Filtern
Dokumenttyp
- Konferenzveröffentlichung (4) (entfernen)
Volltext vorhanden
- ja (4) (entfernen)
Schlagworte
- Winkel (4) (entfernen)
Within the COST Action TU1101 the working group WG 1 is dealing with acceptance criteria and problems in helmet use while bicycling concerning conspicuity, thermal stress, ventilation deficits and other potential confounding. To analyze the helmet usage practice of bicyclists in Europe a questionnaire was developed in the scope of working group 1 to collect relevant information by means of a field study. The questionnaire consists of some 66 questions covering the fields of personal data of the cyclist, riding und helmet usage habits, information concerning the helmet model and the sensation of the helmet, as well as information on previous bicycle accidents. A second complementary study is conducted to analyze if the use of a bicycle helmet influences the seating geometry and the posture of cyclists when riding a bicycle and if the if the helmet vertically limits the vision. For this purpose cyclists with and without helmets were photographed in real world situations and relevant geometrical values such as the decline of the torso, the head posture of the upper vertical vision limit due to the helmet were established from the photos. The interim results of the field studies which were conducted in Germany by the Hannover Medical School are presented in this study. Some 227 questionnaires were filled out, of which 67 participants had used a helmet and 42 of the 227 participants have had a bicycle accident before. For the analysis of the riding position and posture of the cyclist over 40 pictures of riders with a helmet and over 240 pictures of riders without a helmet were measured concerning the seating geometry to describe the influence of using a bicycle helmet. Some results in summary: From the riders interviewed with the questionnaire only 11% of the city bike riders and 12% of the mountain bike riders always used the helmet, while 38% of the racing bike riders and 88% of the e-bike-riders always used the helmet. The helmet use seems not to change the sensation of safety of cycling compared to the use of a car. The arguments for not wearing a helmet are mostly stated to be the short distance of a trip, high temperatures or carelessness and waste of time. The reasons for using a helmet are stated to be the feeling of safety and being used to using a helmet. Being a role model for others was also stated to be a reason for helmet use. Concerning the sensation of the helmet 9% of the riders reported problems with the field of vision when using a helmet, 57% saw the problem of sweating too much, and 10% reported headaches or other unpleasant symptoms like pressure on the forehead when using the helmet. The analysis of the seating posture from the pictures taken of cyclists revealed that older cyclists generally have a riding position where the handle bar is higher than the seat (0-° to 10-° incline from seat to handlebar), while younger riders had a higher variance (between -10-° decline and 20-° incline). Further, elderly riders and riders with helmets seem to have a more upright position of the upper body when cycling. The vertical vision limit due to the helmet is determined by the front rim of the helmet (mostly the sun shade). Typical values here range from 0-° (horizontal line from the eye to the sun shade) to 75-° upwards, in which elderly riders tend to have a slightly higher vertical vision limit possibly due to the helmet being worn more towards the face.
Among European Countries, Spain first issued a Standard, UNE 135900:2005, further updated in 2008, that deals with homologation and effectiveness evaluation of road restraint systems components designed to reduce harm for bikers impacting on them. An in depth analysis and critical review of this standard is reported in this paper. Beside a close examination of the standard requirements, numerical models of the crash test stated by the standard have been set up and simulated to study the effects of slight speed and approach angle variations on test results, remaining within tolerance gaps allowed by the standard. Model were validated against experimental data. Together with the expected increasing severity of the impact according with speed, a strong influence of approach angle on injury parameters was found. Possible improvements to the norm, in order to make it more robust, are suggested.
In a first step, we have examined approximately 23 000 single vehicle accidents within the Austrian National Statistics database. In a second step, we considered 15% of all fatal "running off the road" accidents that occurred in Austria in 2003. As a result, two accident categories were specified; "leaving the road without preceding manoeuvre" and "leaving the road with preceding manoeuvre". These two categories can be basically characterised by the vehicle- heading angle and its velocity angle. In this report, we further suggest theoretical approaches for the dimensioning of a safety zone, an area adjacent to the road free of fixed objects or dangerous slopes. We also show the link between the two accident categories mentioned above and the real world accidents analysed in detail. These observations also form the basis for the required length for safety devices. Finally, we summarise accident avoidance strategies.
The national accident statistics demonstrate that the situation of passenger car side impacts is dominated by car to car accidents. Car side to pole impacts are relatively infrequent events. However the importance of car side to pole impacts is significantly increasing with fatal and seriously injured occupants. For the present study the German in-depth database GIDAS (German In-Depth-Accident Study) and the UK based database CCIS (Co-operative Crash Injury Study) were used. Two approaches were undertaken to better understand the scenario of car to pole impacts. The first part is a statistical analysis of passenger car side to pole impacts to describe the characteristics and their importance relevant to other types of impact and to get further knowledge about the main factors influencing the accident outcome. The second part contains a case by case review on passenger cars first registered 1998 onwards to further investigate this type of impact including regression analysis to assess the relationship between injury severity and pole impact relevant factors.