Advanced Occupant Detection System PDF

ADVANCED OCCUPANT DETECTION SYSTEM: DETECTION OF HUMAN VITAL
SIGNS BY SEAT-EMBEDDED FERROELECTRIC FILM SENSORS AND BY VIBRATION

ANALYSIS
Pierre Orlewski
CRP Gabriel Lippmann
Laurent Federspiel
IEE SA
Luxemburg
Mark Cuddihy
Manoharprasad Rao
Ford Motor Company,
Stephen Fuks
IEE Sensing Inc.
USA
Paper Number 11-0205
ABSTRACT static (sleeping like) and non-static scenarios.

Recordings using test loads and a pack of water
The concepts of human seat occupancy detection bottles were also collected as the counterpart to the
and driver’s drowsiness monitoring require a passengers.
sophisticated, sensing technology capable of
capturing human vital signs in a reliable manner. Human-specific presence detection and
The concept discussed in this paper may help discrimination from objects by detection of vital
enable the development of future systems capable signs was achieved within a relatively short
of detecting an occupant in a seat. detection time in this conceptual study. Infants and
small children were placed in dedicated child
The present study explores the feasibility of restraint seats (CRS) and not moved during the data
detecting humans based on a polymer sensor fitted collection, thus simulating sleeping children. All
into the seat cushion and capable of capturing subjects were detected typically within a 20
human vital signs. A bulk, polypropylene seconds sampling interval. In a few cases and with
ferroelectric film has been charged and polarized in additional time, their respective signals could be
a strong external electric field prior to the sensor extracted from collected data as confirmed by a
assembly. The resulting 323 sq cm sensors medical monitor used in parallel.
displayed a high piezoelectric d33 coefficient of
approximately 200 pC/N, considerably higher than INTRODUCTION
vibration sensors made of PVDF or PVDF-TR
piezoelectric films. This type of electroresponsive The concept of human seat occupancy detection
polymer has been used for medical respiration, requires a sophisticated, sensing technology. Any
heartbeat and epileptic seizure monitors. proposed solution should be capable of quickly and
reliably capturing and analyzing data to identity
We employed dedicated, microprocessor-based characteristics of the human body (such as
electronics including charge and variable gain vibration frequency eigen-values) and human vital
amplifiers and 4th-order anti-aliasing filter for data signs (such as respiration rate and/or heart beat).
collection. Three different types of algorithms have The constraint of seat-specific detection rather than
been fitted or developed and tested: i) a commercial entire vehicle interior monitoring implies the use of
medical monitor with estimation of respiratory and seat-embedded sensors. This brings additional
heart beat rates, ii) a signal extraction, filtering and functional restrictions of sensor size and materials
matching wavelet-based algorithm for vital sign as directly impacting the seating comfort, seat
detection and (iii) a frequency domain, 2nd-order designs and seat manufacturing process. For all
classifier for humans/objects, using knowledge- those reasons, the use of thin, electromechanical
based discrimination. polymer was the approach investigated in this
study.
Experimental data involved a minimum of 20
human subjects ranging from a 5-month old infant
in a child restraint to a 95th%ile male, both in fully
Orlewski, 1
SENSOR TECHNOLOGY vibration noise conditions (parked with engine on
or cruising on smooth paved roads)? (2) Would it
Over the past decade a lot of research has been be possible to use this information for a robust
carried out on multilayer electret films extruded discrimination of human passengers from
from various polymer materials like polyethylene transported cargo? Collected vibration time-domain
(PE), polystyrene (PS), polyurethane (PU), and data has been denoised by using classical Coiflet's
polyethylene terephtalate (PET). Those wavelets [8] with universal thresholding method as
successfully brought to the large scale commercial proposed by Donoho and Johnstone [9].
applications included polytetrafluoro-ethylene
(PTFE), polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) and its Each human test subject was monitored for 60
copolymer (PVDF-TR) and more recently a porous, seconds of steady seating at a sampling frequency
monolayer polypropylene (PP) film [1,2,3]. Even of 1 kHz. A reduced sample of 32 seconds was
employed in relatively slim thickness of 90µm, the used for analysis in order to avoid the bias from
latter displays excellent sensitivity in the 130 - 200 initial and continuing compression of seat
pC/N range and at vibration frequencies spanning materials. As shown on Figure 1 below, we were
from 1 to 150 KHz. Those principal characteristics, able to extract a quite regular and reliable vital sign
together with the simplicity of the sensor setup, as signal especially from steady vehicle with engine
well as its cost effectiveness, made this intrinsically on. Signal periodicity coincides well with the
sensing material attractive for slim acoustic and typical human respiration rate and a higher
photoacoustic transducers [4], paramedical, patient frequency component, probably in relation to the
in bed monitoring [5], vital sign monitoring heart beat, is clearly perceptible on the top of every
including both, respiration rate and heart activity peak.
[6] and recently for the wireless ballistographic
chair [7]. Detectors built with such a ferroelectric
material are transient state sensors reacting only on
transient compression or release and are insensitive
to the constant force or load applied to its surface.
signal magnitude (V)
INITIAL PROOF OF CONCEPT
In the early part of our study we employed an A4-

size electromechanical sensor including a 90µm
polypropylene EMFi film (Emfit Ltd.) and two time (s)
bottom and top PET layers, both covered with ca. 6
µm screen-printed silver paste. All three layers Figure 1. Vital signals from 50%ile male
have been assembled using double-sided bonding passenger in steady vehicle with engine on: raw
spacer (3M) exclusively applied to the contour of signal (upper) and extracted human respiration
vibration sensitive PP layers. It allowed a stable after wavelet denoising (bottom).
electrical contact between the sensing layer and the
conductive electrode paste and finally a direct A similar approach, except with 2 (backrest and
charge change measurement instead of a capacitive seat cushion) ferroelectric EMFi sensors fitted to an
measurement, which is generally noisier. An office chair, and a wavelet analysis has been
additional silver and dielectric double-layer was adopted in the past by Postolache et al. [6] for a
printed on top of one PET film to protect the sensor remarkably good separation of respiration signal
from external electromagnetic disturbances embedded in the heart rate ballistocardiogram
(shielding). The sensor was simply deployed on (BCG).
horizontal portion of the vehicle rear bench. It was
interfaced to the DAS1000 data logger via original Test conditions and sampling
electronics used for a para-medical bed exit and
seizure monitor supplied from Emfit Ltd (Finland). For the setup of a discrimination algorithm, a larger
Initial testing included a sample of 3 adult male data set has been collected consisting of a 5 x 32
passengers covering the range from 50th- 95th data series recorded in a non-moving vehicle with
percentile and a variety of objects up to the weight the engine ON and OFF. The test series included 4
of approximately 15kg, supposed to be transported objects (5, 10, 15kg load stamps and a 9L 6x1.5L
on the rear bench seat. Our attention was initially water pack), 3 adult males and 1 empty seat, every
focused on two major questions: (1) Would it be sequence being repeated twice. The second set of
possible to extract human vital signals captured by data was collected while the vehicle was cruising.
the sensor exclusively fitted to the seating portion It totaled 5x16 data series (incl. 2 repetitions) from
of the vehicle bench seat (no backrest sensor 4 objects, 3 humans and 1 empty seat. The third set
present), while the vehicle is operating at low of data (2x48) has been collected in similar
Orlewski, 2
conditions as previously described but with
Decision-making Process
intentionally aged sensors. Finally, 40 data series
were collected while the vehicle was traveling at 70
km/h on very smooth paved road and at 50 km/h on Data transformation
a paved but non-smooth road. From the total into the training space
number of 371 useable vibration profiles (out of the
first 376 recordings, 5 were damaged), 144 profiles
were used in algorithm setup and discrimination
Discriminant analysis
training while the remaining 227 were used in
further testing.
Discrimination Algorithm Final Class Call:

Human/ Non-Human
A three-step discrimination algorithm was
established. In the first step a data sequence of an Figure 3. On-line decision-making process.
arbitrarily selected 50th percentile male test subject
was collected in a steady vehicle with engine on. After data transformation into the training space,
After extracting a 32.7sec window and performing the final (Human or non-Human) discrimination
wavelet decomposition, the noise was removed call (Fig. 3) was issued from Discriminant Analysis
from the signal using universal hard thresholding. (DA). The prevalent discriminators in the DA were
A representative physiological pattern was the respective distances to the human and non-
manually picked up from the cleaned signal. In the human class barycentres and the likeness to the
second, still off-line stage, all 144 test sequences canonical physiological pattern. The overall human
were employed in a setup of the training database / cargo (or empty seat) discrimination performance
(Fig.2). The following wavelet-based signal during this part of the study reached 93.5% of
denoising and reconstruction, autocorrelation, correct decisions. As expected, most of the errors
correlation with physiological pattern and FFT (false positives) came from driving scenarios, while
analysis, resulted in 5 primary signal characteristics non- detection (false negatives) errors resulted
(max DSP frequency, max DSP value, max FFT exclusively from testing with parked vehicle
frequency, max FFT value and max correlation (Tab.1). This result was obtained without any a
with physiological pattern). These physical signal priori knowledge about the state of vehicle
parameters were then converted to a set of (stationary or moving). In real life, this information
classification features among which, the may be retrieved from the vehicle CAN bus which
barycentres (centers of mass) of the Human and would improve the performance. In the present
non-Human (cargo or empty seat) clusters were the study, use of this information improved the final
most prominent classifiers. discrimination, with up to 98.8% of the decisions
correctly classified.
Setup of Training Database
32.7s test sequence Table 1.
Wavelet-based
signal denoising and Confusion matrix of the final discrimination:
reconstruction FN–false negatives, FP–false positives.
Steady vehicle with Cruising

Autocorrelation Correlation with physiological pattern engine ON vehicle
FFT FFT
Extraction of 2 FN 5 0
Extraction of 3 primary characteristics
primary characteristics FP 0 17
Principal Component Total 224 112
Analysis
In this conceptual study, extraction of the vital

Transform
Human Class: Non-Human Class: signs from the electromechanical film sensor fitted
- barycentre - barycentre into the vehicle seat cushion was achieved, even in
Matrix - covariance matrix - covariance matrix
presence of relatively large vibration noise
Figure 2. Off line setup of Training Database. background generated by a moving vehicle. It was
realized that with currently available sensor
In the on-line phase, every incoming, “unknown” technology, one needs to address also other human
vibration sequence from the 227 testing data sets body characteristics for the robust discrimination
was submitted to exactly the same wavelet over the large number of passengers and objects
denoising procedure as previously employed with potentially carried in the rear seats and to cover
the training sequences. real-world driving scenarios (e.g., road quality,
vehicle velocity and acceleration, types of chassis)
Orlewski, 3
sensitive vibration sensor installed in the car seat,
DETECTION TRIALS OF TODDLERS AND with both ballistocardiograph and respiration
INFANTS signals of acceptable quality. The “child detected”
decision exclusively relied on vital signals and did
One of the sensors employed in the previous study not account for other captured signals, generated by
was fitted into the rear bench seat with thick foam small body movements of the children.
trim. We used both the original electronic interface Additionally, in order to detect a child with this
for paramedic vital sign monitoring (from Emfit conceptual approach, a sensor-CRS contact surface
Ltd., Finland) and its modified version with is necessary and complete absorption of vibrations
reduced amplification gain. The principal point of within a physiological frequency range from 0.1 to
interest was the feasibility of vital sign capture and 2.0 Hz by the CRS cannot occur.
detection of infants installed in a CRS. All tests
were made with a rearward-facing class 1 child TOWARDS A VERSATILE INTELLIGENT
restraint seat and with a forward facing seat (Fig. PEOPLE DETECTOR IN THE VEHICLE
4). Two infants (4 and 5 months old) and two SEATS
toddlers (22 and 24 months old) were involved in
detection trials in a parked vehicle with the engine Although conceptual feasibility was shown in
off. These tests were conducted during the winter laboratory testing, the robustness of in-vehicle
period, with the children warmly dressed. The thick occupant detection by vital signals will be limited
clothes constituted an additional damping factor of in the real-world driving due to the vibration noise.
the vital signals supposed to propagate through the Therefore, human vital signs cannot be the
base of the CRS. As at this stage we were exclusive detection target and must by
exclusively interested in vital signs, all of children accompanied by another “human factor”, well
were encouraged to stay motionless, simulating a distinguishable from the surrounding vibration
sleeping child scenario. background of a moving vehicle. Such a physical
entity, moderately influenced by chassis vibrations,
is apparent mass resonance frequency of the human
body, which significantly differs from empty seat
and seat cargo resonance frequencies (Fig. 5 and
Fig. 6).
Country road driving test: FFT spectra
5kg object 15kg object empty seat

