Sonstige
Filtern
Sprache
- Englisch (20) (entfernen)
Schlagworte
- Passives Sicherheitssystem (20) (entfernen)
Institut
- Sonstige (20)
- Abteilung Fahrzeugtechnik (5)
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.
Bus or heavy vehicle passenger accidents are rare events, compared with car accidents, but sometimes leads to a large number of victims especially in rollover crash scenarios. Two accidents occurred in Portugal in 2007 and 2013 in which 28 people died and more than 50 are injured, shown the importance of the investigation of such accidents. For the investigation of these accidents multidisciplinary teams are constituted with engineers and police officers. All the factors involved are taken into consideration including road design, traffic signs, maintenance and hardware, human factors, and vehicle factors. In this work a methodology to an accurate collection of the data is proposed. From the information collected the accident is reconstructed using the PC-CrashTM software. From this all the contribution factors are determined and recommendations to mitigate these crashes are listed. These two accidents are rollover accidents and the analysis of the injuries and its correlation with the use of retention systems is very important. From the medical data and with the dynamics of the accident determined simulations of the occupants with biomechanical models are carried out in order to evaluate the effect of the retention systems in the injuries. This analysis is based on injury criteria (such as Abbreviated Injury Score (AIS) or Injury Severity Scale (ISS)). With this it is possible to determine if the seat belt was worn or not.
In most of developed countries, the progress made in passive safety during the last three decades allowed to drastically reduce the number of killed and severely injured especially for occupants of passenger cars. This reduction is mainly observed for frontal impacts for which the AIS3+ injuries has been reduced about 52% for drivers and 38% for front passengers. The stiffening of the cars' structure coupled with the generalization of airbags and the improvement of the seatbelt restraint (load limiter, pretension, etc.) allowed to protect vital body regions such as head, neck and thorax. However, the abdomen did not take advantage with so much success of this progress. The objective of this study is to draw up an inventory on the abdominal injuries of the belted car occupants involved in frontal impact, to present adapted counter-measures and to assess their potential effectiveness. In the first part the stakes corresponding to the abdominal injuries will be defined according to types of impact, seat location, occupants' age and type of injured organs. Then, we shall focus on the abdominal injury risk curves for adults involved in frontal impact and on the comparisons of the average risks according to the seat location. In the second part we will list counter-measures and we shall calculate their effectiveness. The method of case control will be used in order to estimate odds ratio, comparing two samples, given by occupants having or not having the studied safety system. For this study, two type of data sources are used: national road injured accident census and retrospective in-depth accident data collection. Abdominal injuries are mainly observed in frontal impact (52%). Fatal or severe abdominal occupant- injuries are observed at least in 27% of cases, ranking this body region as the most injured just after the thorax (51%). In spite of a twice lower occupation rate in the back seats compared to the front seats, the number of persons sustaining abdominal injuries at the rear place is higher than in the front place. In recent cars, the risk of having a serious or fatal abdominal injury in a frontal impact is 1.6% for the driver, 3.6% for the front passenger and 6.3% for the rear occupants. The most frequently hurt organs are the small intestine (17%), the spleen (16%) and the liver (13%). The most common countermeasures have a good efficiency in the reduction of the abdominal injuries for the adults: the stiffness of the structure of the seats allows decreasing the abdominal injury risk from 54% (driver) to 60% (front occupant), the seatbelt pretensioners decrease also this risk from 90% (driver) to 83% (front passenger).
From an automotive safety occupant protection standpoint, effective occupant restraint requires a system capable of providing non-injurious occupant ride down of anticipated crash forces. This is not only the case for frontal collisions, where occupant restraint is provided primarily by seatbelts and airbags, but is also critical for other crash modes such as side impacts, rear impacts, rollovers, as well as multiple impact events. In the rear impact crash mode, occupant restraint is provided primarily by the seatbacks and to some extent the seatbelts. Foundationally, therefore, what becomes fundamental to the seatback's role in rear occupant protection is its ability to contain the occupant within the seat, preventing occupant ramping, as well as preventing the seat's, and/or its occupant's, dangerous intrusion into the rear occupant's survival space where contact with rear compartment components and/ or rear seated occupants can present a significant injury risk. An analysis is presented of a series of rear impact sled testing conducted by the authors that evaluates the timing, position and extent of the front seatback's reward displacement toward and into the rear occupant compartment as well as consideration of the front seat occupant' ramping potential and its injury potential relative to the rear compartment. Additionally, three other series of testing are presented which assess various seat designs occupant retention capabilities. Lastly, a matched-pair comparison test series is presented which evaluates occupant motion in rear impact with and without use of a typical vehicle body mounted 3-point seatbelt. Discussion of restraint system performance observed in all the testing is included along with ATD biofidelity and thigh-gap considerations. The data collected and presented includes accelerometer instrumentation and high speed video analysis.
