Filtern
Erscheinungsjahr
Dokumenttyp
Volltext vorhanden
- nein (45) (entfernen)
Schlagworte
- Impact test (veh) (45) (entfernen)
Institut
One main objective of the EU-Project SENIORS is to provide improved methods to assess thoracic injury risk to elderly occupants. In contribution to this task paired simulations with a THOR dummy model and human body model will be used to develop improved thoracic injury risk functions. The simulation results can provide data for injury criteria development in chest loading conditions that are underrepresented in PMHS test data sets that currently proposed risk functions are based on. To support this approach a new simplified generic but representative sled test fixture and CAE model for testing and simulation were developed. The parameter definition and evaluation of this sled test fixture and model is presented in this paper. The justification and definition of requirements for this test set-up was based on experience from earlier studies. Simple test fixtures like the gold standard sled fixture are easy to build and also to model in CAE, but provide too severe belt-only loading. On the other hand a vehicle buck including production components like airbag and seat is more representative, but difficult to model and to be replicated at a different laboratory. Furthermore some components might not be available for physical tests at later stage. The basis of the SENIORS generic sled test set-up is the gold standard fixture with a cable seat back and foot rest. No knee restraint was used. The seat pan design was modified including a seat ramp. The three-point belt system had a generic adjustable load limiter. A pre-inflated driver airbag assembly was developed for the test fixture. Results of THOR test and simulations in different configurations will be presented. The configurations include different deceleration pulses. Further parameter variations are related to the restraint system including belt geometry and load limiter levels. Additionally different settings of the generic airbag were evaluated. The test set-up was evaluated and optimized in tests with the THOR-M dummy in different test configurations. Belt restraint parameters like D-ring position and load limiter setting were modified to provide moderate chest loading to the occupant. This resulted in dummy readings more representative of the loading in a contemporary vehicle than most available PMHS sled tests reported in the literature. However, to achieve a loading configuration that exposes the occupant to even less severe loading comparable to modern vehicle restraints it might be necessary to further modify the test set-up. The new generic sled test set-up and a corresponding CAE model were developed and applied in tests and simulations with THOR. Within the SENIORS project with this test set-up also volunteer and PMHS as well as HBM simulations are performed, which will be reported in other publications. The test environment can contribute in future studies to the assessment of existing and new frontal impact dummies as well as dummy improvements and related instrumentation. The test set-up and model could also serve as a new standard test environment for PMHS and volunteer tests as well as HBM simulations.
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.
Als passive Schutzeinrichtungen werden Systeme bezeichnet, die von der Fahrbahn abkommende Fahrzeuge abweisen und aufhalten, wie Stahlschutzplanken oder Betonschutzwände. Schutzeinrichtungen müssen als wichtigsten Eignungsnachweis erfolgreiche Anprallversuche mit handelsüblichen Pkw und/oder Lkw absolvieren. Die Grundlage dafür bilden Europäische Normentwürfe. Bewertungskriterien für die Eignung einer Schutzeinrichtung sind ihr maximales Aufhaltevermögen, ihre dynamische seitliche Auslenkung, das Fahrzeugverhalten und die Insassenbelastung. Durch die Einführung der Europäischen Normen, vermutlich Anfang 1997, wird es auch in Deutschland Veränderungen für die Anforderungen an Schutzeinrichtungen geben. Zukünftig werden Leistungsklassen an Stelle der jetzt in den nationalen Richtlinien explizit genannten Systembeschreibungen treten, das heißt, Schutzeinrichtungen