80 Unfallforschung
Filtern
Schlagworte
- Conference (4)
- Deutschland (4)
- Germany (4)
- Konferenz (4)
- Injury (3)
- Verletzung (3)
- Accident (2)
- Accident reconstruction (2)
- Analyse (math) (2)
- Analysis (math) (2)
- Frontalzusammenstoß (2)
- Head on collision (2)
- Interview (2)
- Spinal column (2)
- Unfall (2)
- Unfallrekonstruktion (2)
- Wirbelsäule (2)
- Anfahrversuch (1)
- Behinderter (1)
- Biomechanics (1)
- Biomechanik (1)
- Brustkorb (1)
- Car (1)
- Cause (1)
- Crash victim (1)
- Cyclist (1)
- Digital model (1)
- Disablement (1)
- Fear (1)
- Finite element method (1)
- Fracture (bone) (1)
- Furcht (1)
- Fußgänger (1)
- Human factor (1)
- Impact test (veh) (1)
- Knochenbruch (1)
- Langfristig (1)
- Long term (1)
- Menschlicher Faktor (1)
- Methode der finiten Elemente (1)
- Motorcyclist (1)
- Motorradfahrer (1)
- Numerisches Modell (1)
- On the spot accident investigation (1)
- Pedestrian (1)
- Pkw (1)
- Post crash (1)
- Radfahrer (1)
- Risiko (1)
- Risk (1)
- Schweregrad (Unfall (1)
- Schweregrad (Unfall, Verletzung) (1)
- Severity (accid, injury) (1)
- Severity (acid (1)
- Simulation (1)
- Statistics (1)
- Statistik (1)
- Thorax (1)
- Unfallfolgemaßnahme (1)
- Unfallopfer (1)
- Ungeschützter Verkehrsteilnehmer (1)
- Untersuchung am Unfallort (1)
- Ursache (1)
- Verletzung) (1)
- Vulnerable road user (1)
- injury) (1)
Institut
- Sonstige (5)
- Abteilung Fahrzeugtechnik (1)
When assessing the consequences of accidents normally the injury severity and the damage costs are considered. The injury severity is either expressed within the police categories (slight injury, severe injury or fatal injury) or the AIS code that rates the fatality risk of a given injury. Both injury metrics are assessing the consequences of the accident directly after the accident. However, not all consequences of accidents are visible directly after the accident and the duration of the consequences are different. Besides a physiological reduction of functionality social and psychological implications such as reduced mobility options, problems to continue the original job etc. are happening. In order to assess long term consequences of accidents the MHH Accident Research Unit established a brief questionnaire that is distributed to accident involved people of the Hannover subset of the GIDAS data set approx. one year after the accident beginning with the accident year 2013. The basic idea of using a brief questionnaire (in fact only one page) is to obtain a relatively large return rate because the questionnaire appears to be simple and quickly answered. This appears to be important because it is believed that the majority of accident involved people will not report long term consequences. In order to allow a more detailed survey amongst those responders that are reporting long term consequences they are asked for a written consent for the additional questionnaire that will be distributed at a time that is not yet defined. Long term consequences are reported for all addressed areas, medical, physiological, psychological and sociological by people without injuries, with minor injuries and with severe injuries.
To elucidate the risk of pedestrians, bicycle and motorbike users, data of two accident research units from 1999 to 2014 were analysed in regard to demographic data, collision details, preclinical and clinical data using SPSS. 14.295 injured vulnerable road users were included. 92 out of 3610 pedestrians ("P", 2.5%), 90 out of 8307 bicyclists ("B", 1.1%) and 115 out of 4094 motorcycle users ("M", 2.8%) were diagnosed with spinal fractures. Thoracic fractures were most frequent ahead of lumbar and cervical fractures. Car collisions were most frequent mechanism (68, 62 and 36%). MAIS was 3.8, 2.8 and 3.2 for P, B and A with ISS 32, 16 and 23. AIS-head was 2.2, 1.3 and 1.5). Vulnerable road users are at significant risk for spine fractures. These are often associated with severe additional injuries, e.g. the head and a very high overall trauma severity (polytrauma).
For the avoidance of traffic accidents by means of advanced driver assistance systems the knowledge of failures and deficiencies a few seconds before the crash is of increasing importance. This information e.g. is collected in the German accident survey GIDAS by an interview derived from the ACAS methodology. However to display the whole range of accident causation factors additional information is needed on enduring factors of the system components "human", "infrastructure" and "machine". On the strategic level these accident moderating factors include long term influences such as medical preconditions or a general higher risk taking behavior as well as influences on the immediate conflict level such as an aggressive response to a perceived previous traffic conflict. This study was conducted to examine the feasibility of collecting such causation information in the scope of an in-depth accident investigation like GIDAS. Due to the comprehensive amount of information necessary to estimate the moderating factors the collection of the information is distributed to different methods. 5 cases of real world crashes have been investigated where information was collected on-scene and retrospective by interviews. The identified moderating factors of the accidents and the method for collecting the information are displayed.
In general the passive safety capability is much greater in newer versus older cars due to the stiff compartment preventing intrusion in severe collisions. However, the stiffer structure which increases the deceleration can lead to a change in injury patterns. In order to analyse possible injury mechanisms for thoracic and lumbar spine injuries, data from the German Inâ€Depth Accident Study (GIDAS) were used in this study. A twoâ€step approach of statistical and caseâ€byâ€case analysis was applied for this investigation. In total 4,289 collisions were selected involving 8,844 vehicles, 5,765 injured persons and 9,468 coded injuries. Thoracic and lumbar spine injuries such as burst, compression or dislocation fractures as well as soft tissue injuries were found to occur in frontal impacts even without intrusion to the passenger compartment. If a MAIS 2+ injury occurred, in 15% of the cases a thoracic and/or lumbar spine injury is included. Considering AIS 2+ thoracic and lumbar spine, most injuries were fractures and occurred in the lumbar spine area. From the case by case analyses it can be concluded that lumbar spine fractures occur in accidents without the engagement of longitudinals, lateral loading to the occupant and/or very severe accidents with MAIS being much higher than the spine AIS.
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.