The off-set assessment procedure potentially contributes to the FIMCAR objectives to maintain the compartment strength and to assess load spreading in frontal collisions. Furthermore it provides the opportunity to assess the restraint system performance with different pulses if combined with a full-width assessment procedure in the frontal assessment approach. Originally it was expected that the PDB assessment procedure would be selected for the FIMCAR assessment approach. However, it was not possible to deliver a compatibility metric in time so that the current off-set procedure (ODB as used in UNECE R94) with some minor modifications was proposed for the FIMCAR Assessment Approach. Nevertheless the potential to assess load spreading, which appears not to be possible with any other assessed frontal impact assessment procedure was considered to be still high. Therefore the development work for the PDB assessment procedure did not stop with the decision not to select the PDB procedure. As a result of the decisions to use the current ODB and to further develop the PDB procedure, both are covered within this deliverable. The deliverable describes the off-set test procedure that will be recommended by FIMCAR consortium, this corresponds to the ODB test as it is specified in UN-ECE Regulation 94 (R94), i.e. EEVC deformable element with 40% overlap at a test speed of 56 km/h. In addition to the current R94 requirements, FIMCAR will recommend to introduce some structural requirements which will guarantee sufficiently strong occupant compartments by enforcing the stability of the forward occupant cell. With respect to the PDB assessment procedure a new metric, Digital Derivative in Y direction - DDY, was developed, described, analysed, and compared with other metrics. The DDY metric analyses the deformation gradients laterally across the PDB face. The more even the deformation, the lower the DDY values and the better the metric- result. In order analyse the different metrics, analysis of the existing PDB test results and the results of the performed simulation studies was performed. In addition, an assessment of artificial deformation profiles with the metrics took place. This analysis shows that there are still issues with the DDY metric but it appears that it is possible to solve them with future optimisations. For example the current metric assesses only the area within 60% of the half vehicle width. For vehicles that have the longitudinals further outboard, the metric is not effective. In addition to the metric development, practical issues of the PDB tests such as the definition of a scan procedure for the analysis of the deformation pattern including the validation of the scanning procedure by the analysis of 3 different scans at different locations of the same barrier were addressed. Furthermore the repeatability and reproducibility of the PDB was analysed. The barrier deformation readings seem to be sensitive with respect to the impact accuracy. In total, the deliverable is meant to define the FIMCAR off-set assessment procedure and to be a starting point for further development of the PDB assessment procedure.
The objective of this deliverable is to describe the expected influence of the candidate test procedures developed in FIMCAR for frontal impact on other impact types. The other impact types of primary interest are front-to-side impacts, collisions with road restraint systems (e.g. guardrails), and heavy goods vehicle impacts. These collision types were chosen as they involve structures that can be adapted to improve safety. Collisions with vulnerable road users (VRU) were not explicitly investigated in FIMCAR. It is expected that the vehicle structures of interest in FIMCAR can be designed into a VRU friendly shell. Information used for this deliverable comes from simulations and car-to-car crash tests conducted in FIMCAR or review of previous research. Three test configurations (full width, offset, and moving deformable barriers) were the input to the FIMCAR selection process. There are three different types of offset tests and two different full width tests. During the project test procedures could be divided into three groups that provide different influences or outcomes on vehicle designs: 1. The ODB barrier provides a method to assess part of the vehicles energy absorption capabilities and compartment test in one test. 2. The FWRB and FWDB have similar capabilities to control structural alignment, further assess energy absorption capabilities, and promote the improvements in the occupant restraint system for high deceleration impacts. 3. The PDB and MPDB can be used to promote better load spreading in the vehicle structures, in addition to assessing energy absorption and occupant compartment strength in an offset configuration. The consortium selected the ODB and FWDB as the two best candidates for short term application in international rulemaking. The review of how all candidates would affect vehicle performance in other impacts (beside front-to-front vehicle or frontal impacts with fixed obstacles) however is reported in this deliverable to support the benefit analysis reported in FIMCAR. The grouping presented above is used to discuss all five test candidates using similarities between certain tests and thereby simplify the discussion.
The objectives of the FIMCAR (Frontal Impact and Compatibility Assessment Research) project are to answer the remaining open questions identified in earlier projects (such as understanding of the advantages and disadvantages of force based metrics and barrier deformation based metrics, confirmation of specific compatibility issues such as structural interaction, investigation of force matching) and to finalise the frontal impact test procedures required to assess compatibility. Research strategies and priorities were based on earlier research programs and the FIMCAR accident data analysis. The identified real world safety issues were used to develop a list of compatibility characteristics which were then prioritised within the consortium. This list was the basis for evaluating the different test candidates. This analysis resulted in the combination of the Full Width Deformable Barrier test (FWDB) with compatibility metrics and the existing Offset Deformable Barrier (ODB) as described in UN-ECE Regulation 94 with additional cabin integrity requirement as being proposed as the FIMCAR assessment approach. The proposed frontal impact assessment approach addresses many of the issues identified by the FIMCAR consortium but not all frontal impact and compatibility issues could be addressed.