6x1.5L 5%F normal 5%F backrest
water pack
Figure 4. Detection trials with child restraint

seats (from left to right 4 month old infant in
rearward-facing seat and 22 month old toddler
in a forward-facing seat)
Frequency (Hz)
All tests were repeated at least 5 times with both

types of electronic interface. With the original Figure 5. Frequency spectrum of 5th%ile female
Emfit interface setting, typically 20 seconds were and of seat cargoes up to 15 kg during 50 km/h
required to detect vital signs within preset signal cruising on smooth road.
robustness and quality requirements. Even with the
inevitable high frequency movements of the
children, the software was able to yield realistic,
average heat beat rates of approximately 115 beats /
min and 90 beats / min respectively for the infants
and for toddlers. Trials with modified electronics
and modified amplification gains and filtering
parameters accelerated the detection of vital signs
down to approximately 15 sec (toddlers) and 10 sec
(infants) but computed heart rates were
unrealistically low.
This assessment demonstrated the conceptual

feasibility of detection of infants with a very
Orlewski, 4
Country road driving test: FFT spectra The sensors (Fig.8) were modified and their
7YO_booster_1 7YO_booster_2 5YO_booster_1 5YO_booster_2 sensitive surface was reduced to ca. 323 cm2 in
5%F normal 5%Fbackrest
backrest inclined 5%F turned on cushion
order to fit 3 places of a sedan rear bench seat.
Frequency (Hz)
Figure 6. Frequency spectrum of 5th%ile female Figure 8. Electromechanical sensor setup with
(various seating postures) and of 5&7 YO 90μm porous polypropylene ferroelectric film
children seated on booster seats during 50 km/h (length: 214 mm, width: 152 mm, thickness:
cruising on smooth road. 370 μm).
In the test cases using human occupants, a 5th All three sensors fitted into the rear bench were
percentile female adopting different seating quasi-simultaneously controlled by an electronics
postures and 5 and 7 year old children in booster module specially developed for this purpose. It
seats, the human mass resonance peaks at included (Fig.9) a 12 bit Field Programmable Gate
approximately 4.43Hz and is perceptible and in Array microprocessor (μC), a 3-channel
agreement with data found in the literature [10,11]. multiplexer (MUX), a 12 bit ADC converter,
In contrast, the resonance frequency of unanimated charge- and variable gain amplifiers and a 4th-
seat cargo peaks at higher frequencies, starting order antialiasing filter. All data was stored on the
from 7-8Hz on and thus allows for the human /non- laptop PC hosting the graphical user interface. The
human seat occupancy discrimination. discrimination software operated alternatively in
the real-time and in the off-line mode.
Dual mode discrimination strategy and new
algorithm setup
After basic detection assessments were conducted 3 x vibration sensor Charge amplifier Variable gain
amplifier
both in parked and in moving vehicles, the focus BNC
was shifted to the dual mode detection scenario. Anti-aliasing filter
4th order
The magnitude of the vehicle chassis vibrations Vref 2.5V
was selected as the trigger between vital signals DB25 JP4

and apparent mass vibration characteristics in the 25x flat cable
ADConverter
dedicated algorithm (Fig. 7). For study, the vehicle 5VDC
μC 12bits
vibration noise level was assumed to be known, PC in
USB
driver
mux
inter- 16x flat cable
which in practice is achievable in the vehicle either face DMA
by retrieving this information from the CAN bus or Acquisition Card
by installing a dedicated, vertical accelerometer.

Figure 9. Block diagram of acquisition
electronic interface.
A new, dedicated algorithm was developed,

different from the computation-intensive algorithm
with wavelet filtering used in the initial proof of
concept. It involved several discrete discrimination
features computed both from the time domain and
frequency domain spectra, depending on the
vehicle noise magnitude (a major feature trigger)
and specifically addressing vital signs and/or
vibration properties of the human beings. Current
front outboard seat belt reminder systems emit their
Figure 7. Dual mode discrimination strategy warning within 30-60 seconds. For this reason, we
triggered by vehicle’s noise magnitude. limited a spectral window to only 8 seconds in
order to be able to collect and average the
discrimination status over at least 3 samples.
Orlewski, 5
During the algorithm setup (training) and dependent on the design and materials of the CRS
validation, data was collected with both a parked hosting the child.
vehicle (engine on and off) and with a vehicle
moving with three different velocities (50, 70 and More exhaustive, driving tests conducted with a
90 kph) on three types of roads (smooth paved, Ford Taurus covered 3 different vehicle velocities
rough paved and gravel roads). The human test and 3 different road types.
subjects (collected with 2 to 5 repetitions) were:
95th and 50th percentile adult males, 5th percentile
female, 3 and 6 year old children sitting on booster
seats. A few tests also involved additional objects
like a thick blanket or wooden comfort mat. The
cargo transported on the seat included 5, 10 and 15
kg metal load stamps, 6x2L water containers and a
FF2
5 kg backpack. The data from the empty seat was
also collected.
In total, the performance validation sample

consisted of not less than 153 tests repeated up to 8
times, which resulted in more than 163 hours of FF1
elapsed testing time. Final performance evaluation
Figure 10. Example of discrimination among the
was run with 8 second samples without any higher
most critical occupants from the last test
level decision, smoothing or filtering. Thus, the
campaign. Three different road styles and
system was required to classify the occupant within
vehicle velocities of 50, 70 and 90 kph.
8 seconds for performance evaluation.
As vehicle vibrations become more prominent, seat
Results and discussion occupancy discrimination occurred principally
through the algorithm features addressing human
The parked vehicle discrimination evaluation was
body vibration properties and less via vital signs.
performed with motionless passengers and
Figure 10 depicts separation achieved by two
separately with passengers behaving normally
principal “dynamic” features FF1 and FF2. There
(moving) on the seat. The test population included
were very few issues with classification of the 5th
various adults as well as 6 year old children on
percentile female, but signals generated by 3YO
boosters. The test cargo was manually agitated by
children in boosters were usually below the preset
the test operator during the moving testing
sensitivity threshold, and are therefore not shown in
scenario, which had a significant impact on the
the Table 3 below.
sensor response (Tab.2).
Table 3.
Table 2.
Estimated discrimination performance
Discrimination performance in parked vehicle
in driving test with static passengers.
with engine on and with steady and moving seat Smooth paved
occupants. Decision exclusively based on SEAT road
Rough paved road Gravel road
OCCUPANCY
algorithm features addressing human vital signs. Car seat boosters Car seat boosters Car seat boosters
5th%ile
100% - 100% - 100% -
female
SEAT OCCUPANT Steady Moving
Human
6YO child A - 91% - 100% - 97%

adults 100% 100%
6YO child B - 78% - 100% - 85%
Children on boosters 75% 92% Backpack 100% - 63% - 88% -
cargo 92% 20% 9L water
100% - 41% - 100% -
Cargo
pack
10kg stamp
67% - 71% - 100% -
load
In many cases of manually agitated seat cargo the Empty seat 100% - 100% - 100% -
signal was saturated to the point that precise

occupancy discrimination was no longer feasible, The performance was moderately affected by the
except for the classification of an occupied seat. quality of the road, with the rough paved road
According to this logic, the detection of empty seat being the most difficult for cargo discrimination.
and occupied seat has reached 100% performance. Also, additional objects in the seat (thick blanket,
In both, steady and moving passenger scenarios in wooden comfort mats) and occupant motion (still,
the vehicle with engine on, the system seemed to moving) seemed to have little influence on the
reach its detection limit for 3 year old children spectra of adult passengers (Fig. 11).
seated on booster seats. With the engine off, this
limit seemed to be much lower but was still very
Orlewski, 6
5%ile female nitrogen and corona charged air pockets, which
static
seem to progressively lose their charge and
blanket polarization in temperature ranges above 75°C.
moving Therefore it will be necessary to investigate
woodmat
alternative materials further in view of an
application in automotive environment.
CONCLUSIONS
This paper describes the use of a conceptual

electromechanical, ferroelectric polymer for
frequency advanced occupant detection and occupancy
discrimination in a variety of vehicle scenarios.
95%ile male
It also demonstrates the possibility of the capture of
static human vital signals (especially respiration) by the
blanket
moving
detector fitted into the seat cushion. A means to
woodmat address the limitations caused by chassis vibrations
is presented.
Based on this study, further research into the

utilization of ultrasensitive vibration sensor as an
occupant detection technology is warranted. If
researchers can address the material-related
limitations, this technology may become a viable
frequency approach to monitoring human body physiological
characteristic in a motor vehicle environment.
Figure 11. Seat resonance spectra of 5th
percentile female (top) and 95th percentile male ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
(bottom) sitting on other objects (blanket,
wooden mat). The authors would like to thank Dr Radu Ranta
from Centre de Recherche en Automatique in
OUTLOOK Nancy, France for his comprehensive introduction
of wavelet theory and practice and his contribution
This study suggests some limitations of the into the preliminary proof of concept. We also
concepts evaluated due to the core functional thank Heikki Räisänen from Emfit Ltd., Finland for
material employed. Additional research is his active support over the complete program
necessary to evaluate these shortcomings in more duration.
detail.
REFERENCES
The ultrasensitivity of the highly porous, charged
polymer led to detection performance reduction as [1] Savolainen AK. and Kirjavainen K.
far as vehicle rear seating positions are concerned. “Electromechanical film : Part 1. Design and
Seating position which are not physically separated Characteristics”, (1989), J. Macromol. Sci –Chem.,
or at least, not mechanically decoupled will have A26(2-3) 583-591.
the potential to generate vibration crosstalk in case [2] Kirjavainen K. “Electromechanical film and
of simultaneous bench occupation by passenger(s) procedure for manufacturing same”, U.S. Patent
and by cargo. The latter can then be misclassified No. 4654 546, 1987.
as a human being. [3] Paajanen M., Lekkala, J. and Kirjavainen K.
“ElectroMechanical Film (EMFi) – a new
The stability of the sensitivity over a broad multipurpose electret material”, (2000), Sensors
temperature range for the material evaluated in this and Actuators 84:95-102.
study has not been demonstrated. Preliminary [4] Manninen A., Sand J., Saarela J., Sorvajärvi T.,
analysis of deliberately degraded (aged) sensors Toivonen J. and Harnberg R., “Electromechanical
suggests that a minimum sensitivity of 50-80 pC/N film as a photoacoustic transducer”, (2009), Optics
would have to be preserved over the seat and Express, 19:16994-16999.
sensors lifetime to guarantee successful detection [5] Emfit Ltd., Vaajakoski, Finland,
of human vital signs. The current ferroelectric www.emfit.com/en/care/
material will probably not meet these requirements [6] Postolache O., Silva Girão P., Postolache G.
as it is based on polypropylene film injected with and Pereira M. “Vital Signs Monitoring System
Orlewski, 7
Based on EMFi Sensor and Wavelet Analysis”,
(2007), Instrumentation and Measurement
Technology Conference – IMTC2007, Warsaw,
Poland, 1:4.
[7] Junnila S., Akhbaradeh A. and Värri A. “An
Electromechanical Film Sensor Based Wireless
Ballistographic Chair: Implementation and
performance”, (2009), J Signal Process Syst
57:305-320.
[8] Coifman, R. and Wickerhauser, M., “Adapted
waveform de-noising for medical signals and
images”, (1994), Engineering in Medicine and
Biology Magazine, vol. 14, 5:78–586,
[9] Donoho, D. and Johnstone, I., “Ideal spatial
adaptation via wavelet shrinkage”, (1994),
Biometrica 81:455
[10] Fairley T.E. and Griffin M.J. “The apparent
mass of the seated human body in the fore-and-aft
and lateral directions”,(1990), Journal of Sound and
Vibration, 139, 2: 299-306
[11] Smith S.D. “Modelling differences in the
vibration response characteristics of the human
body”,(2000), Journal of Biomechanics, 33, 11:151
Orlewski, 8
ANALYSIS OF CHILD DUMMY RESPONSES AND CRS PERFORMANCE IN FRONTAL NCAP TESTS
Chung-Kyu (CK) Park

