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.

Autonomous Emergency Braking (AEB) systems for pedestrians have been predicted to offer substantial benefit. On this basis, consumer rating programmes, e.g. Euro NCAP, are developing rating schemes to encourage fitment of these systems. One of the questions that needs to be answered to do this fully, is to determine how the assessment of the speed reduction offered by the AEB is integrated with the current assessment of the passive safety for mitigation of pedestrian injury. Ideally, this should be done on a benefit related basis. The objective of this research was to develop a benefit based methodology for assessment of integrated pedestrian protection systems with pre-crash braking and passive safety components. A methodology has been developed which calculates the cost of pedestrian injury expected, assuming all pedestrians in the target population (i.e. pedestrians impacted by the front of a passenger car) are impacted by the car being assessed, taking into account the impact speed reduction offered by the car’s AEB (if fitted) and the passive safety protection offered by the car’s frontal structure. For rating purposes, this cost can be normalised by comparing it to the cost calculated for selected cars. The methodology uses the speed reductions measured in AEB tests to determine the speed at which each casualty in the target population will be impacted. The injury to each casualty is then calculated using the results from standard Euro NCAP pedestrian impactor tests and injury risk curves. This injury is converted into cost using ‘Harm’ type costs for the body regions tested. These costs are weighted and summed. Weighting factors were determined using accident data from Germany and GB and the results of a benefit analysis performed by the EU FP7 AsPeCSS project. This resulted in German and GB versions of the methodology. The methodology was used to assess cars with good, average and poor Euro NCAP pedestrian ratings, with and without a current AEB system fitted. It was found that the decrease in casualty injury cost achieved by fitting an AEB system was approximately equivalent to that achieved by increasing the passive safety rating from poor to average. Also, it was found that the assessment was influenced strongly by the level of head protection offered in the scuttle and windscreen area because this is where head impact occurs for a large proportion of casualties. The major limitation within the methodology is the assumption used implicitly during weighting. This is that the cost of casualty injuries to body areas, such as the thorax, not assessed by the headform and legform impactors, and other casualty injuries such as those caused by ground impact, are related linearly to the cost of casualty injuries assessed by the impactors. A methodology for assessment of integrated pedestrian protection systems was developed. This methodology is of interest to consumer rating programmes which wish to include assessment of these systems. It also raises the interesting issue if the head impact test area should be weighted to reflect better real-world benefit.

Since the beginning of the testing activities related to passive pedestrian safety, the width of the test area being assessed regarding its protection level for the lower extremities of vulnerable road users has been determined by geometrical measurements at the outer contour of the vehicle. During the past years, the trend of a decreased width of the lower extremity test and assessment area realized by special features of the outer vehicle frontend design could be observed. This study discusses different possibilities for counteracting this development and thus finding a robust definition for this area including all structures with high injury risk for the lower extremities of vulnerable road users in the event of a collision with a motor vehicle. While Euro NCAP is addressing the described problem by defining a test area under consideration of the stiff structures underneath the bumper fascia, a detailed study was carried out on behalf of the European Commission, aiming at a robust, worldwide harmonized definition of the bumper test area for legislation, taking into account the specific requirements of different certification procedures of the contracting parties of the UN/ECE agreements from 1958 and 1998. This paper details the work undertaken by BASt, also serving as a contribution to the TF-BTA of the UN/ECE GRSP, towards a harmonized test area in order to better protect the lower extremities of vulnerable road users. The German In-Depth Accident Database GIDAS is studied with respect to the potential benefit of a revised test area. Several practical options are discussed and applied to actual vehicles, investigating the differences and possible effects. Tests are carried out and the results studied in detail. Finally, a proposal for a feasible definition is given and a suggestion is made for solving possible open issues at angled surfaces due to rotation of the impactor. The study shows that, in principle, there is a need for the entire vehicle width being assessed with regard to the protection potential for lower extremities of vulnerable road users. It gives evidence on the necessity for a robust definition of the lower extremity test area including stiff and thus injurious structures at the vehicle frontend, especially underneath the bumper fascia. The legal definition of the lower extremity test area will shortly be almost harmonized with the robust Euro NCAP requirements, as already endorsed by GRSP, taking into account injurious structures and thus contributing to the enhanced protection of vulnerable road users. After finalization of the development of a torso mass for the flexible pedestrian legform impactor (FlexPLI) it is recommended to consider again the additional benefit of assessing the entire vehicle width.