werden nicht nach ihrer Bauart, sondern nach ihrer Leistungsbeschreibung ausgewählt. Die sich abzeichnenden Europäischen Normen bieten ein breites Spektrum neuer Klassen, mit der Möglichkeit, auch in Deutschland höhere Leistungsklassen als bisher wählen zu können. Gleichzeitig wird in Zukunft sicher noch deutlich mehr in die Einrichtung von passiven Schutzeinrichtungen investiert werden müssen, weil nicht nur die Verkehrsbelastung und damit die Gefahr des Abkommens von der Fahrbahn steigt, sondern auch die Schwere der durch Lkw mit höheren Radlasten verursachten Unfälle. Die dazu notwendigen Finanzmittel und die zu erwartenden volkswirtschaftlichen Auswirkungen müssen sorgfältig gegeneinander abgewogen werden. Bei einem vorhandenen Straßennetz von circa 228.000 km (außerorts) in Deutschland und abgeschätzten Kosten für die Umrüstung in dreistelliger Millionenhöhe müssen alternative Überlegungen in Betracht gezogen werden, wie die Orientierung am DTV-Schwerlastverkehr oder eine gewichtete Aufteilung der Mittel auf die verschiedenen Straßenklassen. Aufgrund der angespannten Haushaltssituation wird der zur Verfügung stehende Rahmen zwangsläufig sehr eng sein. Trotzdem muss es vorrangiges Ziel bleiben Schutzeinrichtungen an Straßen aufgrund ihrer positiven Wirkung auf die Unfallfolgen in einer Qualität und in einem Umfang einzusetzen, der allen Verkehrsteilnehmern ein möglichst hohes Maß an Sicherheit bietet.
An approach to the standardization of accident and injury registration systems (STAIRS) in Europe
(1998)
STAIRS is a European Commission funded study whose aim is to produce a set of guidelines for a harmonised, crash injury database. The need to evaluate the effectiveness of the forthcoming European Union front and side impact directives has emphasised the need for real world crash injury data-sets that can be representative of the crash population throughout Europe. STAIRS will provide a methodology to achieve this. The ultimate aim of STAIRS is to produce a set of data collection tools which will aid decision making on vehicle crashworthiness as well as providing a means to evaluate the effectiveness of safety regulations. This paper will disseminate the up-to-date findings of the group as they try to harmonise their methods. The stage has been reached where studies into the diverse methods of the UK, French and German systems of crash injury investigation have been undertaken. An assessment has already been made of the relationships between the three current systems in order to define the areas of agreement and divergence. The conclusions reached stated that there were many areas that are already closely related and that the differences were only at the detailed level. With the emphasis on secondary safety and injury causation, core data sets were decided upon, taking into account: vehicle description, collision configuration, structural response of vehicles, restraint and airbag performance, child restraint performance, Euro NCAP, pedestrian and vehicle occupant kinematics, injury description and causation. Each variable was studied objectively, the important elements isolated and developed into a form that all partners were agreeable on. A glossary of terms is being developed as the project progresses which includes ISO standards and other definitions from the associated CAREPLUS project, which addresses the comparability of national data sets. A major consideration of the group was the data collection method to be employed. The strengths and weaknesses of each study were investigated to obtain a clear idea of which aspects offered the best way forward. The quality of this information and transference into a common format, as well as the necessary error checking systems to be employed have just been completed and are described. In tandem with this area of study the problem of the statistical relationship of each sample to the national population is also being investigated. The study proposes a mechanism to use a sample of crash injury data to represent the national and international crash injury problem
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.
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.