Richard M. Morgan
Kennerly H. Digges
National Crash Analysis Center (NCAC), The George Washington University
USA
ABSTRACT had much higher head and neck injury-assessment

values than adult-size dummies in the front seat.
The new car assessment program (NCAP) conducted Generally, the rear seat dummy had higher chest
95 frontal crashes with child dummies in child acceleration readings than the front seat dummy. [1-
restraint systems (CRS) in the rear seat. In addition to 3]
the two mid-size male dummies in the front seat,
there were one or two child dummies in the rear seat In investigating real-world field data in 2009, Kent et
area. The child dummies were (1) 12-month-old, (2) al. [5] observed that, “the relative effectiveness (to
3-year-old, and (3) 6-year-old. The child dummies mitigate serious injury and death) of rear seats with
were restrained in a CRS or a booster. This research respect to front seats for restrained adult occupants in
focused on comparing the response of the child newer vehicle models is less than it is in older
dummies with the adult dummy. The study examined models, presumably due to the advances in restraint
the dynamic readings of the head acceleration, chest technology that have been incorporated into the front
acceleration, chest deflection, and upper neck seat position.” Other studies have examined real-
loading. world data and suggested similar findings. [5-7]
In terms of the customary injury assessment reference A 2005 report by Starnes [8], which was based on the
values (IARVs) for the adult and child dummies, the analysis of the fatality analysis reporting system
adult dummy had an easier time going under the (FARS) and the national automotive sampling system
IARVs than the child dummies. The passing rate for crashworthiness data system (NASS CDS) data,
the adult was almost 100% while the passing rate was focused on child passenger injuries in different crash
60 - 70% for the child dummies. In short, the configurations. For all crash configurations, a child
different dummy sizes in their respective seating occupant, whether restrained or unrestrained, was
location do not show the same relative level of safer when travelling in the second row of the vehicle
protection as measured by body motion and as opposed to the front passenger seat. It was also
instrumentation inside the dummy occupant. found that in non-fatal crashes, unrestrained
passengers were much more likely to have been
The 3-year-old and 6-year-old child dummies show injured than restrained passengers.
relatively elevated head response because their heads
are not restrained in the sense that the adult’s head is In 2008, Hong et al. [9,10] investigated frontal
cushioned by the airbag. Some device or concept is crashes conducted by NCAP. All crashes had two
needed to reduce the rotational motion of the head for 50th % male Hybrid III dummies in the front-seat area
the forward-facing child. The child dummies do not and a total of twenty-eight 10-year-old (10YO) child
take advantage of the ride down (connecting the Hybrid III dummies in the rear-seat area. Hong
occupant to the initial crushing of the vehicle compared the 10YO Hybrid III dummy with the adult
structure to slow down the occupant) as capably as dummy in the front seat. In these NCAP tests, almost
the adult dummy. Some device or concept - such as all the front-seat adults had low IARVs. In contrast,
the pre-tensioner for the adult in the front seat - is many of the rear-seat 10YO child dummies saw
needed to reduce the free motion of the forward- violent head motion, high head injury criterion (HIC),
facing child. The motion and response of the 6-year- high tension or compression in the neck, and high
old child dummy appear to vary more than the other chest accelerations. In a few vehicles, the 10YO child
crash test dummies. dummy saw much smoother head motion, lower HIC,
lower tension, and lower chest acceleration.
INTRODUCTION
In this paper, an analysis of child dummies (1
Recent investigations (of frontal laboratory crashes) through 6-years-old) was conducted to determine
have found that adult-size dummies in the rear seat crash conditions that involved rear-seat injuries that
Park 1
are not currently being directly addressed by vehicle The 6YO child dummy is restrained by the 3 points
safety standards or by consumer information test seatbelt system on a booster.
protocols. Analysis of US NCAP tests were
conducted to determine the relative safety provided Table 1. Cases of the frontal NCAP test with child
by seating position and by vehicle model year. dummies on rear seats of a vehicle (performed
Opportunities for reducing IARVs [11] in the child from 2001 to 2005)
dummies were determined by examining current Type of Number of Type of Number of
laboratory safety testing. Areas of opportunities Vehicle Tests Child Dummy Dummies
6YO Child 7
include improved occupant restraint to reduce the
Passenger Car 46 3YO Child 56
dynamic readings of the children relative to their 12MO Child 13
IARVs. 6YO Child 6
SUV & Van 39 3YO Child 62
METHODOLOGY 12MO Child 9
6YO Child 2
This study examines the responses of child dummies Light Truck 10 3YO Child 17
and the performance of CRS in frontal NCAP tests. 12MO Child 1
There are 95 cases of the frontal NCAP test 6YO Child 15
performed from 2001 to 2005 with child dummies on Total 95 3YO Child 135
rear seats of a vehicle as shown in Table 1 [12]. The 12MO Child 23
vehicles are classified into 3 types: a passenger car, a
sport utility vehicle (SUV) and a van, and a light The pass rates of HIC15, maximum chest G’s and
truck. Generally there are two adult dummies on a peak chest deflection of dummies in frontal NCAP
driver and a passenger seats, and one or two child tests are summarized in Table 2. Table 2 shows that
dummies on the rear seat. The adult dummy is the the pass rates of HIC15 and chest G’s of adult
Hybrid III 50th percentile male dummy. Three child dummies are almost 100%, which means that drivers
dummies, such as the Hybrid III 6-year-old (6YO) will be well protected in frontal vehicle crash
child dummy, Hybrid III 3- year-old (3YO) child environment. The pass rates of HIC15 and chest G’s
dummy, or child restraint airbag interaction (CRABI) of child dummies are not as good as the adult
12-month-old (12MO) child dummy, are used. The dummies even though they need to be. The injury
child dummies are seated on the rear seat with a CRS pass rates of child dummies are around 50 – 70% and
or a booster. The 12MO child dummy is restrained by especially the pass rate of HIC15 of 6YO child
a 5 points belt on a rear facing CRS (RFCRS) and the dummies is as low as 21%. In other words, a child on
RFCRS is affixed to the vehicle by using the 3 points rear seat might be expected to suffer much more
seatbelt system. The 3YO child dummy is restrained severely from impact than an adult on driver seat
by a 5 points belt on a forward facing CRS (FFCRS), during frontal vehicle collisions even though a child
which is affixed to the vehicle by using the 3 points is supposed to be as well protected as an adult.
seatbelt system and the top tether or the lower Interestingly, the chest deflection of the adult and the
anchors and tethers for children (LATCH) system. child dummies is passed the injury criterion in all
Table 2. Pass Rates of HIC15, chest max G’s and chest peak deflection of dummies
Pass rate of Pass rate of Pass rate of
Type of dummy Type of vehicle
HIC15 chest G's chest deflection
50th Percentile (Driver) Passenger Car 100.0 % (45/45) 100.0 % (45/45) 100.0 % (45)
(HIC15 < 700 ) SUV 100.0 % (39/39) 92.3 % (36/39) 100.0 % (38)
(Chest G's < 60 G's) Light Truck 100.0 % (10/10) 90.0 % (9/10) 100.0 % (10)
(Chest Deflection < 52mm) Total 100.0 % (94/94) 95.7 % (90/94) 100.0 % (93)
6YO Child Passenger Car 0.0 % (0/6) 42.9 % (3/7) 100.0 % (6)
(HIC15 < 700 ) SUV 33.3 % (2/6) 50.0 % (3/6) 100.0 % (5)
3YO Child Passenger Car 74.5 % (41/55) 67.3 % (37/55) 100.0 % (56)
(HIC15 < 570) SUV 69.5 % (41/59) 77.0 % (47/61) 100.0 % (62)
12MO Child Passenger Car 50.0 % (6/12) 41.7 % (5/12)
(HIC15 < 390 ) SUV 88.9 % (8/9) 100.0 % (7/7)
N/A
(Chest G's < 50 G's) Light Truck 0.0 % (0/1) 0.0 % (0/1)
Total 63.6 % (14/22) 60.0 % (12/20)
Park 2
cases.
ANALYSIS OF HEAD ACCELERATION
In Table 2, the pass rate of HIC15 of adult dummies

is 100%, but the passing of 12MO and 3YO child
dummies is around 65-70% and the passing of 6YO
child dummy is as low as 20%. To understand this,
the head response of adult dummies is compared with
one of child dummies. Table 3 summarizes the cases
that HIC15 of the child dummies is higher than one
of adult dummies. In the 76% of the cases, child
dummies experience higher head acceleration than (a) Adult dummy (Test 5130)
adult dummies during the vehicle crash. The data
points of HIC15 of adult dummies vs. HIC15 of child
dummies are plotted in Figure 1. It shows that the
data points of the 12MO child dummies are
distributed around a diagonal dot-line, but most of the
data points of 6YO and 3YO child dummies are
spread far over the diagonal dot-line. HIC15 of all
adult dummies is less than 700, but one of many child
dummies, especially 3YO and 6YO child dummies,
are much greater than 700. In other words, child
dummies experience higher HIC15 values relative to
IARVs than adult dummy during crash.
(b) 6YO child dummy (Test 5130)
2000
1500
HIC 15 of Child
1000
6-Year-Old Child
3-Year-Old Child
500
12-Month-Old Child
0
0 500 1000 1500 2000
(c) 3YO child dummy (Test 5130)
HIC 15 of Driver
Figure 1. HIC15 of the driver vs. HIC15 of the

child
Table 3. Cases of [(HIC15 of the child) > (HIC15

of the driver)]
Type of Cases of
child dummy [(HIC15 of child) > (HIC15 of driver)]
6YO 93%
Child Forward (13/14) 85%
3YO Facing 82% (131/145) 76%
Child (108/131) (123/165)
12MO Rear 60%
Child Facing (12/20) (d) 12MO child dummy (Test 4242)
Figure 2. Snapshots of the dummies’ behavior
Park 3
Figure 2 shows snapshots of the dummies’ behavior supported by RFCRS. However, the RFCRS itself is
during impact. After the vehicle impacts the barrier, rotating and produces considerable head accelerations
the forward facing occupant starts moving forward. as shown in Figure 3(b).
Since the torso of the occupant is restrained by the
seatbelt, the head of the occupant starts rotating and The head resultant accelerations of 6YO and the 3YO
then X- and Z- head accelerations occur as shown in dummies in some tests are shown in Figure 4. It can
Figure 3. In the case of the occupants in front seats, be seen that there are two peaks in the head resultant
the rotational head motion is restrained by an airbag, acceleration. The 1st peak is due to the forward
like in Figure 2(a). Thus the airbag contributes to movement of the head like Figure 5(a) and the 2nd
reduce the head acceleration of front occupants and peak is due to the rear seat contact with the back of
leads the high pass rate of HIC15 in Table 2. the head like Figure 5(b). In some cases, the 2nd peaks
However, in the rear seat, the occupant’s head is not of the head acceleration are considerable high, or
restrained. Therefore the heads of the forward facing even higher than the 1st one of 3YO child dummies in
6YO and 3YO child dummies are fully rotated Figure 4(b). In Table 4, the cases that the 2nd peak of
around the axis of the shoulder like Figure 2(b) and head acceleration is higher than its 1st one are 28% in
2(c). Figure 3(a) shows that X- accelerations are not 3YO child dummies and 20% in 6YO child dummies.
much different among all dummies, but Z- Also, the cases that HIC15 around the 2nd peak of
accelerations of the 6YO and 3YO child dummies are head acceleration is higher than 570 G’s, which is the
much higher than one of the adult dummy. The head head injury criteria of 3YO child, are 5%. It seems
of 12MO child, who is restrained with the RFCRS that the 2nd peak of head acceleration of 3YO child
like Figure 2(d), does not rotate since the head is dummies is considerable.
X-Driver Z-Driver X-6YO Z-6YO X-3YO Z-3YO

100
80
60
40
G'S
20
-20
-40
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30
SECONDS
(a) Test 5130
X-Driver Z-Driver X-12MO Z-12MO X-3YO Z-3YO
100
80
60
40
G'S
20
-20
-40
-60
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30
SECONDS
(b) Test 4240
Figure 3. X- and Z- head accelerations of adult, 6YO child and 3YO child dummies
Park 4
Test 5130 Test 5117 Test 4493 Test 4472 Test 4463
110
100
90
80
70
60
G'S
50
40
30
20
10
0
-0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30
SECONDS
(a) 6YO child dummy
Test 5130 Test 5117 Test 4488 Test 4463 Test 4240
180
160
140 2nd Peak due to rear seat contact

st
120 1 Peak due to forward rotational with back of head hits
motion of head
100
G'S
80
60
40
20
0
-0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30
SECONDS
(b) 3YO child dummy
Figure 4. Resultant head acceleration curves
Table 4. Relationship between 1st Peak and 2nd

Peak of Head Resultant Acceleration
Cases of Cases of
[2nd Peak > 1st [HIC15 at 2nd Peak >
Peak] 570 G’s]
Passenger 19.6 % 6.5 %
Car (9/46) (3/46)
35.2 % 5.6 %
SUV
3YO (19/54) (3/54)
Child Light 28.6 % 0.0 % (a) at 1st peak time of head acceleration
Truck (4/14) (0/14)
28.1 % 5.3 %
Total
(32/114) (6/114)
6YO 20.0 % 0.0 %
Total
Child (1/5) (0/5)
(b) at 2nd peak time of head acceleration

