29
Evaluation of Crash Types Associated with Test Protocols Evaluation of Crash Types Evaluation of Crash Types Associated with Test Associated with Test Protocols Protocols _______________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________

Evaluation of Crash Types Associated with Test Protocols10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Head Thorax Upp Ext. Lower Ext. Number of Injuries ODB MDB FRB. Conclusion _____ MDB Type Crash ØMost

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    3

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Evaluation of Crash Types Associated with Test Protocols10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Head Thorax Upp Ext. Lower Ext. Number of Injuries ODB MDB FRB. Conclusion _____ MDB Type Crash ØMost

Evaluation of Crash Types Associated with Test

Protocols

Evaluation of Crash Types Evaluation of Crash Types Associated with Test Associated with Test

ProtocolsProtocols

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Page 2: Evaluation of Crash Types Associated with Test Protocols10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Head Thorax Upp Ext. Lower Ext. Number of Injuries ODB MDB FRB. Conclusion _____ MDB Type Crash ØMost

Test ProtocolsTest Protocols

• Offset Deformable Barrier (ODBODB)

• Moving Deformable Barrier (MDBMDB)

• Fixed Rigid Barrier (FRBFRB)

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Page 3: Evaluation of Crash Types Associated with Test Protocols10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Head Thorax Upp Ext. Lower Ext. Number of Injuries ODB MDB FRB. Conclusion _____ MDB Type Crash ØMost

NASS VariablesNASS Variables

• Object contacted• GAD of other vehicles• Specific horizontal location (SHLSHL)• Direct damage width• Heading angles• GAD of the other vehicle in combination

with heading angles

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Page 4: Evaluation of Crash Types Associated with Test Protocols10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Head Thorax Upp Ext. Lower Ext. Number of Injuries ODB MDB FRB. Conclusion _____ MDB Type Crash ØMost

Offset Deformable BarrierOffset Deformable BarrierOffset Deformable Barrier______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Page 5: Evaluation of Crash Types Associated with Test Protocols10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Head Thorax Upp Ext. Lower Ext. Number of Injuries ODB MDB FRB. Conclusion _____ MDB Type Crash ØMost

ODBODB type crash with left offset

Page 6: Evaluation of Crash Types Associated with Test Protocols10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Head Thorax Upp Ext. Lower Ext. Number of Injuries ODB MDB FRB. Conclusion _____ MDB Type Crash ØMost

ODBODB type crash for a left offset, withAn oblique angle

Page 7: Evaluation of Crash Types Associated with Test Protocols10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Head Thorax Upp Ext. Lower Ext. Number of Injuries ODB MDB FRB. Conclusion _____ MDB Type Crash ØMost

Moving Deformable BarrierMoving Deformable BarrierMoving Deformable Barrier______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Page 8: Evaluation of Crash Types Associated with Test Protocols10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Head Thorax Upp Ext. Lower Ext. Number of Injuries ODB MDB FRB. Conclusion _____ MDB Type Crash ØMost

MDBMDB type crash with a right obliqueright offset configuration

Page 9: Evaluation of Crash Types Associated with Test Protocols10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Head Thorax Upp Ext. Lower Ext. Number of Injuries ODB MDB FRB. Conclusion _____ MDB Type Crash ØMost

MDBMDB type front-to-rear crash configuration

Page 10: Evaluation of Crash Types Associated with Test Protocols10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Head Thorax Upp Ext. Lower Ext. Number of Injuries ODB MDB FRB. Conclusion _____ MDB Type Crash ØMost

Fixed Rigid BarrierFixed Rigid BarrierFixed Rigid Barrier______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Page 11: Evaluation of Crash Types Associated with Test Protocols10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Head Thorax Upp Ext. Lower Ext. Number of Injuries ODB MDB FRB. Conclusion _____ MDB Type Crash ØMost

Front-to-rear FRBFRB type crash

Page 12: Evaluation of Crash Types Associated with Test Protocols10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Head Thorax Upp Ext. Lower Ext. Number of Injuries ODB MDB FRB. Conclusion _____ MDB Type Crash ØMost

