Sonstige
Filtern
Schlagworte
- Conference (3)
- Injury (3)
- Konferenz (3)
- Verletzung (3)
- Analyse (math) (2)
- Analysis (math) (2)
- Decrease (2)
- Fahrzeug (2)
- France (2)
- Frankreich (2)
- Frontalzusammenstoß (2)
- Head on collision (2)
- Schweregrad (Unfall, Verletzung) (2)
- Severity (accid, injury) (2)
- Vehicle (2)
- Verminderung (2)
- Abdomen (1)
- Accident (1)
- Ausrüstung (1)
- Bewertung (1)
- Car (1)
- Cost benefit analysis (1)
- Deutschland (1)
- Efficiency (1)
- Equipment (1)
- Europa (1)
- Europe (1)
- Evaluation (assessment) (1)
- Fahrstabilität (1)
- Fahrzeugflotte (1)
- Fatality (1)
- Fleet of vehicles (1)
- Germany (1)
- Gewicht (1)
- Homogeneity (1)
- Homogenität (1)
- Inertia reel safety belt (1)
- Insasse (1)
- Lap strap (1)
- Leistungsfähigkeit (allg) (1)
- Occupant (veh) (1)
- Passenger (1)
- Passive safety system (1)
- Passives Sicherheitssystem (1)
- Pkw (1)
- Risiko (1)
- Risk (1)
- Safety harness (1)
- Seat belt (1)
- Seat harness (1)
- Sicherheitsgurt (1)
- Statistics (1)
- Statistik (1)
- Theorie (1)
- Theory (1)
- Tödlicher Unfall (1)
- Unfall (1)
- Unterleib (1)
- Vehicle handling (1)
- Weight (1)
- Wirtschaftlichkeitsrechnung (1)
Electronic Stability Program (ESP) aims to prevent the lateral instability of a vehicle. Linked to the braking and powertrain systems, it prevents the car from running wide on a corner or the rear from sliding out. It also helps the driver control his trajectory, without replacing him, in the case of loss of control where the driver is performing an emergency manoeuvrer (confused and exaggerated steering wheel actions). A new ESP function optimizes ESP action in curves with hard under steering (situations in which the front wheels lose grip and the vehicle slides towards the outside of the curve). A complementary feature prevents the wheels from spinning when pulling away and accelerating. The name given to the ESP system varies according to the vehicle manufacturer, but other terms include: active stability control (ASC), automotive stability management system (ASMS), dynamic stability control (DSC), vehicle dynamic control (VDC), vehicle stability control (VSC) or electronic stability Control (ESC). This paper proposes an evaluation of the effectiveness of ESP in terms of reduction of injur accidents in France. The method consists of 3 steps: - The identification, in the French National injury accident census (Gendarmerie Nationale only), of accident-involved cars for which the determination of whether or not the car was fitted with ESP is possible. A sample of 1 356 cars involved in injury accidents occurred in 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2003 was then selected. But we had to restrict the analysis to only 588 Renault Lagunas. - The identification of accident situations for which we can determine whether or not ESP is pertinent (for example ESP is pertinent for loss of control accidents whilst it is not for cars pulling out of a junction). - The calculation, via a logistic regression, of the relative risk of being involved in an ESPpertinent accident for ESP equipped cars versus unequipped cars, divided by the relative risk of being involved in a non ESP-pertinent accident for ESP equipped cars versus unequipped cars. This relative risk is assumed to be the best estimator of ESP effectiveness. The arguments for such a method, effectiveness indicator and implicit hypothesis are presented and discussed in the paper. Based on a few assumptions, ESP is proved to be highly effective. Currently, the relative risk of being involved in an ESP pertinent accident for ESP-equipped cars is lower (-44%, although not statistically significant)rnthan for other cars.rn
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).
This work aims at bringing evidence for mass incompatibility in frontal impact for cars built according to the UNECE R94 regulation. French national injury accidents database census for years 2005 to 2008 were used for the analysis. The heterogeneity of frontal self-protection among cars of different masses is investigated, as well as the partner protection parameter offered by these cars. The last part of the analysis deals with the estimation of the benefit, in terms of fatal and severe injuries avoided, if crashworthiness was harmonized for the whole fleet of vehicle. This calculation is done for France and is extended to all Europe.