Filtern
Erscheinungsjahr
Dokumenttyp
- Konferenzveröffentlichung (41)
- Buch (Monographie) (11)
- Arbeitspapier (8)
- Wissenschaftlicher Artikel (7)
Schlagworte
- Impact test (veh) (67) (entfernen)
Institut
The EVERSAFE project addressed many safety issues for electric vehicles including the crash and post-crash safety. The project reviewed the market shares of full electric and hybrid vehicles, latest road traffic accident data involving severely damaged electric vehicles in Europe, and identified critical scenarios that may be particular for electric vehicles. Also, recent results from international research on the safety of electric vehicles were included in this paper such as results from performed experimental abuse cell and vehicle crash tests (incl. non-standardized tests with the Mitsubishi i-MiEV and the BMW i3), from discussions in the UN IG REESS and the GTR EVS as well as guidelines (handling procedures) for fire brigades from Germany, Sweden and the United States of America. Potential hazards that might arise from damaged electric vehicles after severe traffic accidents are an emerging issue for modern vehicles and were summarized from the perspective of different national approaches and discussed from the practical view of fire fighters. Recent rescue guidelines were reviewed and used as the basis for a newly developed rescue procedure. The paper gives recommendations in particular towards fire fighters, but also to vehicle manufacturers and first-aiders.
Upcoming test procedures and regulations consider the use of Q-dummies. Especially Q6 and Q10 will be introduced to assess the safety of child occupants in vehicle rear seats. Therefore detailed knowledge of these dummies is important to improve safety. As recent studies have shown, chest deflection measurements of both dummies are influenced by parameters like belt geometry. This could lead to a non optimized design of child restraint systems (CRS) and belt systems. The objective of this study is to obtain a more detailed understanding of the sensitivity of chest measurements to restraint parameters and to investigate the possibilities of chest acceleration as an alternative for the assessment of chest injury risks. A study of frontal impact sled tests was performed with Q6 and Q10 in a generic rear seat environment on a bench. Belt parameters like modified belt attachment locations were varied. For the Q6 dummy, different positioning settings of the CRS (booster with backrest) and of the dummy itself were investigated. The Q10 dummy was seated on a booster cushion. Here the position of the upper belt anchorage point was varied. To simulate the influence of vehicle rotation in the ODB crash configuration, the bench was pre-rotated on the sled in additional tests with the Q10. This configuration was tested with and without pretensioner and load limiter. Chest deflection in Q6 showed a high sensitivity to changes in positioning of the CRS and the dummy itself. A more slouched position of the CRS or dummy resulted in a reduction of measured chest deflection, whereas chest acceleration increased for a more slouched position of the CRS. Chest deflection in Q10 is sensitive to belt geometry as already shown in other studies. In a more outboard position of the shoulder belt anchorage the measured chest deflection is higher. Chest acceleration shows the opposite tendency, which is highest for the rearmost location of the upper belt anchorage. On a pre-rotated bench the highest chest deflection within this test series was observed without load limiter/pretensioner and an outboard belt position. By optimizing the belt location and the use of pretensioner/load limier the chest deflection was significantly reduced. For the Q6 a criterion based on chest acceleration as well as deflection measured at two locations might be the most reliable approach, which requires further research with an additional upper deflection sensor. In the Q10 the measured chest deflection does not always correctly reflect the severity of chest loading. The deflection is depending on initial belt position and restraint parameters as well as test conditions, which result in different directions of belt migration. A3ms chest acceleration might be a better indicator for severity of chest loading independent of different conditions like belt geometries. However, in some cases the benefit of an optimized restraint system could only be shown by deflection. These findings suggest that further research is needed to identify a chest injury assessment method, which could be based on deflection as well as acceleration or other parameters related to belt to occupant interaction.
Anhand von zwei verschiedenen Versuchskonfigurationen wurde das Schutzpotential von Kopfschutzsystemen (Fahrradhelm und airbagbasiertes System) untersucht. Hierbei wurden die resultierende Kopfbeschleunigung als Messwert sowie das Kopfverletzungskriterium HIC bei Versuchen ohne und mit Kopfschutzsystem vergleichend gegenübergestellt.
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.