Figure 5. Behavior of 3YO child dummy (Test
4901)
Park 5
ANALYSIS OF HEAD VELOCITY
The velocity histories of dummies are helpful to

understand the initial behavior of occupants and the
interaction between the vehicle and the occupant
during crash. The velocity curves are obtained by
integrating the acceleration curves and only X-
velocity (longitudinal) is utilized here. Figure 6
shows the typical X-velocity curves of a vehicle and
dummy head in frontal NCAP test. In general, the
vehicle velocity starts to decrease right after vehicle
impact barrier, but the deceleration of occupant (a)
velocity is not occurred until time t1, which is the
required time for the restraint system to fully work on
occupants because of initial space between restraint
and occupant. Figure 7, which is cited from reference
[13], gives the good physical interpretation of the
velocity profiles in frontal crash of vehicle. In Figure
7(a), the area under the vehicle velocity curve
represents the crush of the vehicle. The area between
the vehicle velocity curve and the occupant velocity
curve, up to time t1, represents the initial restraint to
occupant spacing (e.g., the spacing from occupant to
(b)
an airbag or the longitudinal slack in a lap and
Figure 7. Interpretation of head X-velocity curve
shoulder belt). The area between the vehicle velocity
[13]
curve and the occupant velocity curve, after time t1,
represents the stroking of the restraint system. A lot
Figure 8 shows the X-velocity curves of some cases.
of time (up to t1) is wasted in bringing the occupant
It can be seen that the time t2, the initial restraint
to rest. The area not wasted is the stroke of the
space of the 6YO and the 3YO child dummies in rear
restraint system and the vehicle crush after the
seat, is much longer than the time t1, the initial
restraint picks up the occupant in Figure 7(b). The
restraint space of the adult dummy in driver seat. This
area labeled “vehicle crush after the restraint picks up
means that even though the child dummies are well
the occupant” in Figure 7(b) is commonly referred to
seated and secured by CRS or booster with seatbelt,
as ridedown, which is the important part to reduce the
there is still a lot of initial space and slack between
stroke of the restraint system.
occupant and restraint system and between CRS or
booster and rear seat. Therefore the child is supposed
to have a small ridedown, which is unfavorable for
the child.
Fundamentally, the ridedown contributes for

occupants to reduce the stroke of the restraint system,
which is the impact force on the head and chest. The
ridedown is also related with the vehicle crush.
Figure 9 shows the relationship between chest and
head of dummy and vehicle. Statistical linear
Figure 6. Typical head X-velocity curve regression curves shows that the maximum chest
acceleration and the maximum upper neck force of
the 3YO and 6YO child dummies decrease
respectively when the vehicle crush increases.
Park 6
Car Driver 6YO child 3YO child
60
50
40
KILOMETERS/HOUR
30
20
10
-10
-20
-30
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30
t1 t2 SECONDS
(a) Test 5130
Car Driver 12MO child 3YO child
60
50
40
KILOMETERS/HOUR
30
20
10
-10
-20
-0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30

t1 t2 SECONDS
(b) Test 4553
Figure 8. X- velocity curves
90
4000
80
3500
Max. Chest Acceleration (G's)
70
Max. Upper Neck Force (N)
3000
60
2500
50
2000
40
1500
30
3-Year-Old Child
3-Year-Old Child 1000
20 6-Year-Old Child
6-Year-Old Child
Linear (3-Year-Old Child)
Linear (3-Year-Old Child) 500
10 Linear (6-Year-Old Child)
Linear (6-Year-Old Child)
0
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Max. Crush Distance of Vehicle (mm)
Max. Crush Distance of Vehicle (mm)
Figure 9. Vehicle crush vs. max. chest acceleration and max. upper neck force
ANALYSIS OF UPPER NECK FORCE proportional to HIC15. In addition, it can be seen that
the upper neck force and HIC15 of the 3YO and 6YO
In general, the upper neck force (tension) is linked child dummies is much higher than the responses of
with the head acceleration. The data points of the adult dummies.
upper neck force vs. the head acceleration are plotted
in Figure 10. It shows that the upper neck force is
Park 7
and Fexternal is zero. Figure 11 shows the data points of
4000
maximum Z-upper neck force vs. maximum Z-head
3500 acceleration. The diagonal line indicates the Fneck =
3000 maz line, where the masses of dummy head (m) are
Neck Upper Force (N)
3.47 kg in 6YO child dummy and 2.73 kg in 3YO

2500
child dummy [14]. The data points of 6YO child
2000 dummy in Figure 11(a) are distributed close to the
1500 diagonal line, which means that the external is zero,
in other words, Eq (1) is zero. However, the data
1000
Driver points of 3YO child dummy in Figure 11(b) are quite
500
6-Year-Old Child scattered over the diagonal line, which means any
0 external force exists on dummy head during crash, in
0 500 1000 1500 2000
other words, Eq. (1) is not zero. Figure 12 is the
HIC 15
snapshots of the behavior of the 3YO child dummy in
test 3554. The child is restrained by FFCRS.
4000 Basically FFCRS has a chest clip, which is a stiff
3500
material and located on the middle of the dummy
chest shown in Figure 12(a). Figure 12(b) shows that
3000
the chin of the child dummy hits the chest clip during
2500 crash. Thus Fexternal is the force caused by that the

2000 chin of 3YO child dummy hits the chest clip or chest.
1500
Also, the reference [11] looks into the external force
by dummy chin contact with chest clip. Probably, this
1000 Driver external force produces a high reverse X-velocity of
500 3-Year-Old Child
the head of 3YO child dummy and induces the high
0 2nd peak of head acceleration of 3YO child dummy in
0 500 1000 1500 2000 Figure 4(b). On the other hand, the 6YO child is
HIC 15
restrained by 3-points rear seat belt on the booster.
During crash, the head of 6YO child dummy is fully
4000
rotating without any external force as shown in
Driver
Figure 2(b). This head motion of 6YO child dummy
3500
12-Month-Old Child produces high acceleration and upper neck force and
3000 makes pass rate of HIC15 as low as 21.4% in Table
2500
2.
2000
According to references [11] and [15], real world
1500 crash analysis suggests that neck trauma corresponds
1000
to only a small fraction of the injuries found in
children in passenger vehicles crashes. In Figure 10,
500
however, the upper neck tensions exceed the injury
0 criteria (6YO:1890N, 3YO:1430N, 12MO:780N
0 500 1000 1500 2000
HIC 15
[11]) in most of the cases, which suggests that there
is a possibility that the neck force of child dummies
Figure 10. Data distribution plots of Neck Upper is over-predicting neck injury and that further study
Force vs. HIC15 is needed.
As mentioned in the previous section, the rotational

motion of the dummy head during impact produces
the Z-acceleration (az), the centripetal acceleration.
According to Newton’s law, multiplying the Z-
acceleration by the mass of dummy head should
equal to the Z-upper neck force (Fneck) if there is no
external force (Fexternal), in other words,
Fexternal = maz – Fneck , (1)
Park 8
90
4000
80
Chest MAX Resultant G's

3500 Passenger Car
SUV 70
Light Truck
3000
60
Z - Upper Neck Force (N)
F = ma
2500
50
2000
40
1500
30
1000
20 Driver
500
10 6-Year-Old Child
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 0
Z - Head Acceleration (G's)
0 500 1000 1500 2000
HIC 15
90
4000
80

3500 Passenger Car
SUV
70
Light Truck
3000
F = ma
60
Z - Upper Neck Force (N)
2500
50
2000
40
1500
30
Driver
1000 20
3-Year-Old Child
500 10
0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
0 500 1000 1500 2000
Z - Head Acceleration (G's)
HIC 15
Figure 11. Max Z-upper neck force(FNeck) vs. Max 100

Z-head acceleration
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
Driver
20
12-Month-Old Child
10
0
0 500 1000 1500 2000
(a) before impact HIC 15
Figure 13. Maximum chest resultant G’s vs.

HIC15
ANALYSIS OF CHEST ACCELERATION AND

DEFLECTION
In Table 2, the pass rate of chest G’s of the child

dummies is about 60%, while the pass rate of the
adult dummies is 96%. The data distribution of the
(b) moment that chin hits chest clip maximum chest resultant G’s vs. HIC15 is plotted in
Figure 12. Behavior of 3YO child dummy (Test Figure 13. It shows that the maximum chest G’s is
3554) proportional to HIC15. In addition, Figure 9 shows
Park 9
that the maximum chest acceleration is inversely Head Acceleration
proportional to the vehicle crush. The pass rate of the - Pass rate of HIC15: Driver - 100%, 6YO child -
chest deflection is 100% for all dummies in Table 2. 21.4%, 3YO child - 71%, and 12MO child -
The data distribution of the maximum chest 63.6%
deflection vs. HIC15 is plotted in Figure 14. It shows - Child dummies experience higher HIC15 values
that, in the cases of the 3YO child dummy, the chest relative to IARVs than adult dummy during
deflection is much lower than the driver in spite of crash
the fact that the chest acceleration is similar with the - HIC15 around the 2nd peak of the head
driver in Figure 13. It is because the 3YO child acceleration of the 3YO child is considerable.
dummy is restrained by the 5-point CRS, which has
two harnesses on the child chest like Figure 12(a). Head Velocity
These two harnesses make the force be dispersed - The head X-velocity is helpful for understanding
around the chest. the initial occupant behavior and the relationship
between the vehicle and the occupants during
60
impact.
- The much space between the restraint systems
50
50th Percentile(driver) and the child makes the “ridedown” area small,
6-Year-Old Child
which is unfavorable for the child.
Chest MAX X-Deflection (mm)
40
Upper Neck Force
30 - The upper neck tension forces of the child
dummies are exceed the criteria in the most of
20 the cases.
- As HIC15 increases, the upper neck force
10
increases.
0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 Chest Acceleration and Deflection
HIC 15 - Pass rate of chest maximum acceleration : Driver
- 95.7%, 6YO child - 53.3%, 3YO child - 72.9%,
60 and 12MO child - 60%
50th Percentile(driver)
- Pass rate of chest maximum deflection : all
50
3-Year-Old Child occupants - 100%
Chest MAX X-Deflection (mm)
40
This study suggests that the performance of the CRS
30
could better protect the child in the rear seat during
frontal crash. Based on the study, a couple of
20
countermeasures can be recommended. Firstly, a
forward facing child experiences severe head
10 acceleration and neck force because of rotational
head motion. Thus, during frontal crash, child head
0 needs to be restrained by some means like airbags in
0 500 1000 1500 2000
HIC 15
front seats. Secondly, child on CRS or booster in rear
seat has a lot of initial slack and gap between child
Figure 14. Maximum chest X-deflection vs. HIC15 and CRS and between CRS or booster and rear seat,
which make ridedown small. The ideal
CONCLUSIONS countermeasure is to make the crash performance of
vehicles improved. In practice, some devices are
The objective of this study is to examine the needed to reduce the initial slack, for example, a pre-
responses of child dummies and the performance of tensioner or an air-belt in the rear-seat area.
CRS in the frontal NCAP tests. The responses of
head, upper neck and chest of adult and child
dummies in 95 NCAP tests are analyzed. REFERENCES
[1] Tylko, S. and Dalmotas, D., Protection of rear

seat occupants in frontal crashes, Proceedings of
the 19th Conference on the Enhanced Safety of
Park 10
Vehicles (ESV), Washington DC, Paper No. 05- [9] Hong, S-W., Park, C-K., Morgan, R.M., Kan, C-
0258, June 2005. D, Park, S., and Bae, H., A study of the rear seat
[2] Saunders, J., NHTSA’s research program for occupant safety using a 10-year-old child dummy in
adult rear occupants in frontal crashes, SAE the new car assessment program, SAE International
Industry/Government Meeting, Washington DC, Journal of Passenger Cars- Mechanical Systems,
May 2006. 2009;1(1):371-382.
[3] Mizuno, K., Ikari, T., Tomita, K., and Matsui, Y., [10] Hong, S-W., Park, C-K., Morgan, R.M., Kan, C-
Effectiveness of seatbelt for rear seat occupants in D, Park, S., and Bae, H., Using consumer
frontal crashes, Proceedings of the 20th Conference information testing to improve rear seat occupant
on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles (ESV), Lyon protection, SAE Industry/Government Meeting,
France, Paper No. 07-0224, June 2007. Washington DC, May 2008.
[4] Kent, R., Forman, J., Parent, D.P. and Kuppa, S., [11] Maltese, M.R. and Eppinger, R.H., Development
Rear seat occupant protection in frontal crashes and of improved injury criteria for the assessment of
its feasibility, Proceedings of the 20th Conference child restraint systems, NHTSA Docket # 2002-
on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles (ESV), Lyon 11707-18, April 2002.
France, Paper No. 07-0386, June 2007. [12] NHTSA vehicle crash test database, http://www-
[5] Smith, K. and Cummings, P., Passenger seating nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/database/aspx/vehdb/querytesttab
position and the risk of passenger death in traffic le.aspx.
crashes: a matched cohort study, Injury Prevention, [13] Strother, C.E. and Morgan, R.M., A fundamental
2006;12(2):83, 2006. look at side impact, Proceedings of the American
[6] Kuppa, S., Frontal crash protection for rear seat Association for Automotive Medicine (AAAM) 23th
occupants, SAE Industry/Government Meeting, Annual Scientific Conference, Louisville KY,
Washington, DC, May 2006. October 1979.
[7] Sahraei, E., Soudbakhsh, D., and Digges, D., [14] Humanetics Innovative Solutions,
Protection of rear seat occupants in frontal crashes, http://www.dentonatd.com/dentonatd/anthropomor
controlling for occupant and crash characteristics, phic.html.
Stapp Car Crash Journal, 2009;53:75-91. [15] Morgan, R.M., Sled and vehicle crash testing
[8] Starnes, M., Child passenger fatalities and with child restraints in the USA, CRASH-TECH
injuries, based on restraint use, vehicle type, seat 2003 Conference, Nuremberg, Germany, May
position, and number of vehicles in the crash, 2003.
NHTSA Technical Report No. DOT HS 809 784,
U.S. Department of Transportation, July 2005.
Park 11
EVALUATION OF AN IMPROVED PERFORMANCE ANTI-SUBMARINING SEAT BELT SYSTEM
Tom Gibson
Amy Clarke
Human Impact Engineering
Australia
Lui Pisaniello
Marcel Stephan
Lino Fusco
Lifebelt
Australia
Robert Judd
Autoliv
Australia
ABSTRACT The enhanced system retains similar belt geometry

