Sonstige
Filtern
Erscheinungsjahr
Dokumenttyp
- Konferenzveröffentlichung (28) (entfernen)
Schlagworte
- Frontalzusammenstoß (28) (entfernen)
Institut
- Sonstige (28) (entfernen)
For the assessment of vehicle safety in frontal collisions, the crash compatibility between the colliding vehicles is crucial. Compatibility compromises both the self protection and the partner protection properties of vehicles. For the accident data analysis, the CCIS (GB) and GIDAS (DE) in-depth data bases were used. Selection criteria were frontal car accidents with car in compliance with ECE R94. For this study belted adult occupants in the front seats sustaining MAIS 2+ injuries were studied. Following this analysis FIMCAR concluded that the following compatibility issues are relevant: - Poor structural interaction (especially low overlap and over/underriding) - Compartment strength - Frontal force mismatch with lower priority than poor structural interaction In addition injuries arising from the acceleration loading of the occupant are present in a significant portion of frontal crashes. Based on the findings of the accident analysis the aims that shall be addressed by the proposed assessment approach were defined and priorities were allocated to them. The aims and priorities shall help to decide on suitable test procedures and appropriate metrics. In general it is anticipated that a full overlap and off-set test procedure is the most appropriate set of tests to assess a vehicle- frontal impact self and partner protection.
Although the number of road accident casualties in Europe (EU27) is falling the problem still remains substantial. In 2011 there were still over 30,000 road accident fatalities. Approximately half of these were car occupants and about 60 percent of these occurred in frontal impacts. The next stage to improve a car's safety performance in frontal impacts is to improve its compatibility. The objective of the FIMCAR FP7 EU-project was to develop an assessment approach suitable for regulatory application to control a car's frontal impact and compatibility crash performance and perform an associated cost benefit analysis for its implementation. This paper reports the cost benefit analyses performed to estimate the effect of the following potential changes to the frontal impact regulation: • Option 1 " No change and allow current measures to propagate throughout the vehicle fleet. • Option 2 " Add a full width test to the current offset Deformable Barrier (ODB) test. • Option 3 " Add a full width test and replace the current ODB test with a Progressive Deformable Barrier (PDB) test. For the analyses national data were used from Great Britain (STATS 19) and from Germany (German Federal Statistical Office). In addition in-depth real word crash data were used from CCIS (Great Britain) and GIDAS (Germany). To estimate the benefit a generalised linear model, an injury reduction model and a matched pairs modelling approach were applied. The benefits were estimated to be: for Option 1 "No change" about 2.0%; for Option 2 "FW test" ranging from 5 to 12% and for Option 3 "FW and PDB tests" 9 to 14% of car occupant killed and seriously injured casualties.
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.
Over the past two decades the popularity of consumer crash test programs, commonly referred to as New Car Assessment Programs (NCAP), has grown across the world. They are popular among government regulators as they afford a means of promoting safety innovations and levels of vehicle performance beyond those dictated by national standards. They also fulfill the demand for information regarding the safety ranking of vehicles among consumers contemplating the purchase of a new vehicle. There is no question that consumer crash test programs greatly influence vehicle design changes as well as accelerate the fitment of new safety features. The extent to which these changes can be expected to reduce serious and potentially fatal injuries will be influenced by how well the testing protocols and associated rating schemes correctly reflect the nature of the residual safety problem they seek to address. Drawing on data contained primarily in the US National Automotive Sampling System (NASS), the field relevance of current and proposed testing and rating protocols addressing frontal crash test protection is examined. Emphasis is placed on examining how accurately injury rates computed from the dummy responses measured in consumer crash tests correspond to actual injury rates observed in the field. Additional data from Canadian field investigations and US databases such as the National Motor Vehicle Crash Causation Survey (NMVCCS) are examined to see how well frontal airbag firing times, crush pulse durations and other determinants of injury are replicated in consumer testing protocols. This portion of the analysis draws on data obtained from Event Data Recorders (EDR) in both field collisions and staged tests of the same vehicle model. Vehicle rankings and overall frontal crash test ratings were found to be particularly sensitive to the choice of injury risk functions employed in the test. This was particularly true in the case of injury risk functions used to assess neck injury potential. Neck injury risk derived from Nij was found to show the least agreement with the field. Agreement between field chest injury rates and those derived from crash tests was improved considerably when chest injury risk functions for "older" occupants were employed. The paper concludes with a discussion of how different current testing protocols could be improved to enhance their field relevance.
