Impact and injury patterns in side crashes of vehicles with good ratings for side crash protection
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 21

Impact and injury patterns in side crashes of vehicles with good ratings for side crash protection PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 49 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Impact and injury patterns in side crashes of vehicles with good ratings for side crash protection. SAE Government Industry Meeting Washington, DC ● January 25, 2012. Becky Mueller Research Engineer. Side impact crashworthiness evaluations. Moving deformable barrier crash tests

Download Presentation

Impact and injury patterns in side crashes of vehicles with good ratings for side crash protection

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Impact and injury patterns in side crashes of vehicles with good ratings for side crash protection

Impact and injury patterns inside crashes of vehicles with good ratings for side crash protection

SAE Government Industry Meeting

Washington, DC ● January 25, 2012

Becky Mueller

Research Engineer


Side impact crashworthiness evaluations

Side impact crashworthiness evaluations

Moving deformable barrier crash tests

3,300 lb. barrier at 50 km/h

M

vehicles tested are rated

GOOD

ACCEPTABLE

MARGINAL

POOR

head protection

injury measures from

SID IIs dummies

G

A

P

structure


Side impact crash protection ratings

Side impact crash protection ratings

Improvements: 2003 to 2011


Risk of dying in a side crash based on rating

Risk of dying in a side crash based on rating

Drivers in good rated vehicles were 70% less likely to die in a left side crash than drivers in poor rated vehicles*.

(Teoh and Lund, 2011)

* Of vehicles with standard head and torso airbag protection


How are people being seriously injured in vehicles designed for good side crashworthiness

How are people being seriously injured in vehicles designed for good side crashworthiness?

NASS Query:

  • Side crashes with designation: L (8,9,10) or R (2,3,4)

  • Case years 2000-2010

  • AIS 3+ or fatally injured occupants

  • All vehicles with good IIHS side rating

  • 51 vehicles met these criteria

    • 56 total occupants (multiple qualifying occupants in 5 case vehicles)


Occupant location relative to impact

Occupant location relative to impact

19 occupants

37 occupants

Farside

Nearside

Direction of Impact


Farside occupant characteristics

Farside occupant characteristics

19 farside occupants are not evaluated in any current crashworthiness evaluation test

  • High levels of occupant compartment intrusion

  • Occupant motion inboard toward intruding structure

Ford 4 point safety belt concept


Center airbag

Center airbag

Control occupantkinematics infarside crashes

Also address headinjuries from other occupant contact (seen in 4 cases)

center airbag will debut in 2013 ChevroletTraverse/GMC Acadia/Buick Enclave


Nearside case vehicles

Nearside case vehicles

2004 -10 model year vehicles

27% of all vehicles rated Good


Crash scenario vehicle to vehicle

Crash scenario – vehicle-to-vehicle

25 intersection style crashes

Average occupant age: 49 years old

6 (24%) fatally injured occupants

Two large truck partner vehicles excluded


Crash scenario stationary object

Crash scenario – stationary object

12 loss of control crashes

Average occupant age: 27 years old

9 (75%) fatally injured occupants


Stationary object crash test

Stationary object crash test

NHTSA side pole test

  • 32 km/h impact with rigidnarrow pole

  • Rating based on dummy sensors


Crash severity

Crash severity

Percent of cases by lateral delta V (km/h)

IIHS side impact test delta V


Crush values

Crush values

Percent of cases with by maximum crush (cm)

IIHS Good rated side impact test maximum crush

NHTSA pole test maximum crush


Airbag non deployment

Airbag non-deployment

Lower severity with loading primarily forward of occupant compartment

48 year old male driver

Struck by 2006 Honda Accord

Delta V: 35 km/h

Facial fractures from b-pillar

Rib fractures from door interior trim


Airbag late deployment seen in tests

Airbag late deployment – seen in tests

At higher severities, curtain airbags may not have time to properly deploy for adequate protection


Airbag late deployment seen in real world

Airbag late deployment – seen in real world

2007 Nissan Versa

Max crush: 19 cm

29 year old male belted driver

Lost control and struck light post

Fatal head injuries from direct contact with post

Difficult to identify in crash reconstructionsince airbag does eventually deploy


Summary

Summary

  • Farside occupants (33% of cases) not addressed by crash testing

  • IIHS and NHTSA tests are addressing relevant crash modes

  • Twice as many vehicle-to-vehicle crashes as stationary object

    • Vehicle-to-vehicle crashes: lower severity, involved older occupants

    • Fixed object crashes: higher severity, involved younger occupants

  • LTV underrepresented in case vehicles, overrepresented in striking vehicles

  • Airbag deployment issues contributing to injuries


Future work

Future work

Investigate further how occupants are getting injured in cases with similar severity to IIHS and NHTSA tests


Airbag late deployment torso airbag

Airbag late deployment – torso airbag

At higher severities, torso airbags may not have time to properly deploy as door trim intrudes


  • Login