and occupant use to current belt systems, with
The objective of the present study is to evaluate a some changes to the seat structure for installation.
development of the conventional seat belt, offering The new belt with the extra continuous lap loop
improved control of anti-submarining and chest was shown to give a high level of anti-submarining
loads especially for smaller occupants. performance while at the same time retaining good
occupant kinetics and keeping the chest loads
The seat belt continues to be the prime safety within acceptable limits. The system is able to
system fitted to automobiles. Crash injury data reduce the need for add on components (such as the
indicates that performance improvements continue in seat anti-submarining ramp and pretensioners),
to be required, particularly in the rear seat and with which are required to give current, conventional
smaller occupants in the areas of anti-submarining, seat belts acceptable performance.
adaptation to smaller occupants (such as children
making the transition from using child restraints)
and chest loads. World interest in simple low cost, INTRODUCTION
lightweight vehicles for use in developing countries
is emphasising this need. Currently, issues regarding the safety of smaller
occupants in rear seats, and the effect of seatbelts
The new belt system, the Lifebelt, retains similar during rollovers and side impacts are areas of
belt geometry to current seat belt systems but with vehicle safety research interest worldwide. Of
an extension of the seat belt webbing in a specific recent concern has been the incidence of
continuous loop around the upper thighs. It makes ‘submarining’ injuries to smaller seat occupants in
use of many available belt system components, and frontal crashes, Tylko and Dalmotus (2005) and
has the potential to allow a simple lightweight seat Kuppa et al. (2005).
belt system with acceptable performance, without
some of the complex add on systems now being In 2005, Kuppa et al reported that in the US 90% of
used. rear seat occupants were seated in the second row
of vehicles, with 78% seated in outboard seats. Of
The evaluation began with static fit trials and then these occupants, 64% were restrained occupants in
used dynamic sled testing under frontal crash test frontal crashes, 78% of which weighed less than
conditions similar to regulatory crash tests (50 160lbs (72.5kgs), and 64% of which were 12 years
km/h and 30g pulse). A number of sled tests (n=20) of age or younger.
were carried out in front and rear seat
configurations and with different seat structures In 2008 an investigation of the US data found that
reflecting current production as well as simplified although rear seat occupants accounted for 14% of
seating. The new system was compared to all vehicle occupants, they accounted for 23% of
conventional belt systems in typical seats and belt occupants with injuries and 9% of fatalities, Bilston
geometries. HIII 50M and HIII 5F dummies were (2010).
used to assess the effect of occupant size, with the
small female having the greater tendency to Numerous studies have investigated the location
submarine. Anti-submarining effectiveness was and source of the rear seated occupant injuries,
assessed from video and with belt motion with an overwhelming consensus of a high
monitored by iliac spine force transducers, as used prevalence of injury to the chest and abdomen due
for Japan NCAP testing.
Gibson 1
to interaction with the seatbelt, Kuppa et al (2005), passes through a D ring (#4) on the outboard side.
Tylko et al (2005), Zellmer et al (1998). The belt continues along the femur on the outboard
side of the seat to a D ring (#5) located
Cuerden et al (2007) established the lap belt as the approximately upper thigh. The lower lap portion
cause of 85% of MAIS 1 abdominal injuries and runs under the upper thigh to an anchorage (#6)
60% of MAIS 2+ abdominal injuries. aligned with the D ring, on the inboard side of the
seat base. The layout can be seen in Figure 2.
In the study performed by Tylko et al (2005) with
HIII 5F and HIII 10YO dummies restrained with
the shoulder/lap belt in the rear seat, all 1
experienced abdominal penetration by the lap belt,
or very high chest responses. Submarining was
seen in all tests bar one exception.
2
These studies highlight the poor protection afforded
to rear seat occupants by current rear seat restraints,
particularly in comparison to the ever improving
front seat restraint systems, Bilston et al (2010).
4
Following the work of Mizuno et al (2007), JNCAP 3 5
from FY2009 assesses the safety of rear seat
occupants JNCAP (2009). A group of measures
including crash testing, usability evaluation, and
seatbelt reminders have been introduced to drive
improvements in the safety performance of rear 6
seatbelt systems and to encourage users to wear the
seatbelt. During the offset frontal crash test, a HIII Figure 1. The Lifebelt system (Iteration 1)
5F dummy is seated in the rear outboard seating installed in a vehicle front seat.
position. The HIII 5F is used to assess rear seat
occupant chest loads, and any lap belt penetration
into the abdominal cavity (submarining) by means
of load cells at the iliac crest.
The Lifebelt is a development of the existing

conventional seat belt design. It is based on the lap
sash seatbelt, with the lap portion of the belt
forming a ‘loop’ around the thighs. See Figure 1.
This loop around the upper thighs improves the
capability of the seat belt restraint system by
Figure 2. Lifebelt Iteration 1 seatbelt system.
minimising the likelihood of ‘submarining’ in
frontal crashes. The enhanced system is a simple
TEST SERIES
and effective system for the safe restraint of
occupants in front and rear seats without the need
A total of 20 tests have been performed to date as a
for complex seat structures with anti-submarining
part of the proof of concept testing for Lifebelt. The
pans.
testing was developmental and so includes some
tests where component failures occurred. For the
Lifebelt Iteration 1 purposes of this report, 10 tests have been selected
for inclusion. The 10 tests are grouped into four test
The development version of the Lifebelt system, series for clarity as follows:
Iteration 1, was used in the following tests,
• Rear Seat Control Tests,
comparisons and analyses. The Iteration 1 seatbelt
• Lifebelt 5th % Female Tests,
system is shown in Figure 1. It consists of a vertical
outboard emergency locking retractor (ELR) with • Front Seat Control Tests and
upper D ring (#1), through which the sash belt • Lifebelt 50th % Male Tests.
passes to latch into the inboard buckle (#3) on a
flexible stalk angled at 45o in a standard The test parameters for the four test series are
orientation. The slipping tongue (#2) forms the end summarised in Table 1.
of the upper lap belt which crosses the lap and
Gibson 2
Table 1.
Summary of the test parameters
Test Seatbelt Dummy Seat Sash Iliac Crest Knee Test Test
(Number) (HIII) Load Load Impact Facility Date
Limiter Cells Cushion
Series 1 Honda Rear Seat Control Tests
Control 1 Autoliv 5F Honda No No No Crashlab 06/09
(S090258) Rear
Control 2 Autoliv 5F Foam Seat No No Yes Autoliv 05/10
(D1-4260)
Series 2 Lifebelt HIII 5th % Female Tests
Lifebelt 1 Lifebelt 5F Standard No No Yes Autoliv 02/10
(D1-4189) Iteration 1 Honda
Lifebelt 2 Lifebelt 5F Honda No No Yes Autoliv 05/10
(D1-4258) Iteration 1 Foam Seat
Lifebelt 3 Lifebelt 5F Honda Yes No Yes Autoliv 07/10
Lifebelt 4 Lifebelt 5F Honda Yes Yes Yes Autoliv 10/10
Series 3 Ford Front Seat Control Tests
Control 3 Autoliv 50M Ford Front No No Yes Autoliv 07/10
(D1-4306)
Series 4 Lifebelt HIII 50th % Male Tests
Lifebelt 5 Lifebelt 50M Honda No No Yes Autoliv 05/10
Lifebelt 6 Lifebelt 50M Honda Yes No Yes Autoliv 07/10
The sled testing was performed at two established These parts describe the anthropomorphic test
test laboratories, Crashlab in Sydney, Australia and devices that are to be used for motor vehicle safety
Autoliv in Melbourne, Australia. standard compliance testing of motor vehicles and
motor vehicle equipment. During this project the
Tests at Crashlab were performed according to the dummy positioning was based on Subpart O/E of
ADR4/03 ‘Seatbelts’ frontal impact test pulse. The Part 572. The dummies were instrumented to
peak test acceleration was 27.5 g at 39.2 msec and acquire biomechanical injury data for the head,
the velocity change was 43.7 km/h. Tests at Autoliv neck, thorax, pelvis and femur.
were performed according to the ECE R16 ‘Safety
Belts and Restraint Systems’ frontal impact test Test Seats and Seat Belts
pulse. The peak test acceleration was 28 g at 42
msec with a nominal 48 km/h velocity change. Rear Seat Control Tests A Honda seat
These are both severe dynamic test pulses used to was chosen for control testing, as a split folding
certify the strength of seat belt systems fitted to rear seat typical of those in vehicles currently on
current vehicles. the market. The seat is secured to the vehicle at the
base of the seatback, allowing for numerous folding
Anthropometric Test Devices adjustments necessary in small multi-purpose
vehicles. The Honda seat has a standard 3 point lap
Hybrid III 5F and Hybrid III 50M anthropomorphic sash ELR seatbelt. The seat base consists of a
test devices (ATD) are used to represent the simple flat plywood base with padding. It does not
restrained occupants in the vehicle seat during the incorporate any form of anti-submarining profile in
test series. These dummies are specified under the the seat base.
US regulations (the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standard FMVSS 208): The seat was mounted to the test sled using the
• Title 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart O – Hybrid original mounting brackets from the vehicle. The
III 5th percentile female test dummy (HIII geometry of the seat as tested was as measured in
5F) and the vehicle. The Honda belt geometry was
• Title 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart E – Hybrid replicated for the control tests. Standard ‘off the
III 50th percentile male test dummy, (HIII shelf’ Autoliv belts with vertical ELRs were used
50M). in all the control tests.
Gibson 3
Front Seat Control Tests A current significant injury (or AIS 3) to a vehicle occupant
model Ford front seat was chosen as a production would be unlikely, less than 5% risk.
front seat typical of the range in vehicles currently
on the market. It incorporates an anti submarining Control Test 1 resulted in the dummy submarining.
pan and the inboard seatbelt mount positioned on This was shown by the lap belt riding above the
the seat frame. right and left ASIS (or anterior superior iliac spine)
and penetrating into the dummy’s abdomen, see
Lifebelt Tests The Lifebelt Iteration 1 test Figure 4. Control Test 1 showed high chest
seat belt components, including the ELR, webbing, compression and neck flexion moments with
D rings, buckle and stalk and anchors were respect to the IARVs plus submarining.
standard ‘off the shelf’ Autoliv parts. The Lifebelt
Iteration 1 tests, presented here, had the lower lap
belt mounted to the sled as shown in Figure 3.
The Iteration 1 version of the Lifebelt, discussed

here, is the first of the planned developments of the
Lifebelt concept.
Figure 4. (left) Position of the lap belt in the

dummy’s abdomen (arrowed) following Control
Test 1. (right) Position of the lap belt above the
left ASIS (arrowed) following Control Test 2.
Note the soft seat base (right) used in Control
Test 2.
Control Test 2 also resulted in the dummy

Figure 3. In board sled mounted anchorages for submarining, with the lap belt riding above the left
the Lifebelt Iteration 1 as used in the tests. ASIS and penetrating into the dummy’s abdomen,
see Figure 4. Control Test 2 again showed high
TEST RESULTS chest compression and neck flexion moments with
respect to the IARVs.
Test Series 1 – Rear Seat Control Tests
Note: Control Test 1 was run with no knee impact
Test Series 1 consisted of two tests using a HIII 5F bolster and a slightly different sled pulse (Crashlab
dummy restrained in a standard Honda rear seat sled) to Control Test 2 (Autoliv sled).
with the standard seat belt geometry by an Autoliv
“off the shelf” seatbelt, Table 1. The Control Test 1 Test Series 2 – Lifebelt HIII 5F Tests
(S090258 – at Crashlab) was performed with the
standard rear seat and seatbelt geometry. Control Test Series 2 consisted of four tests with a HIII 5F
Test 2 (D1-4260 – at Autoliv) used a simple foam dummy restrained by the Lifebelt Iteration 1
seat base, see Figure 4, and made use of an seatbelt configuration in a rear seat, Table 1. The
improved seatbelt geometry reflecting first Lifebelt Test 1 (D1-4189) was performed with
developments with the Lifebelt. the standard Honda Rear seat. The remaining three
tests (D1-4258, D1-4309 and D1-4411) used a
Inspection of the vehicle seat following these tests simple foam seat base, similar to Control Test 2
revealed no signs of deformation of the seat or seat (D1-4260).
anchorages. The seat base remained intact. There
were no failures of the seatbelt components. The An inspection of the seat post the Lifebelt tests
dummy was effectively restrained in the vehicle revealed no signs of deformation of the seat or seat
seat by the seatbelt in both tests. Seatbelt anchorages. The seat base and seat back remained
components were replaced between tests. in place. There were no signs of failure of the
seatbelt or seatbelt components and the dummy and
The peak response values for the HIII 5F dummies belt remained in place post crash. The dummy was
during the tests are included in Appendix A, along effectively restrained in the vehicle seat by the
with the Injury Assessment Reference Values Lifebelt seatbelt in all four tests. Seatbelt
IARVs for the Hybrid III 5F dummy for components were replaced after every test.
comparison, Mertz (1984). An IARV is an industry
accepted dummy response value where the risk of
Gibson 4
Appendix B compares the peak response values for
the HIII 5F dummy tests with the IARVs for the
Hybrid III 5F dummy.
Lifebelt Test 1 performed well in restraining the

dummy in the seat, however the upper lap belt
moved upwards to rest above the ASIS, see Figure
5. Although there was upward motion of the belt,
there was no intrusion or penetration of the belt
into the abdomen of the dummy (submarining). The
areas of concern in terms of dummy loading during
the tests included chest compression levels and Figure 6. (left) HIII 5F post Lifebelt Test 2 (D1-
upper neck forces. 4258). (right) HIII 5F post Lifebelt Test 3 (D1-
4309).
post test or in the instrumentation responses and

had lower chest compression. The loading to the
ASIS load cells showed no signs that submarining
or unstable belt positioning occurred.
Test Series 3 – Front Seat Control Test
Test Series 3 consisted of a single test (D1-4306)