For the assessment of vehicle safety in frontal collisions compatibility (which consists of self and partner protection) between opponents is crucial. Although compatibility has been analysed worldwide for over 10 years, no final assessment approach has been defined to date. Taking into account the European Enhanced Vehicle safety Committee (EEVC) compatibility and frontal impact working group (WG15) and the FP5 VC-COMPAT project activities, two test approaches have been identified as the most promising candidates for the assessment of compatibility. Both are composed of an off-set and a full overlap test procedure. In addition another procedure (a test with a moving deformable barrier) is getting more attention in current research programmes. The overall objective of the FIMCAR project is to complete the development of the candidate test procedures and propose a set of test procedures suitable for regulatory application to assess and control a vehicle- frontal impact and compatibility crash safety. In addition an associated cost benefit analysis should be performed. The objectives of the work reported in this deliverable were to review existing full-width test procedures and their discussed compatibility metrics, to report recent activities and findings with respect to full-width assessment procedures and to assess test procedures and metrics. Starting with a review of previous work, candidate metrics and associated performance limits to assess a vehicle- structural interaction potential, in particular its structural alignment, have been developed for both the Full Width Deformable Barrier (FWDB) and Full Width Rigid Barrier (FWRB) tests. Initial work was performed to develop a concept to assess a vehicle- frontal force matching. However, based on the accident analyses performed within FIMCAR frontal force matching was not evaluated as a first priority and thus in line with FIMCAR strategy the focus was put on the development of metrics for the assessment of structural interaction which was evaluated as a first priority.
Accident analysis
(2014)
For the assessment of vehicle safety in frontal collisions compatibility (which consists of self and partner protection) between opponents is crucial. Although compatibility has been analysed worldwide for years, no final assessment approach has been defined to date. Taking into account the European Enhanced Vehicle safety Committee (EEVC) compatibility and frontal impact working group (WG15) and the EC funded FP5 VC-COMPAT project activities, two test approaches have been identified as the most promising candidates for the assessment of compatibility. Both are composed of an off-set and a full overlap test procedure. In addition another procedure (a test with a moving deformable barrier) is getting more attention in today- research programmes. The overall objective of the FIMCAR project is to complete the development of the candidate test procedures and propose a set of test procedures suitable for regulatory application to assess and control a vehicle- frontal impact and compatibility crash safety. In addition an associated cost benefit analysis should be performed. The specific objectives of the work reported in this deliverable were: - Determine if previously identified compatibility issues are still relevant in current vehicle fleet: Structural interaction, Frontal force matching, Compartment strength in particular for light cars. - Determine nature of injuries and injury mechanisms: Body regions injured o Injury mechanism: Contact with intrusion, Contact, Deceleration / restraint induced. The main data sources for this report were the CCIS and Stats 19 databases from Great Britain and the GIDAS database from Germany. The different sampling and reporting schemes for the detailed databases (CCIS & GIDAS) sometimes do not allow for direct comparisons of the results. However the databases are complementary " CCIS captures more severe collisions highlighting structure and injury issues while GIDAS provides detailed data for a broader range of crash severities. The following results represent the critical points for further development of test procedures in FIMCAR.
Cost benefit analysis
(2014)
Although the number of road accident casualties in Europe is falling the problem still remains substantial. In 2011 there were still over 30,000 road accident fatalities [EC 2012]. Approximately half of these were car occupants and about 60 percent of these occurred in frontal impacts. The next stage to improve a car- safety performance in frontal impacts is to improve its compatibility for car-to-car impacts and for collisions against objects and HGVs. Compatibility consists of improving both a car- self and partner protection in a manner such that there is good interaction with the collision partner and the impact energy is absorbed in the car- frontal structures in a controlled way which results in a reduction of injuries. Over the last ten years much research has been performed which has found that there are four main factors related to a car- compatibility [Edwards 2003, Edwards 2007]. These are structural interaction potential, frontal force matching, compartment strength and the compartment deceleration pulse and related restraint system performance. The objective of the FIMCAR FP7 EC-project was to develop an assessment approach suitable for regulatory application to control a car- frontal impact and compatibility crash performance and perform an associated cost benefit analysis for its implementation.
