1. Crash Test Configurations for the Far-side Environment 1
1.1 Introduction: 1
1.2 FEM Model Simulations: 1
1.3 IIHS Crash Test Deformations vs. Model Results 6
1.4 Discussion 8
1.5 Conclusions 8
1.6 References 8
2 Human Facet Model Validation and Dummy Evaluation 9
2.1 Introduction 9
2.2 Results 10
2.3 Conclusions 14
2.4 References 14
3 Effect of Center Console Height on Dummy Kinematics 15
3.1 Introduction 15
3.2 Methods 15
3.3 Results 16
3.4 Conclusions 20
3.5 References 20
4 Suitability of Square Acceleration Profile for Far-Side Impact Testing 21
4.1 Introduction 21
4.2 Results 21
4.3 Discussion 24
4.4 Conclusions 24
4.5 References 24
5 Far-Side Impact Vehicle Simulations with MADYMO 25
5.1 Introduction 25
5.2 Methodology 25
5.2.1 Vehicle Interiors 26
5.2.2 Dummies and Initial Setup 26
5.2.3 Crash Pulses 29
5.2.4 Reverse Seatbelts 29
5.2.5 Airbags 30
5.2.6 Test Matrix Summary 30
5.3 Results 30
5.3.1 Evaluation of Countermeasures by Each Dummy Model 30
5.3.2 Human Finite Element Model 32
5.3.3 Human Faceted Model 32
5.4 Discussion 34
5.5 Conclusions 35
5.6 References 35
6 Sled Test Configurations for the Far-Side Crash Environment 37
6.1 Introduction 37
6.2 Background 37
6.3 Methodology 38
6.4 Vehicle Model Development 39
6.5 Simulations 40
6.5.1 NHTSA 4660 30° Corner Impact Simulation 41
6.5.2 Y Damage Crash Simulations 43
6.5.3 SNCAP Crash Simulations 47
6.6 Simulation Results 51
6.7 Conclusions 52
6.8 References 53
7 Findings of Studies to Determine Crash and Sled Test Conditions 54
7.1 Summary of Study Objectives 54
7.2 Results 55
7.3 References 56
In Task 1, the crash environment associated with injury producing far-side crashes was defined using US Accident data and confirmed from Australian data. The analysis indicated that for belted occupants with MAIS 3+ injuries, the 50% median crash severity was a lateral delta-V of 28 kph and an extent of damage of 3.6 as measured by the CDC scale [SAE Standard J224, Collision Deformation Classification]. The most frequent damage area for seriously injured belted occupants was the front 2/3 of the vehicle (42%), followed by the rear 2/3 (21%). The most frequent principal direction of force (PDOF) was 60o (60%), followed by 90o (24%). The head and chest were the most frequently injured body regions, each at about 40% [Gabler 2008]. The injuring contacts that most frequently caused chest injury were the struck-side interior (23.6%), the belt or buckle (21.4%) and the seat back (20.9%) [Fildes 2007].
The third bullet vehicle used was a GM C-1500 pick up truck.
The five different impact configurations and the measured lateral delta-V for each of the configuration are shown in Figure 4. The first two configurations were based on the US-LNCAP and IIHS test protocols respectively. The remaining three impact configuration was with a GM C-1500 pickup truck. In the first case the impact point was at the mid of the front door and the impact angle was 600. The next case was set-up similar to the IIHS side impact protocol except that the bullet vehicle was a pick-up truck instead of the barrier. In the third case the impact point was at the front body hinge pillar.