performed with a HIII 50M dummy restrained in a
standard Ford front seat.
Figure 5. Post Lifebelt Test 1. Note the final Inspection of the vehicle seat after the control test
position of the upper lap belt was on the ASIS, revealed no signs of deformation of the seat or seat
but not penetrating into the abdomen. anchorages. The seat base and seat back remained
in place. There were no signs of failure of the
The Lifebelt performed very well in Lifebelt Test seatbelt or seatbelt components on visual inspection
2, with no signs of submarining or dummy with the dummy and belt in place post crash.
instability, see Figure 6. The areas of concern in
terms of HIII 5F dummy loading during Lifebelt The dummy was effectively restrained in the
Test 2 were high chest compression and upper neck vehicle seat by the seatbelt. There were no signs of
forces. instability and submarining did not occur during
the test. Note that the seat had an inbuilt anti-
Lifebelt Test 3 was a repeat of Test 2 but with the submarining ramp and good belt geometry.
addition of a sash belt load limiter, which reduced
the peak sash belt load from 9.22kN to 5.21kN. The Appendix A shows the peak response values for the
lifebelt performed very well in Lifebelt Test 3 with HIII 50M dummy during the test with the IARVs
the lap belt positioned below the ASIS post test, see for the 50th percentile male for comparison. The
Figure 6. In Test 3, chest compression and HIC response and chest compression of the dummy
acceleration levels were reduced, however the neck were high in the test when compared with the
forces remained an area of concern in terms of IARVs.
dummy loading with respect to the IARVs.
Test Series 4 – Lifebelt HIII 50M Tests
Lifebelt Test 4 was a repeat of the Lifebelt Test 3
conditions with load limiter, but Denton ASIS load Two Lifebelt tests (D1-4259 and D1-4307) formed
cells were included in the dummy instrumentation. Test Series 4 each with a Hybrid III 50M dummy
The ASIS load cells were fitted to demonstrate restrained by the Lifebelt Iteration 1 seatbelt
quantitatively the anti submarine performance of configuration with soft seat base.
the Lifebelt seatbelt and back up the post test visual
inspection used for the earlier tests. Inspection of the vehicle seat after the HIII 50M
Lifebelt tests revealed no signs of deformation of
In Lifebelt Test 4, the HIII 5F dummy was stable the seat or seat anchorages. The seat base and seat
with good dynamic and kinematic responses, back remained in place. There were no signs of
showing no signs of submarining either visually failure of the seatbelt or seatbelt components on
quick visual inspection with the dummy and belt in
Gibson 5
place post crash. The dummy was effectively quantitatively the anti submarine performance of
restrained in the vehicle seat by the seatbelt. the Lifebelt seatbelt system. With this
instrumentation the moment and force readings
Appendix C shows the peak response values for the change to zero when submarining occurs and the
dummy during the test with the IARVs for the 50th belt slips upwards off the load cells. This was not
percentile male for comparison. seen during Lifebelt Test 4.
The Lifebelt Iteration 1 performed very well in Test Effect of a Soft Seat Base on the Lifebelt
5, effectively restraining the 50th percentile male
dummy with no signs of submarining or instability The effectiveness of the Lifebelt seatbelt system
of the dummy, see Figure 7. The level of chest when used with a simple soft foam seat base is
compression was an area of concern in terms of demonstrated by comparison of Lifebelt Iteration 1
dummy loading with respect to the IARVs. Tests 1 (D1-4189) and 2 (D1-4258). The Lifebelt
seatbelt system prevented submarining with the
hard seat base, Figure 5, and the soft seat base,
Figure 6. It did not need the seat base design to
ensure that submarining did not occur.
The HIII 5F dummy responses for these tests are

compared in Figure 8. The neck loads were reduced
with the soft seat, Figure 8, and the head excursion
increased, Figure 9.
160%
140%
Maximum values normalised with IARV
Figure 7. (left) HIII 50M Post Lifebelt Test 5. 120%
(right) HIII 50M post Lifebelt Test 6.

100%
A chest load limiter was introduced into the sash 80%
portion of Lifebelt system for Test 6. The Lifebelt 60%
performed well in the Lifebelt 6 test, again 40%
effectively restraining the HIII 50M dummy with

no signs of submarining or instability of the 20%
dummy, see Figure 7. The load limiter reduced the 0%
HEAD CHEST NECK (force) NECK (moment) NECK (extension)

chest loading and compression, Appendix C,
however these remained slightly above the IARV Figure 8. HIII 5F test results of the Lifebelt in a
limit. standard rear seat (D1-4189 yellow) and the
Lifebelt with a soft seat base (D1-4258 brown).
DISCUSSION The IARV’s for the HIII 5F are shown in red.
Anti-Submarining Performance of the Lifebelt 450 10
400 9
The anti-submarining performance of the Lifebelt 350

8
is best assessed using the HIII 5F dummy as this 300

7
smaller dummy is more susceptible to submarining 6

millimeters
250
than the larger 50M dummy. The HIII 5F has been
kN
used for this purpose as a rear seat occupant in 200

4
Japan NCAP frontal offset testing since 2009, 150

3
NASVA (2010). 100

2
50 1
Submarining, determined by inspection of the post
0 0
test photographs and the shape of the lap belt load HEAD (x) KNEE (x) HEAD (z) KNEE (z) BELT
curve, occurred in the two 5F Control Tests, Tests

Figure 9. HIII 5F excursion and sash belt load
1 and 2. It did not occur in the Lifebelt Tests 1, 2,
results of the Lifebelt with a standard rear seat
and 3 (standard rear seat with soft foam seat base
(D1-4189 yellow) and with a soft seat base (D1-
and with or without load limiter).
4258 brown).
In the Lifebelt 4 test (D1-4411), in addition to the
visual inspection, Denton ASIS load cells were also
used with the HIII 5F dummy to demonstrate
Gibson 6
Effect of a Chest Load Limiter on the Lifebelt
A comparison of the HIII 5F dummy responses in

Lifebelt Tests 2 (D1-4258), 3 (D1-4309) and 4
(D1-4411), demonstrates that including a force
limiter in the sash remains an effective means for
controlling the chest loads. In each test the Lifebelt
seatbelt system was able to prevent submarining
both without and with the load limiter, Figure 6.
All three tests were with the soft seat base.
Figure 12. Excursion comparison of HIII 5F
performance restrained by the Lifebelt (D1-4258
The HIII 5F dummy responses for these tests are
blue and pink) and Lifebelt with load limiter
compared in Figure 10. The chest load limiter
(D1-4309 red and green).
reduced the sash belt load and the resultant chest
compression to acceptable levels. The neck loads
The HIII 5F Dummy in the Lifebelt
were slightly increased with the load limiter, Figure
10, and the head excursion increased, Figure 11.
The HIII 5F dummy was fully restrained in the
These effects can be seen in the trajectory of the
control tests (S090258 and D1-4260). There was no
dummy in the two tests, Figure 12.
sign of dummy instability, but submarining
occurred in both tests, Figure 4.
140%
The HIII 5F dummy was well restrained in the
Maximum values normalised with IARV
120% Lifebelt Tests 1, 2, 3 and 4, with the lap belt

100% remaining below the ASIS, see Figures 5 and 6.
There was no sign of submarining or dummy
80%
instability during the tests.
60%
40% The dummy responses in the Lifebelt Tests 1, 2, 3

20%
and 4 were very good, especially with the use of
the load limiter in Lifebelt Tests 3 and 4, as shown
0%
HEAD CHEST NECK (force) NECK (moment)
in Figure 13. The chest load limiter reduced the
sash belt load and the resultant chest compression
Figure 10. Comparison of HIII 5F performance
to acceptable levels. The neck moments were low
with the Lifebelt (D1-4258 yellow) and Lifebelt with the load limiter, and in this size occupant the
with sash load limiter (D1-4309 brown and D1- head excursion was increased.
4411 red). The IARV’s for the HIII 5F are
shown in green.
140%
120%
Maximum values normalised with IARV .
100%
9
500
8 80%
7
400 60%
6
millimeters
40%
kN
300 5
4 20%
200
3
0%
2 HEAD CHEST NECK (Fz) NECK (My)

100
0 0 Figure 13. Comparison of HIII 5F performance

HEAD (x) KNEE (x) HEAD (z) KNEE (z) BELT
in the standard rear seat Control Test 1
Figure 11. Excursion and sash belt load (S090258 yellow) and standard rear seat with
comparison of HIII 5F performance restrained soft seat base Control Test 2 (D1-4260 orange)
by the Lifebelt (D1-4258 yellow) and Lifebelt with the Lifebelt Test 1 (D1-4189 red), Lifebelt
with load limiter (D1-4309 brown and D1-4411 soft seat base Test 2 (D1-4258 green) and
green). Lifebelt with load limiter Tests 3 (D1-4309 grey)
and 4 (D1-4411 brown). The IARV’s for the
HIII 5F are shown in dark green.
Gibson 7
The HIII 50M Dummy in the Lifebelt The test setup was not designed to measure the
chest excursion, but based on the video results the
The HIII 50M dummy was fully restrained in the Lifebelt HIII 50M tests remained within the ECE
control test (D1-4306). There was no sign of R16 chest excursion requirement of 300 mm with
dummy instability or submarining. the load limiter.
The HIII 50M dummy was well restrained in both

the Lifebelt Tests 5 and 6, with the lap belt
remaining below the ASIS, see Figure 7. There was
no sign of submarining or dummy instability during
the tests.
The dummy responses in the Lifebelt Tests were

very good, especially with the use of the load
limiter in Lifebelt Test 6, as shown in Figure 14.
The chest load limiter reduced the sash belt load
and the resultant chest compression to acceptable
levels. The neck loads were reduced with the load
limiter, and in this size occupant the head excursion
was reduced, Figure 15 and 16.
Figure 16. Excursion comparison of HIII 50M

120%
performance restrained by the standard front
Maximum vales normalised with IARV
100% seat (D1-4306 red and pink) and by the Lifebelt

with soft seat base (D1-4259 green and blue).
80%
60%
ANALYSIS OF THE FORCES IN THE
LIFEBELT SEATBELT SYSTEM
40%
20%
The forces in the Lifebelt Iteration 1 seatbelt
system were analysed to define the loading forces
0%
HEAD CHEST NECK (force) NECK (moment)

acting though the seatbelt, the belt system and on
the anchorage points. The test chosen as the worst
Figure 14. Comparison of HIII 50M case loading was the Lifebelt system with a 50th
performance in the standard front seat Control HIII 50M dummy seated on the soft seat base with
Test (D1-4306 yellow) and restrained by the no load limiter (Test D1-4259).
Lifebelt Test 5 (D1-4259 brown) and Lifebelt
Test 6 with load limiter (D1-4307 red). The The Lifebelt system has 6 anchorage points through
IARV’s for the HIII 50M are shown in green. which the belt loading is transmitted (see Figures 1,
17 and 18):
600 12
1. The SG (Shoulder D ring) is superior and
posterior to the right shoulder of the dummy.
500 10
Belt tensions T1 and T2 act on this anchor
400 8
point.
2. The ELR (Emergency Locking Retractor) is
millimeters
inferior to the SG. Belt tension T1 acts on

kN
300 6
this anchor point.

200 4
3. The IB (In Board) is adjacent to the left hip
of the dummy. Belt tensions T2 and T3 act
100 2
on this anchor point.
4. The OBA (Out Board A) is adjacent to the
0 0
HEAD (x) KNEE (x) HEAD (z) KNEE (z) BELT right hip of the dummy. Belt tensions T3 and
Figure 15. Excursion and sash belt load T4 act on this anchor point.
comparison of HIII 50M dummy performance 5. The OB (Out Board) is adjacent to the mid
in Lifebelt Test 5 (D1-4259 yellow) and Lifebelt right thigh of the dummy. Belt tensions T4
Test 6 with load limiter (D1-4307 brown). and T5 act on this anchor point.
6. The IBA (In Board A) is adjacent to the mid
left thigh of the dummy. Belt tension T5 acts
on this anchor point.
Gibson 8
Table 2.
Estimated forces acting on Lifebelt anchorage points, during worst case loading scenario Test 5 D1-4259.
Anchor point Belt tensions Belt tensions resolved to component forces Anchorage
Fx (kN) Fy (kN) Fz (kN) force (kN)
SG T1 & T2 9.01 4.36 -16.48 19.28
ELR T1 0 0 11.28 11.28
OBA T3 & T4 19.15 6.67 6.97 21.44
OB T4 & T5 -10.60 11.28 -3.86 15.95
IB T2 & T3 16.65 -10.60 9.91 22.08
IBA T5 0 -11.28 0 11.28
The following assumptions were required to

estimate loadings at each anchorage point:
• The D rings are frictionless;
• The belt system acts as a cable with uniform
tension throughout, i.e. that T1, T2, T3, T4,
T5 are equal;
• The belt forces on each D ring act in line
with the belt webbing;
• Forces were estimated with the 3D geometry
of belt as seen at the maximum excursion of
the head of the dummy;
• Maximum excursion was assumed to occur
at the same time (t=0.071 s for D1-4259) as
the recorded peak sash belt load
• The maximum belt tension was 11.28kN,
therefore it was assumed:
Figure 17. Forces acting on Lifebelt outboard T1=T2=T3=T4=T5= 11.28kN.
anchor points. The red arrows indicate the
applied loads due to belt tension and the green The forces estimated for the D rings and anchorage
arrows the resultant force on the anchorage points are shown in Table 2. In Figures 17 and 18,
point in the local axis system. the red arrows (T1 to T5) indicate the applied loads
due to the belt tension and the green arrows the
resultant force on the anchorage in the local axis
system.
SUMMARY
A new development of the traditional seat belt

system has undergone proof of concept testing. The
testing of the Lifebelt Seatbelt system presented
here clearly demonstrates that it is an effective
restraint system for both front and rear seat
occupants.
The Lifebelt is able to be used with a simple soft

foam seat base design without submarining.
The system makes use of existing seat belt

components. To a user there is no change in the
operation of the seat belt.
Throughout the tests reported here, the motion of