Test and assessment procedures for passive pedestrian protection of passenger cars are in place for many years within world-wide regulations as well as consumer test programmes. Nevertheless, recent accident investigations show a stagnation of pedestrian fatality numbers on European roads alongside increasing injury severities for older road users. The EU-funded SENIORS (Safety ENhancing Innovations for Older Road userS) project developed and evaluated a thorax injury prediction tool (TIPT) for later incorporation within test and assessment procedures. Accident data indicates an increasing portion of AIS2 and AIS3+ thoracic injuries of older pedestrians and cyclists which are currently not assessed in any test procedure for vulnerable road users. Therefore, SENIORS focused on the development of a test tool predicting the risk of rib fractures of vulnerable road users (VRU). While injury risk functions were reanalyzed, human body model (HBM) simulations against categorized generic vehicle frontends served as input for the definition of test setups and corresponding impact parameters. TIPT component tests against a generic frontend and an actual vehicle were used for the evaluation of the technical feasibility. The TIPT component tests shows the general feasibility of a test procedure for the assessment of thoracic injuries, with good repeatability and reproducibility of kinematics and results. Impact parameters such as the inclination angles of the thorax, angles of the velocity vector and impact speeds well replicate the parameters gained from the HBM simulations. The proposed markup and assessment scheme offers the possibility of a homogeneous evaluation of the protection potential of vehicle frontends while maintaining justifiable testing efforts. During evaluation testing, the proposed requirements were entirely met. The developed prototype of TIPT and launching system offer impact angles and speeds as suggested by HBM simulations. However, since thorax impacts during pedestrian accidents do not occur perpendicularly to the vehicle surface in most cases, the TIPT built-in linear potentiometers do not acquire the true resultant intrusions on the ribcage and thus, TIPT rib deflections do not reflect the actual human injury risk. However; for the impact forward to the bonnet leading edge, the TIPT seems applicable without further modifications. The test and assessment procedures using the TIPT offer for the first time the possibility of replicating the kinematics of a pedestrian thorax with a component test. The developed assessment scheme gives a first indication on how the risk for thoracic injuries could be implemented within the Euro NCAP Box 3 assessment. Future development of the TIPT may focus on implementing a rib cage that can deflect in all axes in a humanlike way.

To assess occupant safety in a crash test, criteria associating the measurements made with a crash test dummy to injury risk are necessary. To enable better protection of elderly car occupants the objective of this study was to develop improved thoracic injury criteria for the THOR average male dummy. The development of these criteria is usually based on matched dummy and Post Mortem Human Surrogate (PMHS) tests by relating the obtained PMHS injuries to dummy measurements. This approach is limited, since only a few tests in relevant loading conditions are available and any new test series requires high efforts to be performed due to their complexity and costs. To overcome these limitations and to extend the dataset for the development of THOR dummy chest injury risk functions a simulation-based approach was applied within the EC funded project SENIORS (Safety Enhanced Innovations For older Road Users - www.seniors-project.eu). Within this study frontal impact sled simulations with an FE model representing a THOR average male dummy and matched simulations with a human body model (HBM) representing an elderly car occupant were carried out. The HBM used for this study was the THUMS TUC with modified rib cage, which was developed in SENIORS. The modifications included material and geometry changes aiming to represent an elderly car occupant. The rib fracture risk was predicted with a deterministic approach whereby a rib was considered broken when the strain exceeded an age-dependent threshold. Furthermore, a probabilistic method was applied to predict the probability of sustaining a certain number of fractured ribs by comparing local strain values to the distribution of cortical rib ultimate strain. By relating the output from the HBM simulations to a multi-point dummy injury criterion, injury risk curves were calculated by statistical methods. The wide range of loading conditions resulted in the desired range of injuries and THOR ATD output. The number of fractured ribs predicted by the HBM based on the deterministic prediction method was between 0 and 15. Furthermore, the probabilistic risk for the number of rib fractures equal or greater than two, three or four was calculated for each load case. The THOR rib deflection criterion Rmax was between 18 and 56 mm, while the PC Score was in the range of 2.5 to 7.2. Based on these outputs new risk curves for the predicted deterministic (AIS2+/3+) and probabilistic injury risk were calculated. The new curves show reasonable shapes and significance that provide trust in their application. The new risk curves are compared to risk curves obtained by traditional methods. The results were found similar to previous injury risk functions based on physical tests, which gives a high level of confidence in the chosen approach. The simulation-based approach of matched ATD model vs. HBM simulation was successfully applied. Rmax curves show a slightly better quality than the injury criterion PC Score.

