Sonstige
Filtern
Sprache
- Englisch (14) (entfernen)
Schlagworte
- Side impact (14) (entfernen)
Institut
- Sonstige (14) (entfernen)
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.
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.
When the EEVC proposed the full-scale side impact test procedure, it recommended that consideration should be given to an interior headform test in addition. This was to evaluate areas of contact not assessed by the dummy. EEVC Working Group 13 has been researching the parameters of a possible European headform test procedure in four phases. Earlier stages of the research have been presented at previous ESV conferences. The conclusions from these have suggested that the US free motion headform should be used in any European test procedure and that it should be a free flight test, not guided. This research has now culminated in proposals for a European test procedure. This paper presents the proposed EEVC side impact interior headform test procedure, giving the rationale for the test and the first results from the validation phase of the test protocol.
Pelvic fracture, cracking or breaking of a portion of the pelvis are extremely common injuries in the side impact collisions of motor vehicles. Due to both its shape and structural architecture, mechanics of the pelvic bone is complicated. There is a lack of knowledge regarding the dynamic behavior of the pelvis and its biomechanical tolerance under impact environment. Hence this study is aimed at the understanding of the mechanical response of the human pelvis with three-dimensional finite element (FE) models, under side impact load, applied through a structure, equivalent to a car door. The door structure was modeled, considering few layers, consisting of foam (Styrodur®, 3035 CS), plastic (UHMWPE), steel, glass and steel, putting them in series. A soft tissue layer (equivalent to fat) was also considered on the greater trochanter location. These FE models (with and without the car door structure) were analyzed with ANSYS-LS-DYNA-® dynamic finite element software to compare the effect of the car door padding system for shock absorption. It was observed that with proper combination of shock absorbing material (foam, etc.) and its thickness, the transmission of impact load to the body part (pelvis, etc.) from the outer surface of the car door could be reduced.
At the 2005 ESV conference, the International Harmonisation of Research Activities (IHRA) side impact working group proposed a 4 part draft test procedure, to form the basis of harmonisation of regulation world-wide and to help advances in car occupant protection. This paper presents the work performed by a European Commission 6th framework project, called APROSYS, an further development and evaluation of the proposed procedure from a European perspective. The 4 parts of the proposed procedure are: - A Mobile Deformable Barrier test; - An oblique Pole side impact test; - Interior headform tests; - Side Out of Position (OOP) tests. Full scale test and modelling work to develop the Advanced European Mobile Deformable Barrier (AE-MDB) further is described, resulting in a recommendation to revise the barrier face to include a bumper beam element. An evaluation of oblique and perpendicular pole tests was made from tests and numerical simulations using ES-2 and WorldSID 50th percentile dummies. It was concluded that an oblique pole test is feasible but that a perpendicular test would be preferable for Europe. The interior headform test protocol was evaluated to assess its repeatability and reproducibility and to solve issues such as the head impact angle and limitation zones. Recommendations for updates to the test protocol are made. Out-of-position (OOP) tests applicable for the European situation were performed, which included additional tests with Child Restraint Systems (CRS) which use is mandatory in Europe. It was concluded that the proposed IHRA OOP tests do cover the worst case situations, but the current test protocol is not ready for regulatory use.
The fact that ADAC Air Rescue handles approximately 4,000 road accident missions every year gave rise to set up an accident research programme for which ADAC Air Rescue provides its data. This data is of initial informational quality and will be supplemented by data from the police, experts, fire brigades as well as hospitals and forensic institutes. Although the number of cases is still rather low, certain tendencies can be identified. The causes for most accidents occur when joining or intersecting traffic, followed by speeding in road bends and tailgating. Many accidents involve HGV rear end collisions, often causing serious injuries, considerable damage and technical problems for the rescue operations. With regard to the various impact types, it has become obvious that most of the extremely serious injuries are inflicted during a passenger car side impact. In addition, access to and removal of trapped passengers is becoming more and more complicated, partly due to the increasing use of high-strength materials, and rescue operations tend to be more time consuming.