Supported by field accident data and monitoring results of European Regulation (EC) No. 78/2009, recent plans of the European Commission regarding a way forward to improve passive safety of vulnerable road users include, amongst other things, an extension of the head test area. The inclusion of passive cyclist safety is also being considered by Euro NCAP. Although passenger car to cyclist collisions are often severe and have a significant share within the accident statistics, cyclists are neither considered sufficiently in the legislative nor in the consumer ratings tests. Therefore, a test procedure to assess the protection potential of vehicle fronts in a collision with cyclists has been developed within a current research project. For this purpose, the existing pedestrian head impact test procedures were modified in order to include boundary conditions relevant for cyclists as the second big group of vulnerable road users. Based on an in-depth analysis of passenger car to cyclist accidents in Germany the three most representative accident constellations have been initially defined. The development of the test procedure itself was based on corresponding simulations with representative vehicle and bicycle models. In addition to different cyclist heights, reaching from a 6-year-old child to a 95%-male, also four pedal positions were considered. By reconstruction of a real accident the defined simulation parameters could be validated in advance. The conducted accident kinematics analysis shows for a large portion of the constellations an increased head impact area, which can reach beyond the roof leading edge, as well as high average values for head impact velocity and angle. Based on the simulation data obtained for the different vehicle models, cyclist-specific test parameters for impactor tests have been derived, which have been further examined in the course of head and leg impact tests. In order to study the cyclist accident kinematics under real test conditions, different full scale tests with a Polar-II dummy positioned on a bicycle have been conducted. Overall, the tests showed a good correlation with the simulations and support the defined boundary test conditions. Typical accident scenarios and simulations reveal higher head impact locations, angles and velocities. An extended head impact area with modified test parameters will contribute to an improved protection of vulnerable road users including cyclists. However, due to significantly differing impact kinematics and postures between the lower extremities of pedestrians and cyclists, these injuries cannot be addressed by the means of current test tools such as the flexible pedestrian legform impactor FlexPLI. Based on the findings obtained within the project as well as the existing pedestrian protection requirements a cyclist protection test procedure for use in legislation and consumer test programmes has been developed, whose requirements have been transferred into a corresponding test specification. This specification provides common head test boundary conditions for pedestrians and cyclists, whereby the existing requirements are modified and two parallel test procedures are avoided.
In Deutschland werden als passive Schutzeinrichtungen an Straßen Stahlschutzplanken und in jüngerer Zeit auch vermehrt Betonschutzwände eingesetzt. Auf dem Gebiet der Schutzeinrichtungen wird es demnächst europäisch harmonisierte Normen geben. Durch ihre Einführung, vermutlich noch in 1997, kommt es auch in Deutschland zur Veränderung der Anforderungen an Schutzeinrichtungen. Die Qualifizierung der in Deutschland nach den Richtlinien für passive Schutzeinrichtungen an Straßen eingesetzten Schutzeinrichtungen nach den europäischen Vorgaben ist durch die Bundesanstalt für Straßenwesen (BASt) in einem Forschungsprojekt für das Bundesverkehrsministerium erfolgt. Die BASt hat ein weiteres Projekt initiiert mit dem Ziel, die wichtigsten Ausführungsformen zu untersuchen und zu weitergehenden Kenntnissen über die hier eingesetzten Schutzeinrichtungen zu kommen. Berichtet wird über wesentliche Ergebnisse aus diesem Projekt.
Seit 1997 gibt es in Europa unter dem Namen Euro NCAP (European New Car Assessment Programme) einheitliche Test- und Ratingverfahren. Sie liefern Informationen über den Insassen- und über den Fußgängerschutz. Euro NCAP hat seither fast 90 Fahrzeugmodelle in jeweils drei unterschiedlichen Crashtest-Konfigurationen untersucht und die Ergebnisse den europäischen Konsumenten zugänglich gemacht. Im Beitrag wird auf die Testbedingungen, die Euro NCAP-Ratingverfahren sowie auf die Weiterentwicklung von Euro NCAP eingegangen. Ein wichtiger Aspekt wird dabei auch die weltweite Harmonisierung der Test- und Ratingverfahren sein.
