Second-row occupant responses with and without intrusion in rear sled and crash tests

Abstract

PURPOSE: percentile anthropometric test device (ATD) to assess occupant kinematics and biomechanical responses with and without intrusion of the second-row seatback. METHODS: male ATD on the right-side of the vehicle. The sled tests were conducted at 25, 33 and 40 km/h and involved no intrusion. The first crash test was conducted with a passenger car striking the vehicle at 80 km/h with full centerline overlap. The second to fourth crash tests were with a Sport Utility Vehicle (SUV) striking with a 50% overlap. Tests 2 and 3 were at 51 km/h and test 4, at 80 km/h impact speed. A large wooden speaker box was placed in the trunk of the Taurus in tests 3 and 4. Second-row intrusion was measured at the right-rear outboard package shelf retractor. RESULTS: The sled tests without intrusion had occupant responses below injury assessment reference values (IARVs). The right second-row ATD moved rearward relative to the interior, compressing the rear seatback until it rebounded forward. Occupant compartment intrusion of 12-77 cm in the crash tests pushed the ATD forward, increasing head and chest acceleration. The head, neck and chest biomechanical responses were below IARVs in crash tests 1 to 3 with minimal intrusion (≤ 25 cm). Most of the biomechanical responses were above IARVs for the right second-row ATD in test 4 with higher intrusion. The HIC increased with intrusion. Head acceleration was more than 2.5-times greater in test 3 than in test 2, highlighting the importance of cargo in rear crashes. Test 4 had 2.4-times more energy than test 3 and up to 7.7 times greater biomechanical responses with 77 cm of intrusion. CONCLUSIONS: The crash tests show that intrusion increases occupant responses in the right second-row seat and pushes the occupant forward in rear impacts. The sled tests without intrusion had relatively low biomechanical responses. Intrusion was influenced by the crash energy and cargo.

Topics & Concepts