During the last 5 years, the number of cars fitted with side airbags has dramatically increased. They are now standard equipment, even on many smaller cars or less luxurious vehicles. While some side airbags offer thoracic protection alone, there are those that combine thoracic and head protection (of which most deploy from the seat). Other systems employ separate airbags for head and thorax protection, which are designed to be effective noticeably in a crash against a pole. This paper proposes an evaluation of the effectiveness of side airbags in preventing thoracic injuries to passenger car occupants involved in side crashes. First, the target population (who can take benefit of side airbag deployment and in what circumstances) is defined. Side airbags can be especially effective in cases of impacts on the door with intrusion at a certain impact speed. Then, an example case of a side impact with side airbag deployment is given were side airbag deployment is thought to have had a positive effect on injury outcome. A further case is presented where the impact configuration is likely to have reduced the effect of side airbag deployment on injury outcome. Finally, the estimation of side airbag effectiveness (in terms of additional occupant protection brought exclusively by the airbag) is proposed by comparing injury risk sustained by occupants in (more or less) similar cars (fitted or non fitted with airbags) because, during these years, car structure, and side airbag conception have considerably evolved. In-depth accident data from France, the UK and Germany has been collected. Out of 2,035 side impact accident cases available in the databases, we selected 435 occupants of passenger cars (built from 1998 onwards) involved in an injury accident between year 1998 and year 2004 for EES (Energy Equivalent Speed) values between 20km/h and 50km/h. The occupants, belted or not, were sat on the struck side, whatever the obstacle and type of accidents (intersection, loss of control, etc.). For multiple impact crashes, the side impact is assumed to be the more severe one. Passenger cars were fitted with (96) or without (339) side airbags. Most of the potential risk explanatory variables were correctly and reliably reported in the databases (velocity " impact zone " impact angle " occupant characteristics, etc.). The analysis compared injury risks for different levels of EES and different types of side airbags. A logistic regression model was also computed with injury variables (such as thoracic AIS 2+ or AIS 3+) as the dependant variable and other variables (including airbag type and EES) as explanatory injury risk factors. Results revealed statistically non-significant reductions in thoracic AIS 2+ and AIS 3+ injury risk in side airbag equipped cars in the impact violence range selected (odds ratio between 0.84 and 0.98 depending on types of airbags). The results are discussed. The non-significance is assumed to be due to a low number of cases. Statistical analysis for head injuries was not possible due to the low number of accident cases with passenger cars fitted with head airbags in the databases. Moreover, the discrepancies between the data coming from different countries (especially calculation of EES) might have introduced instability in the analysis.
The increase in light duty trucks (LDT) on the road in the US is a safety concern because of their aggressivity, or risk they present to occupants of cars, especially in side impacts. We use FARS data to look at fatality trends in frontal and side impacts between cars and LDT. FARS data is also used to determine risk, or fatalities per registered vehicle, imposed on car drivers from other vehicle types. We use NASS CDS data to investigate sources of serious injuries in vehicles with side impact. These sources of injury are categorized into three major groups: 1) contact without intrusion, 2) contact with intrusion, and 3) restraints. We find a greater fraction of intrusion related injuries in cars struck on their side by SUV or pick-up trucks than when they are struck by other cars.
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.
Side impacts, both nearside and farside, have been indicated by research to be responsible for a large proportion of serious injuries from road crashes. This study aimed to compare and contrast the characteristics of nearside and farside crashes in Australia, Germany and the U.S., using the ANCIS, GIDAS and NASS/CDS in-depth-databases, in order to establish the impact and injury severity associated with these crashes, and the types of injuries sustained. The analyses revealed some interesting similarities, as well as differences, between both nearside and farside crashes, and the emergent trends between the three investigated countries. More specifically, it was indicated that whilst the severity of injury sustained in nearside crashes was slightly greater overall than that found for farside crashes, careful consideration of struck and nonstruck side occupants must be made when considering aspects such as vehicle design and occupant protection.