In the EC FP6 Integrated Project Advanced Protection Systems, APROSYS, the first WorldSID small female prototype was developed and evaluated by BASt, FTSS, INRETS, TRL and UPM-INSIA during 2006 and 2007. Results were presented at the ESV 2007 conference (Been et al., 2007). With the prototype dummy scoring a biofidelity rating higher than 6.7 out of 10 according to ISO/TR9790, the results were very promising. Also opportunities for further development were identified by the evaluation group. A revised prototype, Revision1, was subsequently developed in the 2007-2008 period to address comments from the evaluation group. The Revision1 dummy includes changes in the half arms and the suit (anthropometry and arm biomechanics), the thorax and abdomen ribs and sternum (rib durability), the abdomen/lumbar area and the lower legs (mass distribution). Also a two-dimensional chest deflection measurement system was developed to measure deflection in both lateral and anterior-posterior direction to improve oblique thorax loading sensitivity. Two Revision1 prototype dummies have now been evaluated by FTSS, TRL, UPM-INSIA and BASt. The updated prototype dummies were subjected to an extensive matrix of biomechanical tests, such as full body pendulum tests and lateral sled impact tests as specified by Wayne State University, Heidelberg University and Medical College of Wisconsin. The results indicated a significant improvement of dummy biofidelity. The overall dummy biofidelity in the ISO rating system has significantly improved from 6.7 to 7.6 on a scale between 0-10. The small female WorldSID has now obtained the same biofidelity rating as the WorldSID mid size male dummy. Also repeatability improved with respect to the prototype. In conclusion the recommended updates were all executed and all successfully contributed in achieving improved performance of the dummy.
The purpose of this paper is to review injuries found in real world lateral collisions and determine the mechanisms responsible for certain kinds of biomechanical failure. During the last years the distribution of deaths among the different types of accidents has changed. Lateral collisions now are the most frequent cause of fatal and other serious injuries. Every third accident is an impact from the side, while every second fatality is the result of a lateral accident. Just a few years ago this value was no higher than 30%. This is probably the result of increasing safety standards for frontal collisions (airbags, seatbelt usage, structural improvements of cars, etc.). Although the number of registered vehicles increased, the total amount of fatalities decreased during the same period. Thus it is now necessary to pay greater attention to the lateral accident situation in order to improve road safety and decrease the number of traffic injuries. Several European organisations had decided to launch the project SID2000, which was funded by the European Commission, with the intention of gathering more knowledge on injuries occurring in lateral accidents and the mechanisms that lead to such injuries. This should enable the group to define the requirements for a new side impact dummy (SID) to be designed. Within the same project the existing TNO-EUROSID 1 was enhanced by another group and the experience gained has now enabled allowed to design a better measuring device for side impacts. The data used for this contribution came from sources from all over Europe and had to be gathered in such a manner that as many accident parameters as possible were taken into account.
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.
At the 2005 ESV conference, the International Harmonisation of Research Activities (IHRA) side impact working group proposed a 4 part draft test procedure, to form the basis of harmonisation of regulation world-wide and to help advances in car occupant protection. This paper presents the work performed by a European Commission 6th framework project, called APROSYS, an further development and evaluation of the proposed procedure from a European perspective. The 4 parts of the proposed procedure are: - A Mobile Deformable Barrier test; - An oblique Pole side impact test; - Interior headform tests; - Side Out of Position (OOP) tests. Full scale test and modelling work to develop the Advanced European Mobile Deformable Barrier (AE-MDB) further is described, resulting in a recommendation to revise the barrier face to include a bumper beam element. An evaluation of oblique and perpendicular pole tests was made from tests and numerical simulations using ES-2 and WorldSID 50th percentile dummies. It was concluded that an oblique pole test is feasible but that a perpendicular test would be preferable for Europe. The interior headform test protocol was evaluated to assess its repeatability and reproducibility and to solve issues such as the head impact angle and limitation zones. Recommendations for updates to the test protocol are made. Out-of-position (OOP) tests applicable for the European situation were performed, which included additional tests with Child Restraint Systems (CRS) which use is mandatory in Europe. It was concluded that the proposed IHRA OOP tests do cover the worst case situations, but the current test protocol is not ready for regulatory use.
When the EEVC proposed the full-scale side impact test procedure, it recommended that consideration should be given to an interior headform test in addition. This was to evaluate areas of contact not assessed by the dummy. EEVC Working Group 13 has been researching the parameters of a possible European headform test procedure in four phases. Earlier stages of the research have been presented at previous ESV conferences. The conclusions from these have suggested that the US free motion headform should be used in any European test procedure and that it should be a free flight test, not guided. This research has now culminated in proposals for a European test procedure. This paper presents the proposed EEVC side impact interior headform test procedure, giving the rationale for the test and the first results from the validation phase of the test protocol.