The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe Informal Group on GTR No. 7 Phase 2 are working to define a build level for the BioRID II rear impact (whiplash) crash test dummy that ensures repeatable and reproducible performance in a test procedure that has been proposed for future legislation. This includes the specification of dummy hardware, as well as the development of comprehensive certification procedures for the dummy. This study evaluated whether the dummy build level and certification procedures deliver the desired level of repeatability and reproducibility. A custom-designed laboratory seat was made using the seat base, back, and head restraint from a production car seat to ensure a representative interface with the dummy. The seat back was reinforced for use in multiple tests and the recliner mechanism was replaced by an external spring-damper mechanism. A total of 65 tests were performed with 6 BioRID IIg dummies using the draft GTR No.7 sled pulse and seating procedure. All dummies were subject to the build, maintenance, and certification procedures defined by the Informal Group. The test condition was highly repeatable, with a very repeatable pulse, a well-controlled seat back response, and minimal observed degradation of seat foams. The results showed qualitatively reasonable repeatability and reproducibility for the upper torso and head accelerations, as well as for T1 Fx and upper neck Fx. However, reproducibility was not acceptable for T1 and upper neck Fz or for T1 and upper neck My. The Informal Group has not selected injury or seat assessment criteria for use with BioRID II, so it is not known whether these channels would be used in the regulation. However, the ramping-up behavior of the dummy showed poor reproducibility, which would be expected to affect the reproducibility of dummy measurements in general. Pelvis and spine characteristics were found to significantly influence the dummy measurements for which poor reproducibility was observed. It was also observed that the primary neck response in these tests was flexion, not extension. This correlates well with recent findings from Japan and the United States showing a correlation between neck flexion and injury in accident replication simulations and postmortem human subjects (PMHS) studies, respectively. The present certification tests may not adequately control front cervical spine bumper characteristics, which are important for neck flexion response. The certification sled test also does not include the pelvis and so cannot be used to control pelvis response and does not substantially load the lumbar bumpers and so does not control these parts of the dummy. The stiffness of all spine bumpers and of the pelvis flesh should be much more tightly controlled. It is recommended that a method for certifying the front cervical bumpers should be developed. Recommendations are also made for tighter tolerance on the input parameters for the existing certification tests.
The paper describes the development of transitions between different safety barriers in Germany but also in the context of the European standardization. In the paper practical and impact test expriences with transitions are shown. In view of the sheer number of theoretically possible combinations of safety barriers, the demand for testing every transition, even if the connecting safety barriers differ only slightly, appears to be economically unacceptable. On the other hand the experience from accidents and also from failed impact tests shows that transitions can be a risk to traffic safety. Therefore criteria for the distinction between transitions (impact test required/impact test unnecessary) are explained. In order to distinguish transitions which do not have to be impact-tested from those that require impact tests, criteria were developed and formulated.
Since a number of human models have been developed it appears sensible to use these models also in the accident analysis. Especially the understanding of injury mechanisms and probably even injury risk curves can be significantly improved when interesting accidents are reconstructed using human body models. However, an important limitation for utilising human models for accident reconstruction is the effort needed to develop detailed FE models of the accident partners or to prepare the human model reconstruction by running physical accident reconstructions. The proposed approach for using human models for accident reconstruction is to use simplified and parametric car models. These models can be adapted to the crash opponents in a fast and cost effective way. Although, accuracy is less compared to detailed FE models, the relevant change in velocity can be simulated well, indicating that the computation of a detailed crash pulse is not needed. Two frontal impact test accidents that were reconstructed experimentally and using the parametric car models are indicating sufficient correlation of the adapted parametric car models with the full scale crash reconstructions. However, further developments of the parametric models to be capable for the use in lateral impacts and rear impacts are needed. For the PC Crash simulation runs the output sampling rate is too large to allow sufficient analysis. In addition the performance appears to be too general.
