Optimizing Seat Belt and Airbag Designs for Rear Seat Occupant Protection in Frontal Crashes.

Q2 Medicine
Jingwen Hu, Matthew P Reed, Jonathan D Rupp, Kurt Fischer, Paul Lange, Angelo Adler
{"title":"Optimizing Seat Belt and Airbag Designs for Rear Seat Occupant Protection in Frontal Crashes.","authors":"Jingwen Hu, Matthew P Reed, Jonathan D Rupp, Kurt Fischer, Paul Lange, Angelo Adler","doi":"10.4271/2017-22-0004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recent field data have shown that the occupant protection in vehicle rear seats failed to keep pace with advances in the front seats likely due to the lack of advanced safety technologies. The objective of this study was to optimize advanced restraint systems for protecting rear seat occupants with a range of body sizes under different frontal crash pulses. Three series of sled tests (baseline tests, advanced restraint trial tests, and final tests), MADYMO model validations against a subset of the sled tests, and design optimizations using the validated models were conducted to investigate rear seat occupant protection with 4 Anthropomorphic Test Devices (ATDs) and 2 crash pulses. The sled tests and computer simulations were conducted with a variety of restraint systems including the baseline rear-seat 3-point belt, 3-point belts with a pre-tensioner, load limiter, dynamic locking tongue, 4-point belts, inflatable belts, Bag in Roof (BiR) concept, and Self Conforming Rear seat Air Bag (SCaRAB) concept. The results of the first two sled series demonstrated that the baseline 3-point belt system are associated with many injury measures exceeding injury assessment reference values (IARVs); showed the significance of crash pulse and occupant size in predicting injury risks; and verified the potential need of advanced restraint features for better protecting the rear-seat occupants. Good correlations between the tests and simulations were achieved through a combination of optimization and manual fine-tuning, as determined by a correlation method. Parametric simulations showed that optimized belt-only designs (3-point belt with pre-tensioner and load limiter) met all of the IARVs under the soft crash pulse but not the severe crash pulse, while the optimized belt and SCaRAB design met all the IARVs under both the soft and severe crash pulses. Two physical prototype restraint systems, namely an \"advanced-belt only\" design and an \"advanced-belt and SCaRAB\" design, were then tested in the final sled series. With the soft crash pulse, both advanced restraint systems were able to reduce all the injury measures below the IARVs for all four ATDs. Both advanced restraint systems also effectively reduced almost all the injury measures for all ATDs under the severe crash pulse, except for the THOR. The design with the advanced-belt and SCaRAB generally provided lower injury measures than those using the advanced belt-only design. This study highlighted the potential benefit of using advanced seatbelt and airbag systems for rear-seat occupant protection in frontal crashes.","PeriodicalId":35289,"journal":{"name":"Stapp car crash journal","volume":"61 ","pages":"67-100"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"17","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Stapp car crash journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4271/2017-22-0004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

Abstract

Recent field data have shown that the occupant protection in vehicle rear seats failed to keep pace with advances in the front seats likely due to the lack of advanced safety technologies. The objective of this study was to optimize advanced restraint systems for protecting rear seat occupants with a range of body sizes under different frontal crash pulses. Three series of sled tests (baseline tests, advanced restraint trial tests, and final tests), MADYMO model validations against a subset of the sled tests, and design optimizations using the validated models were conducted to investigate rear seat occupant protection with 4 Anthropomorphic Test Devices (ATDs) and 2 crash pulses. The sled tests and computer simulations were conducted with a variety of restraint systems including the baseline rear-seat 3-point belt, 3-point belts with a pre-tensioner, load limiter, dynamic locking tongue, 4-point belts, inflatable belts, Bag in Roof (BiR) concept, and Self Conforming Rear seat Air Bag (SCaRAB) concept. The results of the first two sled series demonstrated that the baseline 3-point belt system are associated with many injury measures exceeding injury assessment reference values (IARVs); showed the significance of crash pulse and occupant size in predicting injury risks; and verified the potential need of advanced restraint features for better protecting the rear-seat occupants. Good correlations between the tests and simulations were achieved through a combination of optimization and manual fine-tuning, as determined by a correlation method. Parametric simulations showed that optimized belt-only designs (3-point belt with pre-tensioner and load limiter) met all of the IARVs under the soft crash pulse but not the severe crash pulse, while the optimized belt and SCaRAB design met all the IARVs under both the soft and severe crash pulses. Two physical prototype restraint systems, namely an "advanced-belt only" design and an "advanced-belt and SCaRAB" design, were then tested in the final sled series. With the soft crash pulse, both advanced restraint systems were able to reduce all the injury measures below the IARVs for all four ATDs. Both advanced restraint systems also effectively reduced almost all the injury measures for all ATDs under the severe crash pulse, except for the THOR. The design with the advanced-belt and SCaRAB generally provided lower injury measures than those using the advanced belt-only design. This study highlighted the potential benefit of using advanced seatbelt and airbag systems for rear-seat occupant protection in frontal crashes.
正面碰撞中保护后座乘员的安全带和安全气囊优化设计。
最近的现场数据显示,由于缺乏先进的安全技术,汽车后排座椅的乘员保护未能跟上前排座椅的发展。本研究的目的是优化先进的约束系统,以保护不同车身尺寸的后座乘客在不同的正面碰撞脉冲下的安全。通过三个系列的台车试验(基线试验、高级约束试验和最终试验)、针对部分台车试验的MADYMO模型验证,以及利用验证模型进行的设计优化,研究了4个拟人化测试装置(ATDs)和2个碰撞脉冲对后座乘员的保护作用。测试和计算机模拟采用了多种约束系统,包括基线后座3点安全带、带预张紧器的3点安全带、负载限制器、动态锁舌、4点安全带、充气安全带、车顶气囊(BiR)概念和自适应后座气囊(SCaRAB)概念。前两个雪橇系列的结果表明,基线3点带系统与许多超过损伤评估参考值(IARVs)的损伤措施有关;显示碰撞脉冲和乘员大小对损伤风险的预测意义;并验证了先进约束功能的潜在需求,以更好地保护后座乘员。通过相关方法确定的优化和手动微调相结合,实现了测试和模拟之间的良好相关性。参数化仿真结果表明,仅皮带优化设计(带预张紧器和限载器的三点皮带)满足软碰撞脉冲下的所有IARVs,但不满足严重碰撞脉冲下的IARVs,而皮带优化设计和SCaRAB设计同时满足软碰撞脉冲和严重碰撞脉冲下的所有IARVs。两种物理原型约束系统,即“先进带”设计和“先进带+ SCaRAB”设计,随后在最终的雪橇系列中进行了测试。通过软碰撞脉冲,这两种先进的约束系统都能够将所有四种atd的所有伤害措施降低到低于IARVs的水平。除了THOR之外,这两种先进的约束系统还有效地减少了所有atd在剧烈碰撞脉冲下的几乎所有伤害措施。采用先进皮带和SCaRAB的设计通常比使用先进皮带设计的设计提供更低的伤害措施。这项研究强调了在正面碰撞中使用先进的安全带和安全气囊系统保护后座乘员的潜在好处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Stapp car crash journal
Stapp car crash journal Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信