For the assessment of vehicle safety in frontal collisions compatibility (which consists of self and partner protection) between opponents is crucial. Although compatibility has been analysed worldwide for over 10 years, no final assessment approach has been defined to date. Taking into account the European Enhanced Vehicle safety Committee (EEVC) compatibility and the final report to the steering committee on frontal impact [Faerber 2007] and the FP5 VC-COMPAT[Edwards 2007] project activities, two test approaches were identified as the most promising candidates for the assessment of compatibility. Both are composed of an off-set and a full overlap test procedure. In addition another procedure (a test with a moving deformable barrier) is getting more attention in current research programmes. The overall objective of the FIMCAR project is to complete the development of the candidate test procedures and propose a set of test procedures suitable for regulatory application to assess and control a vehicle- frontal impact and compatibility crash safety. In addition an associated cost benefit analysis will be performed. In the FIMCAR Deliverable D 3.1 [Adolph 2013] the development and assessment of criteria and associated performance limits for the full width test procedure were reported. In this Deliverable D3.2 analyses of the test data (full width tests, car-to-car tests and component tests), further development and validation of the full width assessment protocol and development of the load cell and load cell wall specification are reported. The FIMCAR full-width assessment procedure consists of a 50 km/h test against the Full Width Deformable Barrier (FWDB). The Load Cell Wall behind the deformable element assesses whether or not important Energy Absorbing Structures are within the Common Interaction Zone as defined based on the US part 581 zone. The metric evaluates the row forces and requires that the forces directly above and below the centre line of the Common Interaction Zone exceed a minimum threshold. Analysis of the load spreading showed that metrics that rely on sum forces of rows and columns are within acceptable tolerances. Furthermore it was concluded that the Repeatability and Reproducibility of the FWDB test is acceptable. The FWDB test was shown to be capable to detect lower load paths that are beneficial in car-to-car impacts.
Im von der DG Home (CIPS Program) geförderten Projekt "SecMan " Security Manual for Road Infrastructures" wurde ein vierstufiges Verfahren zur Identifikation kritischer Straßeninfrastrukturen, ihre Bewertung hinsichtlich diverser von Menschen verursachter Gefahren sowie die Bestimmung effektiver Schutzmaßnahmen entwickelt. Diese Ergebnisse wurden in einem ganzheitlichen "best-practice" Handbuch zusammen getragen, welches einen trans-nationalen Sicherheitsmanagement-Ansatz für Betreiber und Eigentümer von Straßeninfrastrukturen in Europa ermöglicht. Im Folgenden wird die entwickelte Methodik vorgestellt, ausgehend von der Bewertung der Netzkritikalität über die Attraktivität und Vulnerabilität eines Bauwerks hin zu einer Bewertungsmethodik für die Auswahl geeigneter Schutzmaßnahmen.
Straßenseitige Fahrzeug-Rückhaltesysteme haben entsprechend der Richtlinie für passiven Schutz an Straßen durch Fahrzeug-Rückhaltesysteme (RPS) die Aufgabe, die Folgen von Verkehrsunfällen so gering wie möglich zu halten. Sie kommen dabei sowohl zum Schutz unbeteiligter Personen, des Gegenverkehrs bei zweibahnigen Straßen sowie schutzbedürftiger Bereiche neben der Straße als auch zum Schutz der Fahrzeuginsassen vor schweren Folgen infolge Abkommens von der Fahrbahn zum Einsatz. Vor dem Einsatz der unterschiedlichen Systeme muss die Wirksamkeit des jeweiligen Systems für den entsprechenden Anwendungsfall nachgewiesen werden. Dabei regeln die RPS, welche Anforderungen an welchen örtlichen Gegebenheiten erfüllt sein müssen. In DIN EN 1317 sind die zugehörigen Prüfverfahren beschrieben. Da ein normiertes Prüfverfahren nicht alle real auftretenden Unfallszenarien abdecken kann, stellte sich die Frage, wie sich Stahlschutzplanken und Betonschutzwände beim großwinkligen Anprall kleiner und leichter Fahrzeuge verhalten und wie