Sicherheitstechnische Anforderungen an die Bestuhlung moderner Reisebusse als Rückhaltesysteme
(1991)
Die Schutzfähigkeit von KOM-Fahrgastsitzen, die den ECE-R 80-Anforderungen entsprechen, ist bisher nur für die aufgerichtete Rückenlehne nachgewiesen. Hier wurde untersucht, ob auch geneigte Rückenlehnen ausreichende Schutzwirkung bieten. Ausgehend von der Normalsitzposition verfügen Reisebussitze heutiger Bauart über einen Lehnenverstellwinkel von circa 15 Grad (Normal-, Ruhesitzposition). Sondersitze für Ältere und Sportler erlauben auch die Liegesitz- beziehungsweise Liegeposition bei jedoch erheblich größeren Sitzteilern. In Schlittenaufprallversuchen mit je zwei instrumentierten anthropometrischen Messpuppen auf Reisebus-Doppelsitzen wurden die Belastungsverhältnisse eines frontalen Aufpralls simuliert. Die Lehnenverstelleinrichtung der Prüfsitze wurde behelfsweise so verändert, dass 3 (4) Winkeleinstellungen der Lehnenneigung möglich waren. Für jeweils zwei hintereinander zugeordnete Sitzplätze wurden wechselweise diese Lehneneinstellungen variiert. Mit 17 Doppelsitzen wurden insgesamt 32 Körperaufprallereignisse in den verschiedenen Lehnenneigungskonfigurationen durchgeführt. Die Versuchsergebnisse gliederten sich nach der Bewegungsform des Dummy, seinen Belastungen und den am Vordersitz hervorgerufenen Beschädigungen. Die Aufprallverhältnisse in aufrechter Normalsitzposition entsprechend der ECE-R 80 bildeten die Bewertungsbasis. Die gewonnenen Versuchsergebnisse lassen sich wie folgt zusammenfassen: - Für beliebige Lehneneinstellungen im Winkelbereich bis zu 30 Grad zur Senkrechten bietet die vorgebaute Sitzlehne generell ausreichende Rückhaltewirkung beim Körperaufprall. - Wenn die Vordersitzlehne jedoch steiler eingestellt ist als es der Körperhaltung des dahintersitzenden Dummy entspricht, ist mit 1,5-2fach höheren Kopfbelastungen zu rechnen. Das ECE-R 80-Schutzkriterium HAC < 500 wird überschritten. - Vorsorglich sollte aus sicherheitstechnischer Sicht der zulässige Grenzwinkel der Lehnenneigung auf 30 Grad zur Senkrechten beschränkt werden.
Streuung von Schutzkriterien in kontrollierten Aufprallversuchen gegen die starre 30 Grad-Barriere
(1983)
Gegenstand der Arbeit ist die Ermittlung von Streubreiten von Fahrzeug- und Dummy-Messwerten in Aufprallversuchen bei Geschwindigkeiten von 50 km/h gegen eine starre 30-°-Barriere. Zu den fahrzeugseitigen Messwerten gehörten die Deformation der Frontstruktur, die maximale Fahrzeugverzögerung, die mittlere Fahrzeugverzögerung und Anforderungen der ECE-Regelung 33. Die gemessenen Standardabweichungen der Einzelwerte lagen mit zwei bis sieben Prozent deutlich unter zehn Prozent. Höhere Standardabweichungen der Messwerte wurden dann beobachtet, wenn Aufpralle nach den Mustern Kopf-Lenkrad (Fahrer), Brust-Lenkrad (Fahrer) und Knie-Armaturentafel (Fahrer und Beifahrer) nicht in allen Versuchen zu beobachten sind. Hohe Streubreiten für die Kopfbeschleunigung bzw. die Beschleunigung der Brust des Dummy auf dem Fahrersitz wurden dadurch verursacht, dass in einem Versuch eine unübliche Vorverlagerung des Dummys infolge mangelhafter Gurtwirkung mit nachfolgendem Brust-Lenkrad-Kontakt zu beobachten war.
EEVC Status report
(2001)
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.
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.
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
Many big cities in Europe and elsewhere in the world have problems managing the traffic especially during rush hours. The improvement of the parking problematic and environmental protection as well are important aspects for the future traffic design of urban areas. To improve the traffic situation the development of new traffic concepts and alternative vehicles are required. The BMW company has developed a new type of two-wheel vehicle. This two-wheeler constitutes a totally new concept. BMW implemented a lot of safety features, such as a structure made up of rollover bars and a crush element instead of a front protecting plate. Furthermore the driver can secure himself with two safety belts. The paper contains a description of the novel two-wheel vehicle concept designed so far. BMW's concept and the safety features are also explained. The Federal Highway Research Institute (BASt) was given the task of assessing the concept as a whole with regard to the active and passive safety and the exemption of the obligation to wear a helmet. The expertise concluded that the BMW two-wheeler concept has a very high safety standard. Some extracts of the expertise, in particular the investigations concerning the exemption of the obligation to wear a helmet are presented. Common legal requirements for the vehicle registration of vehicle concepts similar to the BMW two-wheeler in Germany have been formulated.