The ASSESS project is a collaborative project that develops test procedures for pre-crash safety systems like Automatic Emergency Braking (AEB). One key criterion for the effectiveness of e.g. AEB is reduction in collision speed compared to baseline scenarios without AEB. The speed reduction for a given system can only be determined in real world tests that will end with a collision. Soft targets that are crashable up to velocities of 80 km/h are state of the art for these assessments, but ordinary balloon cars are usually stationary targets. The ASSESS project goes one step further and defines scenarios with moving targets. These scenarios define vehicle speeds of up to 100 km/h, different collision scenarios and relative collision speeds of up to 80km/h. This paper describes the development of a propulsion system for a soft target that aims to be used with these demanding scenario specifications. The Federal Highway Research Institute- (BASt-) approach to move the target is a self-driving small cart. The cart is controlled either by a driver (open-loop control via remote-control) or by a computer (closed-loop control). Its weight is limited to achieve a good crashability without damages to the test vehicle. To the extent of our knowledge BASt- approach is unique in this field (other carts cannot move at such high velocities or are not crashable). This paper describes in detail the challenges and solutions that were found both for the mechanical construction and the implementation of the control and safety system. One example for the mechanical challenges is e.g. the position of the vehicle- center of gravity (CG). An optimum compromise had to be found between a low CG oriented to the front of the vehicle (good for driveability) and a high CG oriented to the rear of the vehicle (good for crashability). The soft target itself which is also developed within the ASSESS project will not be covered in detail as this is work of a project partner. Publications on this will follow. The paper also shows first test results, describes current limitations and gives an outlook. It is expected that the presented test tools for AEB and other pre-crash safety systems is introduced in the future into consumer testing (NCAP) as well as regulatory testing.
Passive Schutzeinrichtungen wie Stahlschutzplanken und Betonschutzwände werden in Deutschland bereits seit den 1950er Jahren eingesetzt und spielen seitdem eine bedeutende Rolle für die passive Sicherheit auf unseren Straßen. Die Entwicklung von passiven Schutzeinrichtungen lässt sich in mehrere Zeitabschnitte von den Anfängen in den 1930er Jahren über die Normung auf europäischer Ebene in den 1990er Jahren bis heute untergliedern. Die Entwicklung der heute bekannten und eingesetzten Stahlschutzplankensysteme hat ihren Ursprung in umfangreichen Versuchsreihen in den 1960er Jahren. Nicht zuletzt auch auf Grund der europäischen Normung ist in den letzten Jahren eine Vielzahl von neuen Systemen hinzugekommen. Jedes System, das auf europäischen Straßen zukünftig eingesetzt werden soll, muss seine Leistungsfähigkeit nach den Vorgaben der Europäischen Normen beweisen. Darin werden einheitliche Anforderungen für die Wirkungsweise von Schutzeinrichtungen bei der Abnahmeprüfung mittels Anprallversuchen festgelegt. Die Auswahl für die nationale Verwendbarkeit der Systeme und deren Einsatzbereiche wird auch weiterhin in nationalen Richtlinien geregelt. Diese zu erarbeiten und umzusetzen, stellt die große Herausforderung für die nächsten Jahre dar.
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.
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.