An analysis of NASS and FARS was conducted to determine crash conditions that involved injuries that are not currently being directly addressed by vehicle safety standards or by consumer information test protocols. Analysis of both field data and US NCAP tests were conducted to determine the relative safety provided by seating position and by vehicle model year. Opportunities for improvements were determined by crash categories with large populations of injuries that were not addressed by safety tests or smaller numbers that were increasing in frequency. Areas of opportunities include improved occupant restrain in rollovers, improved frontal protection for rear seat occupants and improved fire prevention in frontal and rollover crashes.
The share of high-tensile steel in car bodies has increased over the last years. While occupant safety has generally benefited from this measure, there is a potential risk that, as a result, rescue time may increase considerably. In more than 60% of all car occupant fatalities a technical rescue has been necessary. These are in particular those cases where occupants die immediately at the accident scene. Therefore, in these cases "rescue time" is a very sensitive parameter. In addition to the general analysis of the need of technical rescue and the actual rescue time depending on model years, the injury pattern of occupants requiring technical rescue will be analysed to provide advice for rescue teams. Furthermore, a detailed analysis of rescue measures for the most popular car models depending on the safety cell design is given.
The paper presents a methodology for the benefit estimation of several secondary safety systems for pedestrians, using the exceptional data depth of GIDAS. A total of 667 frontal pedestrian accidents up to 40kph and more than 500 AIS2+ injuries have been considered. In addition to the severity, affected body region, exact impact point on the vehicle, and the causing part of every injury, the related Euro NCAP test zone was determined. One results of the study is a detailed impact distribution for AIS2+ injuries across the vehicle front. It can be stated, how often a test zone or vehicle part is hit by pedestrians in frontal accidents and which role the ground impact plays. Basing on that, different secondary safety measures can be evaluated by an injury shift method concerning their real world effectiveness. As an example, measures concerning the Euro NCAP pedestrian rating tests have been evaluated. It was analysed which Euro NCAP test zones are the most effective ones. In addition, real test results have been evaluated. Using the presented methodology, other secondary safety like the active bonnet (pop-up bonnet) or a pedestrian airbag measures can be evaluated.
Small overlap frontal crashes are defined by a damage pattern with most of the vehicle deformation concentrated outboard of the main longitudinal structures. These crashes are prominent among frontal crashes resulting in serious and fatal injuries, even among vehicles that perform well in regulatory and consumer information crash tests. One of the critical aspects of understanding these crashes is knowing the crash speeds that cause the types of damage associated with serious injuries. Laboratory crash tests were conducted using 12 vehicles in three small overlap test conditions: pole, vehicle-to-vehicle collinear, and vehicle-to-vehicle oblique (15-degree striking angle). Field reconstruction techniques were used to estimate the delta V for each vehicle, and these results were compared with actual delta V values based on vehicle accelerometer data. Estimated delta Vs were 50% lower than actual values. Velocity change estimates for small overlap frontal crashes in databases such as NASS-CDS significantly underestimate actual values.
The National Highways Development Project in India is aimed at upgrading over 12,000 km of national highways from 2-lane undivided roads to 4-lane divided roads. With nearly 40% of fatal crashes being reported on national highways, the effect of this project on road safety needs to be assessed. Researchers carried out on-site crash investigations and in-depth crash data collection for a period of 45 to 60 days on four 2-lane undivided highways and a 4-lane divided highway. Based on 76 crashes examined, researchers found a shift of crash pattern from head-on collisions on undivided 2- lane highways to front-rear collisions on divided 4-lane highways. This paper presents the methodology, analysis of crashes examined, and the critical safety problems identified for greater consideration in future highway development projects. This paper also highlights the need and significance of in-depth crash investigations to understand local traffic conditions and problems in India.
The following paper presents the nature and mechanism of injuries sustained in frontal impacts, focusing on car to car impacts. It was found that the body regions most frequently sustaining severe to fatal injuries were the legs and the thorax. The nature and mechanism of the injury sustained was investigated only for the thorax injuries, due to their potentially life threatening nature. The analysis revealed that the most frequent cause of the injury recorded was the seatbelt for low severity injuries and the front structure of the vehicle for higher severity injuries. An analysis of the effect of load limiter technology in the restraint system showed that the proportion of occupants who sustained "no thorax injury" did not increase when a load limiter was fitted to the restraint system. However, a decrease in the "organ" and "organ and skeletal" injuries was observed in the load limiter sample. Sample size and variation mean that these findings are not conclusive.
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.