es um die Insassensicherheit bestellt ist. Eine im Rahmen des resultierenden Forschungsprojektes durchgeführte Analyse des Unfallgeschehens ergab für das Jahr 2007 die Zahl von 25.038 polizeilich registrierten Unfällen mit Anprall gegen eine Schutzeinrichtung [Statistisches Bundesamt]. Angaben zu Anprallwinkel, Kollisionsgeschwindigkeit und Fahrzeugmasse können dieser Statistik nicht entnommen werden. Für die In-depth-Analyse wurden daher 69 Unfallgutachten zu Kollisionen mit großem Anprallwinkel (≥ 25-°) aus der DEKRA-Unfalldatenbank herangezogen. Der Schwerpunkt wurde dabei auf 39 Unfälle gelegt, die sich auf Bundesautobahnen ereignet hatten. Mit zunehmendem Anprallwinkel nahm die Unfallhäufigkeit ab. Der größte Winkel lag bei 60-°. Die Masse der anprallenden Fahrzeuge lag zwischen 750 kg und 1.935 kg. Auffällig war die Häufung von Schleuderunfällen. In 29 Fällen kam es zu einem prekollisionären Schleudervorgang. Die Analyse des Unfallgeschehens hat so gezeigt, dass Anpralle gegen passive Schutzeinrichtungen auf Bundesautobahnen mit zunehmendem Anprallwinkel seltener werden und dass der in der Norm für die Systemprüfung geforderte Maximalwinkel von 20-° das Gesamtunfallgeschehen sehr gut abdeckt. Auf Basis der gewonnenen Ergebnisse erfolgte die Festlegung einer Crash-Test-Konfiguration zur Erlangung von Erkenntnissen über die Insassensicherheit bei großwinkligen Anprallen. Dabei wurde als Grundlage der Anprallversuch TB 11 verwendet, wobei der Anprallwinkel von 20-° auf 45-° erhöht wurde. Die Kollisionsgeschwindigkeit von 100 km/h sowie die Fahrzeugmasse von 900 kg blieben unverändert. Die Anpralltests erfolgten gegen eine simulierte Ortbetonwand sowie gegen eine Stahlschutzplanke vom Typ Super-Rail-®. Die Versuchsfahrzeuge waren typgleich mit den Modellen, die für die ursprüngliche TB-11-Prüfung der Systeme verwendet wurden. Die Versuche haben gezeigt, dass beide Systeme die Rückhaltung der anprallenden Fahrzeuge sicher gewährleisteten. Für die Fahrer beider Fahrzeuge hätte aber keine Überlebenschance bestanden. Über das Schutzniveau der Fahrzeuginsassen entscheiden bei derartigen Anprallkonstellationen letztendlich das Niveau der passiven Sicherheit der anprallenden Fahrzeuge sowie das Energieabsorptionsvermögen der die Fahrgastzelle umschließenden Strukturen.
Falltests zur Untersuchung der Belastungen von Dummys beim Aufprall auf den Boden, Teil 1 und 2
(2010)
Beim Zusammenprall eines Motorrads mit einem Pkw unterscheidet man in der Unfallforschung sowohl den Erstanprall des Motorradfahrers an den Pkw als auch den Sekundäraufprall des Motorradfahrers auf dem Boden. So genannte Full-Scale-Crashtests mit Dummys haben beim Erstanprall gezeigt, dass Motorradfahrer durch Airbags potenziell geschützt werden können. Bei den entsprechenden Unfallsimulationen wurde jedoch im weiteren Bewegungsablauf beim nachfolgenden Sekundäraufprall auf dem Boden festgestellt, dass relativ hohe Belastungen auf den Dummy einwirken. Es stellt sich hierbei jedoch die Frage, ob die üblicherweise für Lasteinwirkungen im Falle eines Erstanpralls entwickelten und validierten Dummys die bei einem Sekundäraufprall auf einen Motorradfahrer einwirkenden Belastungen hinreichend genau wiedergeben können. Dazu wurden die Belastungen eines Dummys beim Aufprall auf den Boden untersucht, um das Verletzungsrisiko eines menschlichen Motorradfahrers einschätzen zu können. Im Dekra-Crash-Test-Center wurden vier verschiedene Aufprallsituationen mit einem Hybrid III Dummy durchgeführt, wobei diese Tests an eine andere Testreihe angelehnt sind, die bereits am US-amerikanischen Institut "Dynamic Research International" (DRI) durchgeführt worden waren. Nach der Erläuterung des Testaufbaus und seiner Durchführung wird detailliert auf die gemessenen Verzögerungsbelastungen des Dummys eingegangen. Hierbei geben zum einen Tabellen eine Übersicht über charakteristische Messwerte zur Quantifizierung der maximalen Belastung des Dummys, zum anderen veranschaulichen Bilder die zugehörigen zeitlichen Verzögerungsverläufe in Becken, Brust und Kopf des Dummys. Der Artikel schließt mit einer Interpretation der Versuchsergebnisse und gibt einen Ausblick auf den weiteren Untersuchungsbedarf.