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
EEVC Status report
(2001)
Ausgelöst durch die auch auf dem Gebiet der passiven Schutzeinrichtungen voranschreitende europäische Harmonisierung sind die nach den "Richtlinien für passive Schutzeinrichtungen an Straßen" in Deutschland am häufigsten eingesetzten Schutzeinrichtungen durch Anprallversuche untersucht worden. Vorrangiges Ziel war die Qualifizierung der Systeme nach den Anforderungen der bereits existierenden Europäischen Normen EN 1317 "Rückhaltesysteme an Straßen". Dazu wurden insgesamt 19 Anprallversuche mit Pkw, Lkw und Bussen als Versuchsfahrzeuge an einer 81 cm hohen Ortbetonschutzwand im "New-Jersey"-Profil und an sechs Stahlschutzsystemen durchgeführt. Die Stahlschutzsysteme ESP 4,0 (B-Profil) sowie EDSP 2,0 (B-Profil) und EDSP 1,33 (B-Profil) besitzen die erwartete Leistungsfähigkeit. Sofern die neuen nationalen Richtlinien für den Einsatz von Fahrzeugrückhaltesystemen, die zur Zeit erarbeitet werden, keine höheren als die bislang geltenden Aufhaltestufen festlegen, können diese Systeme - unter Beachtung der jeweiligen Wirkungsbereiche - weiter verwendet werden. Auch die 81 cm hohe Betonschutzwand im "New-Jersey"-Profil konnte das vorher erwartete Aufhaltevermögen nachweisen. Die Anprallschwere liegt jedoch über der Stufe B, so dass sich ihre Einsatzgebiete auf die Bereiche beschränken, an denen die Gefährdung Dritter - wie zum Beispiel bei der Vermeidung von Durchbrüchen in Mittelstreifen - Priorität hat, ohne dass gleichwertige Systeme mit einer günstigeren Anprallschwere zur Verfügung stehen. Nicht zufriedenstellend waren die Ergebnisse der Versuche an der DDSP 4,0 (B-Profil) und DDSP 2,0 (B-Profil). Erst die Nachrüstung mit einem zusätzlichen Distanzstück führte auch bei der DDSP 4,0 (A- und B-Profil) zu einer bestandenen Prüfung. Die Untersuchung hat gezeigt, dass die einseitig wirkenden Stahlsysteme insgesamt besser funktioniert haben als die zweiseitig wirkenden. Sie können deshalb - doppelt angeordnet - eine Alternative bieten.
Teil A: Etwa 25% aller Straßenverkehrsunfälle sind Anfahrten gegen seitliche Hindernisse. Diese Unfälle sind im Allgemeinen auch folgenschwer. Seitlich der Fahrbahn stehende Gegenstände der Straßenausstattung müssen deshalb zur Verbesserung der passiven Sicherheit so verformbar (umfahrbar) ausgebildet werden, dass die Unfallfolgen eines Anpralles möglichst gering bleiben oder es müssen Schutzeinrichtungen angeordnet werden. Im Rahmen dieses Forschungsauftrages sollten in Anfahrversuchen solche Gegenstände der Straßenausstattung untersucht werden, die bei Unfällen als gefährliche seitliche Hindernisse anzusehen sind. In einem 5-Jahres-Versuchsprogramm sollten geprüft werden: - Senkrechte Hindernisse wie großflächige seitlich aufgestellte Verkehrsschilder, Notrufsäulen u.a. - abweisende Schutzeinrichtungen für spezielle Anwendungsfälle wie Sicherung von Mittelstreifenüberfahrten, Schutzplanken vor Lärmschutzwänden u.a. Die Ergebnisse anderer Forschungsstellen sollten berücksichtigt werden. Mit Frankreich wurde eine arbeitsteilige Zusammenarbeit vereinbart. Der vorliegende Teil I des Schlussberichtes enthält die Zielsetzung des Gesamtprogramms, eine Zusammenstellung der Versuchsobjekte, die Kriterien für die Versuchsbedingungen und die Bewertung der Versuche, die Planung und den Bau der Anfahrversuchsstrecke sowie Angaben zur technischen Durchführung der Versuche. Die Ergebnisse der einzelnen Versuchsreihen werden in weiteren getrennten Berichten mitgeteilt. Teil B: In Anfahrversuchen wurden Aufstellvorrichtungen für Verkehrsschilder großer Abmessungen aus Gabelständern und aus Profilständern (U-Profilträger oder Rundrohrpfosten) daraufhin geprüft, ob sie im Sinne der passiven Sicherheit als leicht verformbar (umfahrbar) gelten oder umfahrbar gestaltet werden können. Die Versuchsschilder mit bis zu 4 m hohen Tafeln wurden mit leichten PKW bei Anfahrgeschwindigkeiten von 100 bzw. 40 km/h frontal gegen einen von zwei Ständern angefahren. Die 