Annually within the European Union, there are over 50,000 road accident fatalities and 2 million other casualties, of which the majority are either the occupants of cars or other road users in collision with a car. The European Commission now has competency for vehicle-based injury countermeasures through the Whole Vehicle Type Approval system. As a result, the Commission has recognised that casualty reduction strategies must be based on a full understanding of the real-world need under European conditions and that the effectiveness of vehicle countermeasures must be properly evaluated. The PENDANT study commenced in January 2003 in order to explore the possibility of developing a co-ordinated set of targeted, in-depth crash data resources to support European Union vehicle and road safety policy. Three main work activity areas (Work Packages) commenced to provide these resources. This paper describes some of the outcomes of Work Package 2 (WP2, In-depth Crash Investigations and Data Analysis). In WP2, some 1,100 investigations of crashes involving injured car occupants were conducted in eight EU countries to a common protocol based on that developed in the STAIRS programme. This paper describes the purposes, methodology and results of WP2. It is expected that the results will be used as a co-ordinated system to inform European vehicle safety policy in a systematic, integrated manner. Furthermore, the results of the data analyses will be exploited further to provide new directions to develop injury countermeasures and regulations.
Nowadays airbags are part of the standard equipment in almost all new cars. While airbags are saving an increasing number of people from severe injuries and death in moderate and high speed crashes, they do not completely prevent dashboard injuries. The most common mechanism in dashboard injuries is a posteriorly directed force to the proximal tibia with the knee flexed. This may occur during a motor vehicle frontal impact accident when a knee of the driver or the front-seat passenger strikes the dashboard. The posterior force can be combined with a abducting or rotational force leading to concomitant lateral or posterolateral injury. Car and airbag manufacturers therefore develop special inflatable systems to reduce the impact force in dashboard injuries. Every new inflatable system, however, has to be evaluated in out of position situations in which the system might cause injuries to certain body areas. Therefore, we investigated a new kneebag system in different critical seating positions of post mortem test subjects (PMTS). The tested knee airbag module is a folded airbag (18 litre volume) which is installed below the lower section of the instrument panel of a passenger car. Using four PMTS (2 male, 2 female, age 36"67) the following positions were tested: normal seating position, knee flexed >90 degrees and knee flexed <60 degrees in static deployment tests with direct contact. In addition a dynamic test (48.8kph, AAMA-pulse) was carried out with the PMTS belted in a normal seating position. The inflation phase and the impact of the system on the knee/lower leg were analysed by high speed videos. After the test the lower legs of the PMTS were examined by Xray and autopsy. All soft tissue injuries and bone fractures were recorded. All the tests could be evaluated. Except some superficial skin lesions in the impact area no fracture of the bones around the knee and no knee ligament and tendon injuries were observed. Neither video analysis nor autopsy of the PMTS showed any critical contact injuries caused by the inflation process of the bag. Therefore, it can be concluded that in the tested seating positions which are the most critical for the knee area the knee bag system is safe.
The improvement of passive car security devices led to a reduction of injuries, especially of the head, the neck and the torso mainly due to the airbag function. The passenger's foot and ankle could not profit from this development. Some investigators even reported a progression of leg injuries (1). In this study, we investigated a current collective of patients with foot and ankle fractures or severe soft tissue injuries in relation with defined crash parameters. Special interest was paid to the car's footwell.
Sedan type vehicles in which adult rear seat passengers were present and which were involved in frontal collisions were investigated, and the influence of unbelted rear seat passengers on the injuries of front seat occupants was studied. Unbelted rear seat passengers move forward during impact. It was observed that there were not only cases in which front seat occupants sustained injuries caused by direct contact with rear seat passengers, but also cases where front seat occupants received severe injuries due to additional force from rear seat passengers, either impacting directly or indirectly as a result of deformation of the front seat. Severe injuries of front seat occupants were observed in the latter cases. This research validates the importance of seat-belt use for rear seat passengers, not only to protect themselves but also to mitigate injuries of front seat occupants.
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 number of injuries sustained by car occupants involving the head, thorax, spine, pelvis and the upper limbs have been reduced significantly during recent years. This is probably due to better safety features in the cars, especially the availability and usage of safety belts, airbags etc. Therefore one can notice clinically a relative increase in survivors of severe frontal crashes, but many of them have injuries to the lower extremities. To verify this, we analyzed the foot and ankle injuries of front seat passengers.
This study updates previous IIHS studies comparing estimated delta Vs for crash tested vehicles to the distribution of estimated delta Vs in the National Automotive Sampling System (NASS) Crashworthiness Data System (CDS). The delta V estimates for 232 frontal crash tests at 64.4km/h into a deformable barrier with 40 percent overlap are compared with estimates from frontal offset crashes in the 1997-2004 NASS database. All delta V estimates were based on SMASH, the delta V estimating program used by NASS since 1997. Results indicated that for all vehicles tested by IIHS, SMASH delta Vs were, on average, 32 percent lower than impact speeds and about 28 percent lower than the expected delta V. Almost 80 percent of all real-world frontal crashes resulting in AIS 3+ injuries and just over 60 percent of all fatal crashes occur at or below the average estimated delta V calculated for crash tested vehicles.