAC accident research is the development of the testing scenarios with direct link to accident situations and the identification of useful test criteria for testing.
Mit der vorliegenden Untersuchung knüpft die Bundesanstalt für Straßenwesen an die letzte Untersuchung zum Unfallgeschehen von Wohnmobilen aus dem Jahr 1999 an. Neben der Entwicklung der Anzahl der Unfälle von Wohnmobilen im Zeitraum 2000 bis 2010 wird die Struktur der Unfälle beleuchtet. Auch die charakteristischen Merkmale der beteiligten Fahrer der Wohnmobile und einige technische Merkmale wie z.B. die Motorisierung und das zulässige Gesamtgewicht werden untersucht. Weiterhin wird die im Unfallgeschehen kleine Gruppe der Pkw mit Wohnanhänger soweit möglich in die Untersuchung einbezogen. Diese beiden Gruppen werden der Gesamtgruppe der Pkw-Unfälle vergleichend gegenübergestellt. Wohnmobile werden in der amtlichen Unfallstatistik nicht explizit codiert. Somit sind -im Rahmen der regelmäßigen Veröffentlichungen des Statistischen Bundesamtes -keine Informationen zum Unfallgeschehen von Wohnmobilen verfügbar. Dennoch ist es möglich, über die vom Kraftfahrt-Bundesamt ergänzten fahrzeugtechnischen Angaben zum Kraftfahrzeug, deutsche Wohnmobile zu identifizieren und mit der vollen Merkmalsbreite des amtlichen Datenmaterials auszuwerten. Mit einem Anteil von weniger als 0,3% an allen Unfällen mit Personenschaden stellen Unfälle unter Beteiligung von Wohnmobilen keinen Schwerpunkt im Unfallgeschehen dar. Im Jahr 2010 wurden 743 Unfälle mit Personenschaden registriert, an denen ein Wohnmobil beteiligt war. Die Entwicklung der Unfallbeteiligung stellt sich im Zeitraum 2000 bis 2010 mit einem Rückgang von 36% bei den Unfällen mit Personenschaden sogar günstiger dar, als die Entwicklung der Unfälle unter Pkw-Beteiligung (-28%). Bei Unfällen unter Beteiligung von Wohnmobilen wurden im Jahr 2010 insgesamt 19 Personen getötet und 202 Personen schwer verletzt. Darunter waren jedoch nur 4 getötete und 62 schwerverletzte Personen Insassen eines Wohnmobils; die übrigen Verunglückten wurden beim Unfallgegner registriert. Gleichwohl zeigt die nach Fahrern und Mitfahrern differenzierte Betrachtung der Unfallschwere bei den Wohnmobilen Ansatzpunkte zur Verbesserung der Sicherheit. Im Mittel des Zeitraumes 2000 bis 2010 weisen die Mitfahrer von Wohnmobilen eine deutlich erhöhte Unfallschwere im Vergleich zu den Fahrern auf. So liegt die Kenngrösse \"Schwere Personenschäden bezogen auf die Fahrer bzw. Mitfahrer\" bei den Mitfahrern bei 51 schweren Personenschäden je 1.000 Mitfahrer und bei den Fahrern bei 34 schweren Personenschäden je 1.000 Fahrer.