7 mit Gabelständern durchgeführten Versuche haben gezeigt, dass diese bei geeigneter Befestigung der Tafeln (z. B. Aluminiumklemmschellen) und bei nicht überdimensionierter Befestigung auf dem Fundament als umfahrbar angesehen werden können, wenn sie aus Rohren bis zu 76 mm Durchmesser und bis ca. 3 mm Wandstärke bestehen. Dasselbe gilt für die Aufstellung mit Rohrpfosten der Stärke bis 76 x 3,2 mm (Versuch mit einer Pfeiltafel von 2,6 m2). Verkehrsschilder an Profilständern ohne Sollbruchstellen müssen, wie drei Versuche übereinstimmend gezeigt haben, schon bei kleinen Abmessungen als nicht umfahrbare Hindernisse angesehen werden. Solche Verkehrsschilder sind durch Schutzeinrichtungen abzusichern. Aufgrund der Versuchsergebnisse können Empfehlungen für die konstruktive Ausbildung von Aufstellvorrichtungen für seitlich aufgestellte Verkehrsschilder großer Abmessungen gegeben werden.
Since integrated safety systems combine active and passive safety elements in one safety system, it is necessary to define new procedures to evaluate vehicle safety from the overall system point of view. The main goal of the ASSESS project is to develop harmonized and standardized assessment procedures for collision mitigation and avoidance systems. Methods and Data Sources: In ASSESS, procedures are developed for: driver behaviour evaluation, pre-crash system performance evaluation, crash performance evaluation, socio-economic assessment. This paper will concentrate on the activities related to the crash evaluation. The objective is to perform simulations, sled tests and crash tests in order tounderstand the influence of the activation of the pre-crash systems on the occupants" injuries during the crash phase. When a traffic accident is unavoidable, pre-crash systems work on various safety devices in order to improve the vehicle occupants" protection. Braking assistance and adaptive restraint systems are the main pre-crash systems whose effect on the occupants" protection will be described in this paper. Results: The results will be a description of the effect of the activation of the pre-crash systems on the crash phase. Additionally, a set of recommendations for future methodology developments will be delivered. Furthermore, a first approach to the study of the effect of the pre-crash systems activation on the occupants" protection when the impact is unavoidable will be presented. This effect will be quantified using the biomechanical values obtained from the simulation and testing activities and their related injury risks. Simulation and testing activities will consider the following scenarios: - No activation of any pre-crash system, - Activation of one or a combination of several pre-crash systems. In this way, differences in the results obtained from different scenarios will show the effect of each pre-crash system separately during the crash phase. Discussion and Limitations: The set of activities developed in this research project is limited by the fact that with the given resources only a limited number of vehicle models could be investigated. In addition, there are also limitations related to the injury risk curves and the passive safety tools currently on the market. Conclusion and Relevance to session submitted: The paper will present a complete analysis of the effect of pre-crash systems during the crash phase when the impact is unavoidable. Details, limitations and first application experience based on a few examples will be discussed. Currently, there is not any regulation, assessment program, or other similar official procedure able to assess pre-crash systems during the crash phase. This project comprises phases of traffic accidents which have been historically analysed separately, and aims to evaluate them taking into account their interrelationship. ASSESS is one of the first European projects which deals in depth with the concept of integrated safety, defining methodologies to analyse vehicle safety from a global point of view.