Figure 18. Forces acting on Lifebelt inboard the dummies was well controlled and both the HIII
anchor points. The red arrows indicate the 5F and 50M dummies remained stable and with
applied loads due to belt tension and the green acceptable biomechanical responses when tested in
arrows the resultant force on the anchorage the Lifebelt.
points in the local axis system.
Gibson 9
The high chest deflection readings noted for the Crashes.” Paper Number 05-0212, In the
tests with both the standard and the Lifebelt Proceedings of the ESV Conference.
systems were able to be dealt with by means of
load limiters. The introduction of the load limiters Mertz H 1984 “Injury Assessment values used to
reduced the chest load to acceptable levels and had evaluate Hybrid III response measurements.
no negative effects with respect to dummy stability, General Motors Submission.
submarining and other biomechanical responses.
Mizuno, K., Ikari, T., Tomita, K. and Matsui, Y.
LIMITATIONS 2007 “Effectiveness Of Seatbelt For Rear Seat
Occupants In Frontal Crashes.” Paper Number 07-
A limitation of the study was that it was based on 0224, In the Proceedings of the ESV Conference.
early developmental systems and was intended to
prove the concept only. The results obtained NASVA 2011 The National Agency for
indicate that the enhanced belt system is worthy of Automotive Safety and Victims Aid website.
further development. http://www.nasva.go.jp/mamoru/en/
REFERENCES NCSA, 2008. Fatal Accident Reporting Scheme.

http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Main/index.aspx
Bilston, L., Du, W. and Brown, J. 2010 “A (accessed August 20, 2009).
matched-cohort analysis of belted front and rear
seat occupants in newer and older model vehicles Tylko, S. and Dalmotas, D. 2005 “Protection of
shows that gains in front occupant safety have Rear Seat Occupants in Frontal Crashes.” Paper
outpaced gains for rear seat occupants.” Accident Number 05-258, Proceedings of the ESV
Analysis and Prevention 42 p1974-1977 Conference.
Cuerden, R., Scott, A., Hassan, A and Mackay, M. Zellmer, H., Luhrs, S. and Bruggemann, K.. (1998)
1997 “The Injury Experience of Adult Rear Seat “Optimized Restraint Systems for Rear Seat
Car Passengers” In the Proceedings of the IRCOBI Passengers.” Paper Number 98-SI-W-23,
Conference, Hannover 1997. Proceedings of the ESV Conference.
Kuppa, S., Saunders, J. and Fessahaie, O. 2005

“Rear Seat Occupant Protection in Frontal
Gibson 10
APPENDIX A
Standard Seat and Seatbelt Control Test - Peak Responses
Control Control Control

Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 IARV IARV
(S090258) (D1-4260) (D1-4306)
Parameter Unit max / min max / min max/min
Dummy HIII 5F HIII 5F HIII 50M HIII 5F HIII 50M
resultant head
78.8 72.7 81.1 193 180
acceleration G
HIC15 598 699 779 700
upper neck force
0.1/-1.7 0.0/-1.22 0.01/-1.57 1.9 3.1
FX kN
upper neck force
0.4/-0.3 0.51/-0.10 0.41/-0.14 1.9 3.1
FY kN
upper neck force
2.7/-0.3 2.54/-0.03 3.66/-0.03 2.07 3.29
FZ kN
upper neck 95 (flexion) 190 (flexion)
60.0/-34.8 58.7/-39.4 114/-35.3
moment MY Nm 39 (extension) 77 (extension)
resultant chest
52.4 50.7 73 60
acceleration (3ms) G
chest compression mm -51.0 -56 -55 41 50
viscous criteria V.C -0.39 0.49/-0.26 1.0 1.0
upper sternum
0.78/-3.59 8.2 8.2
deflection rate m/s
lower sternum
0.57/-3.59 8.2 8.2
deflection rate m/s
femur force left
2.8/-0.6 2.0/-0.25 2.5/-0.31 6.19 9.07
FZ kN
femur force right 1.49*/-
3.0/-1.1 2.24/-0.16 6.19 9.07
FZ kN 2.27
resultant pelvis
55.4 58.7
shoulder belt force
6.6/-0.1 8.41 10.53
kN
head excursion x mm 502.6 437.5
knee excursion x mm 155.7 63.6
head excursion z mm 219.4 318.8
knee excursion z mm 51.9 15.6
Note: the peak dummy response values marked in red equal or exceed the corresponding IARV.
Gibson 11
APPENDIX B
HIII 5F Tests - Peak Responses
Lifebelt 1 Lifebelt 2 Lifebelt 3 Lifebelt 4

IARV
(D1-4189) (D1-4258) (D1-4309) (D1-4411)
Parameter Unit max / min max / min max / min max / min
Dummy HIII 5F HIII 5F HIII 5F HIII 5F HIII 5F
resultant head
65.8 60.9 67.7 70.0 193
acceleration g
HIC15 423 367 511 467 779
upper neck force FX kN 0.16/-1.15 0 /-1.04 0.01/-1.18 0.01/-1.08 1.9
upper neck force FY kN 0.31/-0.02 0.28/-0.07 0.08/-0.11 0.15/-0.14 1.9
upper neck force FZ kN 2.31/-0.02 2.08/-0.02 2.32/-0.03 2.42/-0.08 2.07
95 (flexion)/
61.2/-31.4 49.3/-32.3 44.4/-22.8 50.5/-21.2
upper neck moment MY Nm 39(extension)
resultant chest
53.5 53.8 39.7 40.0 73
acceleration (3ms) g
chest compression mm -55.5 -57 -39 -39 -41
viscous criteria V.C 0.75 0.8/-0.3 0.64/-0.18 0.65/-0.17 1.0
upper sternum deflection
1.37/-3.73 0.37/-4.23 0.35/-3.93 8.2
rate m/s
lower sternum deflection 1.36 /-
0.61/-3.32 0.29/-3.36 8.2
rate m/s 3.49
1.79 /-
2.09/-0.30 1.79/-0.32 1.99/-0.34 6.19
femur force left FZ kN 0.68
0.77 /- 2.73*/- 2.29/-
2.51/-1.41 6.19
femur force right FZ kN 3.45* 1.17 4.15*
resultant pelvis
65 56.2 55.3 59.7
Left Iliac force kN 4.09
Right iliac force kN 2.64
Left iliac moment Nm 34.9/-5.0
Right iliac moment Nm 6.2/-26.5
shoulder belt force
9.22 5.21 5.1^
kN
head excursion x mm 278.4 389 490.9 468
knee excursion x mm 181.8 167 135.5 138.3
head excursion z mm 65.4 102.6 144.6 138.3
knee excursion z mm 0 40.6 36.2 37.2
Note: the peak dummy response values marked in red equal or exceed the corresponding IARV.
* noisy sensor
^ Damaged load cell
Gibson 12
APPENDIX C
HIII 50M Tests - Peak Responses
Lifebelt 5 Lifebelt 6
IARV
(D1-4259) (D1-4307)
Parameter Unit max/min max/min
Dummy HIII 50M HIII 50M HIII 50M
resultant head acceleration g 69.3 58.1 180
HIC15 446 294 700
upper neck force FX kN 0.06/-1.78 0.0/-1.16 3.1
upper neck force FY kN 0.25/-0.11 0.13/-0.23 3.1
upper neck force FZ kN 2.55/-0.02 2.3/-0.01 3.29
190 (flexion)
120.6/-34.4 78.1/-37.9
upper neck moment MY Nm 77 (extension)
resultant chest acceleration (3ms) g 45.1 46.6 60
chest compression mm -61 -52 -50
viscous criteria V.C 0.47/-0.28 0.56/-0.26 1.0
femur force left FZ kN 2.31/-0.79 2.67/-0.39 9.07
femur force right FZ kN 2.65/-0.72 3.25/-0.41 9.07
resultant pelvis acceleration (3ms) G 49.2 61.6
shoulder belt force kN 11.28 5.39
head excursion x mm 489.2 475
knee excursion x mm 243.4 220
head excursion z mm 241 128.1
knee excursion z mm 21.5 37.5
Note: the peak dummy response values marked in red exceed the corresponding IARV.
Gibson 13
INNOVATIVE BONNET ACTIVE ACTUATOR
(B2A) FOR PEDESTRIAN PROTECTION
Evrard, Borg
SNPE Matériaux Energétiques
France
Paper Number : 11-0113
ABSTRACT
carmakers to increase the pedestrian score and so to
Since few years, appearance of front vehicles has get a satisfying Euro NCAP rating.
changed progressively to become friendly towards
pedestrians and to meet new regulatory and Euro The Bonnet Active Actuator (B2A) has been tested
NCAP queries. in various cars environment and is ready for
applications in cars programs.
In 2009, Pedestrian Protection received an
additional weight with the second phase of the AIM OF STUDY
European regulation “Phase 2” and the new scheme
of EuroNCAP rating. Requirements on head impact This paper gives an overview of the features and a
injuries mitigation have been reinforced and compel description of the B2A. It includes the following:
cars designers to make advised choices between - Background,
passive and active solutions. - Active Bonnet System review,
- B2A physical content and functions,
Car designers implement passive solutions with - Components testing and simulation,
significant changes of the structure to provide a - Conclusion
clearance between the bonnet and hard surfaces
underneath, allowing free deformations of the BACKGROUND
bonnet and head energy absorption during the
impact. Directive 2003/102/EC (2) allowed for the EU wide
introduction of safety legislation aimed at the
In parallel, more and more solutions named active protection of pedestrian and other vulnerable road
hinge systems (or bonnet deployment mechanism) users. Vehicles were required to pass a number of
are selected with the aim to lift the bonnet in few performance tests in two phases in 2005 and 2010.
milliseconds when a pedestrian knocks the bumper, The second phase has been approved in 2009 and
and to create the saving space under the bonnet came into force with the EC N° 78/2009 regulation
surface. (3).
The choice of such active hinge systems is lead by The content of these regulations is based on
relevant benefits because they allow for: individual component tests: a Legform test assesses
- car designers, greater freedom for the style; the protection afforded to the lower leg by the
- carmakers, to meet C02 rate limitation by bumper, an Upper Legform assesses the leading
improving aerodynamic characteristics; edge of the bonnet and child and adult Headforms
- consumers, to reduce gasoline consumption. are used to assess the bonnet top area.
In January 2011, Euro NCAP working group on The protection of vulnerable road users is also a
pedestrian protection has officially published a critical concern for Euro NCAP since 1997. Euro
method for testing “pop-up” bonnets. As a NCAP released a separate star rating for pedestrian
consequence, active hinge systems can be from now valid until 2009 and assesses vehicles with similar
assessed with an official and comprehensive sub-systems tests. From 2009, pedestrian score has
document. become integral part of the overall rating scheme
with the aim to raise significantly the pedestrian
The Bonnet Active Actuator (B2A) designed by safety area of assessment and to challenge vehicles
SNPE Matériaux Energétiques (SME) is a smart manufacturers to find solutions for Pedestrian
pyrotechnic piston lifter specially designed to Protection improvement.
operate Active Hinge Systems and to help
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Borg 1
In January 2011, the Euro NCAP working group on Bonnet Active Actuator (B2A) is a cost effective
pedestrian protection has officially published a new and highly reliable solution. It allows to meet the
method for testing deployable bonnet systems new Euro NCAP tests method and increase the
through the updated pedestrian testing protocol score with its particular features and functionalities:
version 5.2.1 – January 2011 (1). - easy adjustment for various models of hinges
and kinematics;
In this paper, Euro NCAP requires that pedestrian - hinge unlocking and bonnet deployment time;
protection is not compromised by the results of the - bonnet support waiting for pedestrian impact
deformation of the bonnet on impact due to the load until few hundred milliseconds after T fire;
of the body. So at the point of head impact, it is - bonnet deflection control under body loading
essential that the bonnet deflection in the deployed and head shock absorption particularly on
position is controlled and so doesn’t exceed the hinges areas;
total available clearance between deployed bonnet - bonnet reclosing without effort in case of false
and engine hard points. deployment.
As a consequence, Active Hinge Systems must be Active Bonnet System overwiew