This paper provides an overview of the research work of the European Enhanced Vehicle-safety Committee (EEVC) in the field of crash compatibility between passenger cars. Since July 1997 the EC Commission is partly funding the research work of EEVC. The running period of this project will be two years. The progress of five working packages of this research project is presented: Literature review, Accident analysis, Structural survey of cars, Crash testing, and Mathematical modelling. According to the planned time schedule the progress of research work is different for the five working packages.
Side-impact safety of passenger cars is assessed in Europe in a full-scale test using a moving barrier. The front of this barrier is deformable and represents the stiffness of an 'average' car. The EU Directive 96/27/EC on side impact protection has adopted the EEVC Side Impact Test Procedure, including the original performance specification for the barrier face when impacting a flat dynamometric rigid wall. The requirements of the deformable barrier face, as laid down in the Directive, are related to geometrical characteristics, deformation characteristics and energy dissipation figures. Due to these limited requirements, many variations are possible in designing a deformable barrier face. As a result, several barrier face designs are in the market. However, research institutes and car manufacturers report significant difference in test results when using these different devices. It appears that the present approval test is not able to distinguish between the different designs that may perform differently when they impact real vehicles. Therefore, EEVC Working Group 13 has developed a number of tests to evaluate the different designs. In these tests the barrier faces are loaded and deformed in a specific and/or more representative way. Barrier faces of different design have been evaluated. In the paper the set-up and the reasoning behind the tests is presented. Results showing specific differences in performance are demonstrated.
Sowohl mit dem 3. Road Safety Action Programme der Europäischen Kommission als auch mit dem deutschen Verkehrssicherheitsprogramm werden die verkehrspolitischen Zielsetzungen zur Erhöhung der Verkehrssicherheit in Europa und Deutschland festgelegt. Hierbei muss die passive Fahrzeugsicherheit auch weiterhin eine bedeutende Rolle übernehmen. Es ist jedoch auch festzustellen, dass durch den zunehmenden Einsatz von Elektronik im Fahrzeug die klassischen Bereiche der aktiven und passiven Fahrzeugsicherheit mehr und mehr ineinander greifen. Der Fortschritt in der Elektronik ermöglicht eine Integration der Systeme der aktiven und passiven Sicherheit. Dadurch lässt sich die Fahrzeugsicherheit weiter steigern. Durch die Vernetzung der Systeme lassen sich sogar Kosten einsparen. Der europäische Regierungsausschuss EEVC (European Enhanced Vehicle-safety Committee), die Verbraucherschutzorganisation Euro NCAP (European New Car Assessment Programme) und die Europäische Kommission mit der eSafety Initiative haben diesen Trend erkannt und entsprechende Aktivitäten eingeleitet.
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.
Schutzeinrichtungen in Arbeitsstellen unter Berücksichtigung zukünftiger europäischer Anforderungen
(1998)
Die europäischen Normentwürfe für passive Schutzeinrichtungen, prEN 1317 Teil 1 und 2, werden voraussichtlich im Laufe des Jahres 1998 veröffentlicht. Damit ist die Grundlage geschaffen worden, passive Schutzeinrichtungen nach einheitlichen Anforderungen zu prüfen. Passive Schutzeinrichtungen, die in Deutschland im Straßenverkehr eingesetzt werden sollen, müssen ihre Eignung grundsätzlich in Anprallversuchen unter Beweis stellen. Die Durchführung der Anprallversuche erfolgt in Deutschland durch die BASt in Kooperation mit dem TÜV Süddeutschland. Für die transportablen Schutzeinrichtungen erarbeitet die BASt zur Zeit eine Liste der erfolgreich geprüften Systeme. Neben dem System und Hersteller werden die wichtigsten Ergebnisse der Prüfungen und die Mindestaufstellänge aufgeführt. Mit dieser Liste und den Daten erhalten die Anwender eine bessere Übersicht über die zugelassenen Systeme und können dies in ihren Ausschreibungen berücksichtigen.
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.
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.