An evaluation of front seat distance from rear facing child restraint systems in prevention of injury in frontal crash tests.

Abstract

Objectives: Elevated head injury incidence in infants compared to toddlers involved as occupants in motor vehicle crashes has been demonstrated in multiple population-representative crash databases. Further, experimental studies have revealed a potential injury mechanism via impact between a rear-facing, CRS-restrained child and the back of the vehicle seat or console on the row in front of the CRS. Subsequently, experimental studies have suggested that bracing the CRS against the seat immediately in front of the CRS could mitigate head injury, but also indicated that more research was necessary. Thus, we investigated the effect of bracing against the front seat, as well as distance from the front seat with rear-facing infant carriers and rear-facing convertibles, with a focus on changes to measured head, neck and chest injury metrics in rear facing CRSs. Further, we examined the effect of using the infant carrier with and without a base on these injury metrics.

Methods: 34 frontal sled tests at 30 or 35 mph were conducted using a simulated rear-row vehicle seat and structure representing the front seatback. A Q1.5 anthropomorphic test device (ATD) was placed in a single make/model LATCH-affixed rear-facing convertible or single make/model infant carrier; infant carrier without base was affixed with lap and shoulder belt. To evaluate the effect of bracing and distance, tests were conducted with a 300, 140, 70, or 15 mm gap between the CRS seatback and the front seatback, or a touching (0 mm) or braced (-20 mm) condition. Bayesian regression models quantified the effects of various predictors and model uncertainty.

Results: For tests with the convertible CRS, no head contact was observed between the head and the front vehicle seatback. For the infant carrier, head contact occurred at both 70 and 140 mm distances but not the other distances. On average, the -20, 0, or 15 mm distances yielded a 60% reduction in head injury criterion with 15 millisecond window (HIC15), and a 60% to 80% reduction in neck tension, compared to the 70 and 140 mm distances; chest acceleration also decreased for the convertible seat only. In the case of both carriers and convertibles, each mm of distance the CRS moves away from the front seatback up to 70 mm, adds 5.3 HIC15 points (95% Credible Interval (CrI):[4.6, 6.2]), and 3.5 Newtons (95% CrI: [2.2, 4.8]) of neck tension, on average.

Conclusions: Placing a rear facing CRS, both convertibles and infant carriers, against or close to the seatback of the seat immediately in front of the CRS reduces head and tensile neck injury criteria in ATDs. The amount of gap between the front seat and the rear facing CRS is strongly and positively correlated with HIC for both convertibles and infant carriers. RF infant carriers with and without a base yield comparable injury metrics and kinematics when touching or nearly touching the back of the front vehicle seatback.