FRBFRB type crash configuration for a full-frontal, nearly full-engagement, head-on

crash

Page 13: Evaluation of Crash Types Associated with Test Protocols10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Head Thorax Upp Ext. Lower Ext. Number of Injuries ODB MDB FRB. Conclusion _____ MDB Type Crash ØMost

ODB Type CrashODB Type CrashHyundai Hyundai ElantraElantra, Offset Frontal With , Offset Frontal With

CorollaCorolla

Page 14: Evaluation of Crash Types Associated with Test Protocols10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Head Thorax Upp Ext. Lower Ext. Number of Injuries ODB MDB FRB. Conclusion _____ MDB Type Crash ØMost

ODB Type CrashODB Type CrashToyota Corolla, Offset With Toyota Corolla, Offset With ElantraElantra

Page 15: Evaluation of Crash Types Associated with Test Protocols10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Head Thorax Upp Ext. Lower Ext. Number of Injuries ODB MDB FRB. Conclusion _____ MDB Type Crash ØMost

MDB Type Crash MDB Type Crash Toyota Avalon, Oblique With Chevrolet Toyota Avalon, Oblique With Chevrolet

SuburbanSuburban

Page 16: Evaluation of Crash Types Associated with Test Protocols10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Head Thorax Upp Ext. Lower Ext. Number of Injuries ODB MDB FRB. Conclusion _____ MDB Type Crash ØMost

MDB Type CrashMDB Type CrashToyota Avalon (Continued)Toyota Avalon (Continued)

Page 17: Evaluation of Crash Types Associated with Test Protocols10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Head Thorax Upp Ext. Lower Ext. Number of Injuries ODB MDB FRB. Conclusion _____ MDB Type Crash ØMost

MDB Type CrashMDB Type CrashChevrolet Suburban, Oblique With AvalonChevrolet Suburban, Oblique With Avalon

Page 18: Evaluation of Crash Types Associated with Test Protocols10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Head Thorax Upp Ext. Lower Ext. Number of Injuries ODB MDB FRB. Conclusion _____ MDB Type Crash ØMost

MDB Type Crash MDB Type Crash Buick Century, Oblique With Explorer Buick Century, Oblique With Explorer

PartnerPartner

Page 19: Evaluation of Crash Types Associated with Test Protocols10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Head Thorax Upp Ext. Lower Ext. Number of Injuries ODB MDB FRB. Conclusion _____ MDB Type Crash ØMost

Buick Century InteriorBuick Century Interior

Page 20: Evaluation of Crash Types Associated with Test Protocols10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Head Thorax Upp Ext. Lower Ext. Number of Injuries ODB MDB FRB. Conclusion _____ MDB Type Crash ØMost

Explorer Partner Not CategorizedExplorer Partner Not Categorized

Page 21: Evaluation of Crash Types Associated with Test Protocols10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Head Thorax Upp Ext. Lower Ext. Number of Injuries ODB MDB FRB. Conclusion _____ MDB Type Crash ØMost

FRB Type CrashFRB Type CrashVW Jetta Full Frontal, With S10 PartnerVW Jetta Full Frontal, With S10 Partner

Page 22: Evaluation of Crash Types Associated with Test Protocols10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Head Thorax Upp Ext. Lower Ext. Number of Injuries ODB MDB FRB. Conclusion _____ MDB Type Crash ØMost

FRB Type CrashFRB Type CrashChevrolet SChevrolet S--10 Pickup, Full Frontal With 10 Pickup, Full Frontal With

Jetta PartnerJetta Partner

Page 23: Evaluation of Crash Types Associated with Test Protocols10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Head Thorax Upp Ext. Lower Ext. Number of Injuries ODB MDB FRB. Conclusion _____ MDB Type Crash ØMost

ODB & MDB ODB & MDB Chevrolet Malibu And Ford Taurus, Right Chevrolet Malibu And Ford Taurus, Right

OffsetOffset

Page 24: Evaluation of Crash Types Associated with Test Protocols10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Head Thorax Upp Ext. Lower Ext. Number of Injuries ODB MDB FRB. Conclusion _____ MDB Type Crash ØMost