Europe has benefited from a decreasing number of road traffic fatalities. However, the proportion of older road users increases steadily. In an ageing society, the SENIORS project aims to improve the safe mobility of older road users by determining appropriate requirements towards passive vehicle safety systems. Therefore, the characteristics of road traffic crashes involving the elderly people need to be understood. This paper focuses on car occupants and pedestrians or cyclists in crashes with modern passenger cars. Ten crash databases and four hospital statistics from Europe have been analysed to answer the questions on which body regions are most frequently and severely injured in the elderly, and specific injuries sustained by always comparing older (65 years and above) with mid‐aged road users (25‐64 years). It was found that the body region thorax is of particularly high importance for the older car occupant with injury severities of AIS2 or AIS3+, where as the lower extremities, head and the thorax need to be considered for older pedestrians and cyclists. Further, injury risk functions were provided. The hospital data analysis showed less difference between the age groups. The linkage between crash and hospital data could only be made on a general level as their inclusion criteria were quite different.

The presence and performance of Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) has increased over last years. Systems available on the market address also conflicts with vulnerable road users (VRUs) such as pedestrians and cyclists. Within the European project PROSPECT (Horizon2020, funded by the EC) improved VRU ADAS systems are developed and tested. However, before determining systems" properties and starting testing, an up-to-date analysis of VRU crashes was needed in order to derive the most important Use Cases (detailed crash descriptions) the systems should address. Besides the identified Accident Scenarios (basic crash descriptions), this paper describes in short the method of deriving the Use Cases for car-to-cyclist crashes. Method Crashes involving one passenger car and one cyclist were investigated in several European crash databases looking for all injury severity levels (slight, severe and fatal). These data sources included European statistics from CARE, data on national level from Germany, Sweden and Hungary as well as detailed accident information from these three countries using GIDAS, the Volvo Cars Cyclist Accident database and Hungarian in-depth accident data, respectively. The most frequent accident scenarios were studied and Use Cases were derived considering the key aspects of these crash situations (e.g., view orientation of the cyclist and the car driver- manoeuvre intention) and thus, form an appropriate basis for the development of Test Scenarios. Results Latest information on car-to-cyclist crashes in Europe was compiled including details on the related crash configurations, driving directions, outcome in terms of injury severity, accident location, other environmental aspects and driver responsibilities. The majority of car-to-cyclist crashes occurred during daylight and in clear weather conditions. Car-to-cyclist crashes in which the vehicle was traveling straight and the cyclist is moving in line with the traffic were found to result in the greatest number of fatalities. Considering also slightly and seriously injured cyclists led to a different order of crash patterns according to the three considered European countries. Finally the paper introduced the Use Cases derived from the crash data analysis. A total of 29 Use Cases were derived considering the group of seriously or fatally injured cyclists and 35 Use Cases were derived considering the group of slightly, seriously or fatally injured cyclists. The highest ranked Use Case describes the collision between a car turning to the nearside and a cyclist riding on a bicycle lane against the usual driving direction. A unified European dataset on car-to-cyclist crash scenarios is not available as the data available in CARE is limited, hence national datasets had to be used for the study and further work will be required to extrapolate the results to a European level. Due to the large number of Use Cases, the paper shows only highest ranked ones.

