Filtern
Dokumenttyp
Sprache
- Englisch (4) (entfernen)
Schlagworte
- Weight (4) (entfernen)
Institut
- Abteilung Fahrzeugtechnik (4) (entfernen)
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.
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.
According to the German road traffic regulations children up to the age of 12 or a height below 150 cm have to use approved and appropriate child restraint systems (CRS). CRS must be approved according to UN-ECE Regulation No. 44. The regulation classifies CRS in 5 weight categories. The upper weight group is approved for children from 22 to 36 kg. However, studies show that already today many children weigh more than 36 kg although they have not reached a height of 150 cm. Therefore, no ECE R44 approved CRS is available for these overweight children. In conclusion, today's sizes and weights of children are no longer represented by the current version of the ECE R44. The heaviest used dummy (P10) weighs just 32.6 kg and has a height of 137.9 cm. Statistical data of German children show that already 5% of the children at a height of 137.9 cm have a weight above 45.3 kg. Regarding children at a height of 145 cm, the 95th percentile limit is at a weight of 53.3 kg. Based on these data 4 dummies with different heights and weights were defined and produced. Two of them are overweight. Up to now, there is no experience how current child restraint systems perform in a car crash if they are used by children with a weight above 36 kg and a height smaller than 150 cm. In the future, different child restraint systems will be tested with respect to the ECE R44 regulation using these overweight dummies.
The Joint Transport Research Centre of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and the International Transport Forum recently conducted a benchmarking study of the safety and productivity of typical highway transport trucks from various countries. This paper focuses on vehicle productivity and efficiency in regard to the movement of freight. Forty vehicles from 10 countries were examined. The vehicles were designed for longer-haul applications and were classified in three separate categories: workhorse vehicles, which are the most common and can travel on most roads; high-capacity vehicles, which may be restricted to a certain class of road; and very high-capacity vehicles, which may be restricted to specific highways or routes. The metrics used in the analysis include maximum cargo mass and volume capacity, optimum cargo density, fuel consumption, and carbon dioxide output as a function of the freight task. The study found that size and weight regulations have a significant effect on the productivity and efficiency of heavy vehicles, including fuel consumption and vehicle emissions per unit of cargo transported. Significant variations were found among the vehicles from participating countries as well as within vehicle classes. It was also apparent that, in general, higher-productivity vehicles are correlated more strongly with increased cargo volume than with increased cargo mass and that larger trucks are better suited to lower-density freight than are workhorse vehicles. The study also found that it is important to consider the freight task when evaluating vehicle fuel consumption and emissions.