Frontal Crashes Represented by Crash Type Frontal Crashes Represented by Crash Type NASS 1995NASS 1995--20012001

(Accident exposure by crash type and air bag availability)(Accident exposure by crash type and air bag availability)______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

2 . 5 6 3 8 1 6

0 . 5 0 8 6 1 9

1 . 1 9 6 0 4 4

0 . 6 8 7 4 2 5

1 . 3 3 4 7 1 1

1 . 2 2 9 1 0 5 1 . 2 4 4 4 5 9

0 . 6 6 3 0 0 80 . 5 8 1 4 5 1

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

Airbag Non Airbag TotalNum

ber

of C

rash

es (M

illio

ns)

O DB MDB FRB

Page 25: Evaluation of Crash Types Associated with Test Protocols10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Head Thorax Upp Ext. Lower Ext. Number of Injuries ODB MDB FRB. Conclusion _____ MDB Type Crash ØMost

MAIS 2MAIS 2--6 Driver Injuries by Crash Type 6 Driver Injuries by Crash Type NASS 1995NASS 1995--20012001

Num

ber

of I

njur

ies

( Tho

usan

ds)

_______________________________________________________(Injury distribution by crash type and air bag availability)(Injury distribution by crash type and air bag availability)_______________________________________________________

4 0 . 6 9 5

8 1 . 0 5 91 2 1 . 7 5 4

1 9 6 . 9 9 7

1 1 1 . 6 8 1

3 0 8 . 6 7 8

4 5 . 1 0 6

1 1 8 . 0 1 57 2 . 9 0 9

0

50

10 0

150

2 0 0

2 5 0

3 0 0

3 5 0

Airbag N o n A i rb a g To t a l

O D B M D B F R B

Page 26: Evaluation of Crash Types Associated with Test Protocols10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Head Thorax Upp Ext. Lower Ext. Number of Injuries ODB MDB FRB. Conclusion _____ MDB Type Crash ØMost

AIS 2AIS 2--6 Driver Injuries by Body Region in Airbag Vehicles 6 Driver Injuries by Body Region in Airbag Vehicles NASS 1995NASS 1995--20012001

(Distribution of driver injuries by body region for air bag(Distribution of driver injuries by body region for air bag--equipped vehicles)equipped vehicles)______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Num

ber

of I

njur

ies

(Tho

usan

ds)

1 9 .7 1 61 2 . 2 9 4

1 3 .7 21 1 .3 2 2

6 8 .7 3 4

3 1 .6 3 82 2 .9 2 9

3 8 .2 5 84 .7 4 7 3 4 .4 1 7

5 .6 4 1

1 1 .7 8 8

01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 0

He a d T h o r a x U p p E x t . Lo w e r

Ex t .

Num

ber

of In

juri

es O D B M D B F R B

Page 27: Evaluation of Crash Types Associated with Test Protocols10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Head Thorax Upp Ext. Lower Ext. Number of Injuries ODB MDB FRB. Conclusion _____ MDB Type Crash ØMost

ConclusionConclusion______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

MDB Type CrashMDB Type Crash

ØMost frequent frontal crash

ØPredominant cause of overall injuries and injuries to thelower extremities

Ø Intrusion rather than inertial loading is the predominantcause of injuries to the lower extremities

Page 28: Evaluation of Crash Types Associated with Test Protocols10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Head Thorax Upp Ext. Lower Ext. Number of Injuries ODB MDB FRB. Conclusion _____ MDB Type Crash ØMost

Conclusion (Cont’d)Conclusion (Cont’d)______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

ODB & FRB Type CrashODB & FRB Type Crash

Ø Inertial loading is the predominant injury mechanismfor the lower extremities in ODB and FRB typecrashes

Ø There are nearly 2 times more lower leg injuries inFRB type crashes, than in ODB type crashes

Page 29: Evaluation of Crash Types Associated with Test Protocols10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Head Thorax Upp Ext. Lower Ext. Number of Injuries ODB MDB FRB. Conclusion _____ MDB Type Crash ØMost

QuestionsQuestionsQuestions

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________