Detailed anthropometric data of pregnant women have been collected and used in the development of a computational model of the pregnant occupant model "Expecting". The model is complete with a finite element uterus and multi-body fetus, which is a novel feature in the models of this kind. The computational pregnant occupant model has been validated and used to simulate a range of impacts. The strains developed in the utero-placental interface are used as the main criteria for fetus safety. Stress distributions due to inertial loading of the fetus on the utero-placental interface play a role on the strain levels. Inclusion of fetus model is shown to significantly affect the strain levels in the utero-placental interface. This series of studies has led to the design of seatbelt features specifically for the pregnant women to enable them use the seatbelt correctly and comfortably.
The evaluation of the expected benefit of active safety systems or even ideas of future systems is challenging because this has to be done prospectively. Beside acceptance, the predicted real-world benefit of active safety systems is one of the most important and interesting measures. Therefore, appropriate methods should be used that meet the requirements concerning representativeness, robustness and accuracy. The paper presents the development of a methodology for the assessment of current and future vehicle safety systems. The variety of systems requires several tools and methods and thus, a common tool box was created. This toolbox consists of different levels, regarding different aspects like data sources, scenarios, representativeness, measures like pre-crash-simulations, automated crash computation, single-case-analyses or driving simulator studies. Finally, the benefit of the system(s) is calculated, e.g. by using injury risk functions; giving the number of avoided/mitigated accidents, the reduction of injured or killed persons or the decrease of economic costs.
Past European collaborative research involving government bodies, vehicle manufacturers and test laboratories has resulted in a prototype barrier face called the Advanced European Mobile Deformable Barrier (AE-MDB) for use in a new side impact test procedure . This procedure offers a better representation of the current accident situation and, in particular, the barrier concept is a better reflection of front-end stiffness seen in today- passenger car fleet compared to that of the current legislative barrier face. Based on the preliminary performance corridors of the prototype AE-MDB, a refined AE-MDB specification has been developed. A programme of barrier to load cell wall testing was undertaken to complete and standardise the AE-MDB specification. Barrier faces were supplied by the four leading manufacturers to demonstrate that the specification could be met by all. This paper includes background, specification and proof of compliance.
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 use of proper child restraint systems (CRS) is mandatory for children travelling in cars in most countries of the world. The analysis of the quantity of restrained children shows that more than 90% of the children in Germany are restrained. Looking at the quality of the protection, a large discrepancy between restrained and well protected children can be seen. Two out of three children in Germany are not properly restrained. In addition, considerable difference exists with respect to the technical performance of CRS. For that reason investigations and optimisations on two different topics are necessary: The technical improvement of CRS and the ease of use of CRS. Consideration of the knowledge gained by the comparison of different CRS in crash tests would lead to some improvements of the CRS. But improvement of child safety is not only a technical issue. People should use CRS in the correct way. Misuse and incorrect handling could lead to less safety than correct usage of a poor CRS. For that reason new technical issues are necessary to improve the child safety AND the ease of use. Only the combination of both parts can significantly increase child safety. For the assessment of the safety level of common CRS, frontal and lateral sled tests simulating different severity levels were conducted comparing pairs of CRS which were felt to be good and CRS which were felt to be poor. The safety of some CRS is currently at a high level. All well known products were not damaged in the performed tests. The performance of non-branded CRS was mostly worse than that of the well known products. Although the branded child restraint systems already show a high safety level it is still possible to further improve their technical performance as demonstrated with a baby shell and a harness type CRS.
According to the German road traffic regulations children up to the age of 12 or a height below 150 cm have to use approved and appropriate child restraint systems (CRS). CRS must be approved according to UN-ECE Regulation No. 44. The regulation classifies CRS in 5 weight categories. The upper weight group is approved for children from 22 to 36 kg. However, studies show that already today many children weigh more than 36 kg although they have not reached a height of 150 cm. Therefore, no ECE R44 approved CRS is available for these overweight children. In conclusion, today's sizes and weights of children are no longer represented by the current version of the ECE R44. The heaviest used dummy (P10) weighs just 32.6 kg and has a height of 137.9 cm. Statistical data of German children show that already 5% of the children at a height of 137.9 cm have a weight above 45.3 kg. Regarding children at a height of 145 cm, the 95th percentile limit is at a weight of 53.3 kg. Based on these data 4 dummies with different heights and weights were defined and produced. Two of them are overweight. Up to now, there is no experience how current child restraint systems perform in a car crash if they are used by children with a weight above 36 kg and a height smaller than 150 cm. In the future, different child restraint systems will be tested with respect to the ECE R44 regulation using these overweight dummies.