Test and assessment procedures for passive pedestrian protection based on developments by the European Enhanced Vehicle-safety Committee (EEVC) have been introduced in world-wide regulations and consumer test programmes, with considerable harmonization between these programmes. Nevertheless, latest accident investigations reveal a stagnation of pedestrian fatality numbers on European roads running the risk of not meeting the European Union- goal of halving the number of road fatalities by the year 2020. The branch of external road user safety within the EC-funded research project SENIORS under the HORIZON 2020 framework programme focuses on investigating the benefit of modifications to pedestrian test and assessment procedures and their impactors for vulnerable road users with focus on the elderly. Injury patterns of pedestrians and cyclists derived from the German In-Depth Accident Study (GIDAS) show a trend of AIS 2+ and AIS 3+ injuries getting more relevant for the thorax region in crashes with newer cars (Wisch et al., 2017), while maintaining the relevance for head and lower extremities. Several crash databases from Europe such as GIDAS and the Swedish Traffic Accident Data Acquisition (STRADA) also show that head, thorax and lower extremities are the key affected body regions not only for the average population but in particular for the elderly. Therefore, the SENIORS project is focusing on an improvement of currently available impactors and procedures in terms of biofidelity and injury assessment ability towards a better protection of the affected body regions, incorporating previous results from FP 6 project APROSYS and subsequent studies carried out by BASt. The paper describes the overall methodology to develop revised FE impactor models. Matched human body model and impactor simulations against generic test rigs provide transfer functions that will be used for the derivation of impactor criteria from human injury risk functions for the affected body regions. In a later step, the refined impactors will be validated by simulations against actual vehicle front-ends. Prototyping and adaptation of test and assessment procedures as well as an impact assessment will conclude the work of the project at the final stage. The work will contribute to an improved protection of vulnerable road users focusing on the elderly. The use of advanced human body models to develop applicable assessment criteria for the revised impactors is intended to cope with the paucity of actual biomechanical data focusing on elderly pedestrians. In order to achieve optimized results in the future, the improved test methods need to be implemented within an integrated approach, combining active with passive safety measures. In order to address the developments in road accidents and injury patterns of vulnerable road users, established test and assessment procedures need to be continuously verified and, where needed, to be revised. The demographic change as well as changes in the vehicle fleet, leading to a variation of accident scenarios, injury frequencies and injury patterns of vulnerable road users are addressed by the work provided by the SENIORS project, introducing updated impactors for pedestrian test and assessment procedures.

It is commonly agreed that active safety will have a significant impact on reducing accident figures for pedestrians and probably also bicyclists. However, chances and limitations for active safety systems have only been derived based on accident data and the current state of the art, based on proprietary simulation models. The objective of this article is to investigate these chances and limitations by developing an open simulation model. This article introduces a simulation model, incorporating accident kinematics, driving dynamics, driver reaction times, pedestrian dynamics, performance parameters of different autonomous emergency braking (AEB) generations, as well as legal and logical limitations. The level of detail for available pedestrian accident data is limited. Relevant variables, especially timing of the pedestrian appearance and the pedestrian's moving speed, are estimated using assumptions. The model in this article uses the fact that a pedestrian and a vehicle in an accident must have been in the same spot at the same time and defines the impact position as a relevant accident parameter, which is usually available from accident data. The calculations done within the model identify the possible timing available for braking by an AEB system as well as the possible speed reduction for different accident scenarios as well as for different system configurations. The simulation model identifies the lateral impact position of the pedestrian as a significant parameter for system performance, and the system layout is designed to brake when the accident becomes unavoidable by the vehicle driver. Scenarios with a pedestrian running from behind an obstruction are the most demanding scenarios and will very likely never be avoidable for all vehicle speeds due to physical limits. Scenarios with an unobstructed person walking will very likely be treatable for a wide speed range for next generation AEB systems.

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.

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.

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.

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.