able to:
This section describes the basic structure and
- sustain pedestrians with controlled collapses of mechanisms of Active Bonnet System. So as it is
bonnets and not bottom out throughout head impact illustrated in Figure 1., Active Bonnet System
duration, consists of the following components:
- retract and absorb energy of head impact in a 1. Bumper sensors. They are installed behind the
reverse controlled motion, front bumper facia. They give information
about the fact that an impact is occurring and
Furthermore, Active Hinge Systems must be able to also on the stiffness of the impacting object
sustain the bonnet few hundreds milliseconds after which can be pedestrian legs or anything else:
T fire - 300 ms are generally requested by cars pole, ball...
manufacturers - and to keep its head shock
absorption capacity during all this period. 2. Electronic Control Unit (ECU): It is located
inside the cabin of the car and judges the
necessity to lift the bonnet after receiving and
ACTIVE BONNET SYSTEM REVIEW analysing bumper sensors signals and vehicle
speed.
Main features
3. Active Hinge Systems (Hinge + B2A): As it is
Bonnet Active Actuator (B2A) is designed to be illustrated in Figure 2., they raise
adapted easily to various hinge kinematics, bonnet simultaneously the rear portion of the bonnet as
strengths, geometries and mass, and cars soon as they receive the triggering signal send
manufacturer’s queries related to functions and by ECU.
performances to fulfil before, during and after pyro-
triggering.
Bonnet Active Actuators (B2A) control the

movement of the bonnet and the effort during the 3
functioning phases requested by Active Hinge
Systems.
- They open quickly and simultaneously the 2

hinges located at each corner of the rear part of the
bonnet with a controlled linear lift motion.
- They absorb pedestrian impact on the bonnet by a

reverse controlled linear motion.
- They relax theirs efforts after few seconds and so

allow bonnet re-closing manually in case a false Figure 1. Active Bonnet System
deployments.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Borg 2
When Active Hinge Systems are triggered, latching
systems located currently at the vehicles front end
become fixed pivots and as a result control the
rotating movements of bonnets rear portions
2 active hinge
systems with B2A
(Figure 2.).
inside
New hinges designs gather the following
components (Figures 4. & 5.):
- pivots for normal bonnets closing and opening

operations,
Figure 2. Bonnet and Active Hinge Systems in - upper and a lower members for fixation on cars
elevated position bodies and bonnets,
(ready for head impact absorption)
- locking devices to keep hinges mobile
members folded for normal bonnets operations
Active Hinge System (shear pin, rivet or hook),
Active Hinge System consists of 2 components: - intermediate ties arms and pivots to provide
particular hinge kinematics and specific
1. Bonnet Active Actuator (B2A) bonnets trajectory.
The pyro-actuator proposed and designed by SME

is named Bonnet Active Actuator (B2A). It is Figures 4. and 5. illustrate hinges designs examples
constituted with a Micro Gas Generator (MGG) and with typical characteristics gathered in table 1.
a piston located in a tube as shown in Figure 3.. below.
The piston move out under pyro-gas pressure when

Figures 4 & 4bis Figure 5
the MGG is triggered.
-Free Pushing Force
Hinge type -Link hinge design type
hinge design
-B2A linked to the bonnet -No link between B2A and
B2A mounting
with a hinge mobile part bonnet
-B2A pushing force applied
horizontally (or almost) on
the intermediate mobile
Upraising controlled -B2A pushing force applied
part of the hinge.
movement vertically on the bonnet.
-Bonnet pivot vertical
trajectory controlled with 2
intermediate ties arms
Gear ratio between B2A
3 (as an example) 1
and hinge strokes
These designs have been studied and tested with
Locking device Shear pin
Bonnet Active Actuator (B2A).
Table 1. Hinges designs characteristics
In both cases, hinges kinematics can be modified by

the lengths and positions of intermediate ties arms.
Figure 3. Bonnet Active Actuator (B2A)
designed by SME During normal bonnets opening or closing, the
locking devices (ex: shear pin, rivet or hook) keep
2. New hinges designs hinges mobile parts in folded position, allowing
only hinges upper member and bonnets to rotate
Hinges are specifically designed to ensure an around bonnets pivots.
unusual function which is the lifting of the rear
portion of the bonnet under a pushing force at
approximately 100 mm high.
During normal operations, bonnets are currently

open and close by upward and downward
movements of their front parts which are controlled
by hinges pivots.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Borg 3
The piston deploys under pyro-gas pressure and
extends the hinge. As the result, bonnet rear portion
Hinge gear ratio 3 raises and provides the saving clearance under the
bonnet surface.
Setting the times for the Bonnet Active Actuator

operating phases
This section describes B2A operating phases,

thresholds and durations for each of them.
Phase 1: Bonnet deployment
Figure 4. Link hinge design type Active Bonnet System must provide assurance that
B2A end piston is linked to the hinge upper bonnet always deploys before head impact and
member remains in elevated position when it happens.
Tests and simulations are carried out to evaluate

typical head contact times in car to pedestrian
Hinge gear ratio 3
collisions at a speed of 40 km/h. With AM50
dummy, it occurs at approximately 150 ms. The
shorter is the height of the dummy, the shorter is
the head contact time, so with the C6Y dummy, the
contact time is estimated at 60 ms and the
Gear ratio 3 maximum value is given for 250 ms according to
specific studies (4).
As a result and illustrated in Figure 6., the time for

the bonnet deployment after T fire must be lower
than the shortest head contact time and so is usually
Figure 4bis: Link hinge design type specified within 30 ms.
Prototype implementing a hook to unlock the hinge
mobile parts
Phase 2: Bonnet support
After bonnet deployment, B2A must sustain a

sufficient and constant effort (pyro-pressure) until
Hinge gear ratio 1
pedestrian impact on bonnet, to ensure a deflection
control under body loading and head shock
absorption.
The time limit of this sustained force after T fire is

usually specified at 300 ms Regarding the longest
head contact times define above.
Phase 3: Bonnet reset ability
Figure 5. Free Pushing Force hinge design type The sensing system could trigger a deployment
Piston is not linked to the hinge upper member even if no pedestrian is involved. In that case, B2A
sustained force must be relaxed and cancelled after
the 300 ms threshold, allowing a manual bonnet re-
closing (few daN are generally requested).
When B2A is triggered, its piston pushes the
locking device until it breaks (shear pin or rivet) or
opens (hook) allowing hinge upper member to
move upward.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Borg 4
Figure 6. presents threshold and times requested for
B2A operating phases with the following
parameters: B2A functions
- T0 First contact leg-bumper B2A design allows an easy sizing to achieve

- T sensor Time for firing signal customers performances requirements illustrated in
- T sensor_max Largest value of T sensor in Figure 8. below.
- T fire Time for firing
Deployment Bonnet support Resetability
Maximum
pressure for
bonnet
behaviour
Corridor for
energy storage
and head impact
B2A pyro-pressure energy
absorption
Cold gas
leakage
T fire 30 ms Time 300 ms few s Time
Micro Gas Generator Additional pyrotechnic

pyro-load with high load with low pressure B2A pyro-pressure
pressure level and level and long time falling down
short time combustion combustion
Figure 8. B2A operation phases

vs pyro-gas effort (pressure)
Figure 6. Times of B2A operating phases
Phase 1: Bonnet deployment - Controlled pyro-

B2A PHYSICAL CONTENT AND pressure and time with MGG pyro-load
FUNCTIONS
B2A provides a controlled piston motion and effort
B2A physical content upon receipt of an electric signal. This movement is
started by the MGG ignition.
B2A piston extension occurs in a short time (within

30 milliseconds as requested by customers) under a
quick pyro-pressure increase provided by the
combustion of the MGG pyro-load. That creates a
force which elevates the bonnet at the deployed
position.
Combustion chamber pressures and resulting

extension speeds can be sized and adapted to
customers requirements without any modification
of the B2A design.
Figure 7. B2A general design
The bonnet vertical trajectory is to be multiplied
with the gear ratio of the hinge in order to define
As shown in figure 7., B2A consists of: the stroke of the piston.
- MGG (Micro Gas Generator),
- Additional pyro-load (in piston), B2A design is able to fulfil a minimum stroke of
- Piston in tube with calibrated nozzle for pyro- around 10 mm to a maximum stroke of at least 120
pressure control, mm depending on hinge kinematics and gear ratio
- Casing/tube. (Figures 4. & 5.).
B2A is a fully tight actuator able of resisting the

humidity and severe atmospheres which we find in
engines compartments.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Borg 5
Phase 2: Bonnet support - Controlled energy
storage for head impact absorption with the
secondary pyro-load
Hood deployment and sustain controls
4500
When B2A is fully extended, it is able to store 4000

Parameters setting:
- Additional charge of the actuator
Maximum level defined by ratio: Volume deployed /
energy. The force level for this “work function” is 3500
Initial dead volume
Output parameter:
- Holding pressure during the elevated position of the hood
- Maximum energy which can be absorbed by the actuator
achieved after the deployment phase and must

3000
remains constant until 300 ms after the T fire. The
"Pneumatic" Force N
2500
Hood effort controlled under a shock
topic is to control the bonnet deflection under the

body loading and to absorb the head shock which
2000 End of deployment phase
can occur during all this time.

1500
Hood effort controlled whithout a shock
1000
The pressure of the additional pyro-load (Figures 7.

500
Setting the control of the the dampening force by the additional pyrotechnic charge
& 8.) takes over the MGG pyro-pressure to provide 0

0 50 100 150
Time (ms)
200 250 300
longest time combustion at a lower level (Figure

11). Its combustion time is roughly multiply by 10 Figure 11. Simulation and test typical results
regarding MGG pyro-load combustion time. (30 ms
for deployment to 300 ms for bonnet sustain).
Reset control
This B2A force level is also easily tuneable. The 1000
value is define by the quantity and the composition 900
of the additional pyro-load. 800 Bonnet closes under a small

700
manual effort after few seconds
"Pneumatic" Force N
Phase 3: Bonnet reset ability – Bonnet closing if no 600
pedestrian impact occurs, with pyro-pressure 500
Pyro-gaz evacuation out of the combustion chamber of the actuator

release 400
300
After a deployment event where no pedestrian 200
impact occurs, bonnet has to be re-closed manually 100
without any tool. The objective is for the driver to 0

0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000 90000 100000
recover the visibility and to drive the car to a Time (ms)
service facility.
Figure 12. Piston force vs time after Tfire +
For that topic, B2A provides a calibrated gas 300 ms for bonnet re-closing
leakage whereby customer can move back the B2A
to its initial un-deployed position through a manual Comments
force applied on the bonnet (Figure 12). Customer
is likely to apply a few daN force at the rear portion B2A allows specific tuning to meet customers
of the bonnet just above hinges. requirements according to:
- Deployment time,
- Bonnet sustain effort for energy storage and
COMPONENTS TESTING AND time,
SIMULATION - Cold gas leakage to insure bonnet reset.
Tests are in accordance with simulation.

Objectives
It has been so checked under impactors tests
Several simulations and tests has been done to (Figure 11.) that :
check B2A operations: - bonnets is fully lifted within 30 ms.
- Energy stored after deployment with pyro-gas
- Bonnet deployment, allows to get good HIC values until 300 ms.
- Bonnet sustain and effort control,
- Bonnet reset ability.
Typical results
Figures 11. & 12 illustrate the typical curves

coming from these simulations and tests.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Borg 6
CONCLUSION
B2A is a simple pyro-piston lifter fulfilling

carmakers and hinges designs requirements.
B2A design is easily tuneable with pyro-parameters

without any change of the global design and main
components, so:
- Micro Gaz Generator (MGG) pyro-load for
bonnet deployment,
- Additional pyro-load for bonnet sustain and
energy storage until 300 ms for pedestrian
loading control and head impact energy
absorption,
- Piston nozzle for cold gas leakage and bonnet
reset ability.
Slots of time are significantly different and allow

this easy tuning related to each environment:
- Deployment phase: ~ 30 ms
- Bonnet sustain : ~ 300 ms
- Bonnet reset : few seconds
B2A sizing is achieved with pyrotechnic and

mechanic numerical models and tests. B2A is
available for implementation in Active Hinge
Systems and serial cars manufacturing.
REFERENCES
1. European New Car Assessment Programme

(EuroNCAP) – Pedestrian testing protocol –
version 5.2.1 – January 2011..
2. Directive 2003/102/EC of the European

Parliament and of the Council of 17 November
2003. Official Journal of the European Union
L 321/15
3. Regulation (EC) N° 78/2009 of the European

Parliament and of the Council of 14 January
2009. Official Journal of the European Union
L 35/1
4. CLEPA European Association of Automotive

suppliers - INF GR / PS /67 08.01.2004 –
Pedestrian Protection Test method - Active
hood/bonnet systems.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Borg 7
NHTSA's Rear Seat Safety Research
Aloke Prasad
NHTSA
USA
Doug Weston
Transportation Research Center, Inc.
USA
Paper # 11-0348
ABSTRACT:
SEAT PARAMETER EFFECTS
NHTSA has collected a series of rear seat occupant data
from full-scale frontal vehicle tests. The data set The study reported in this presentation examined the
encompasses Research and Development and New Car effects of rear seat cushion stiffness, seat top surface
Assessment Program (NCAP) tests and a variety of angle, cushion height at the front of the seat and seat
dummies, including adults and children in child restraint support structure angle on a Hybrid III 3 year (3 YO) old
systems. This paper examines the effect of the cushion child dummy in a forward-facing CRS and on a 5th
characteristics (shape, stiffness, thickness) and crash percentile female (5th F) dummy in a 3-point seat belt.
pulse on a small adult and a child in a forward facing The crash simulation (sled) tests were conducted at a ΔV
child restraint (CRS) using sled tests. A controlled of 35 mph equivalent to a NCAP pulse for a 2006 Ford
dynamic test will help us better understand how these Taurus.
factors influence the CRS crash dynamics. The thickness
of the cushions had the most effect on dummy injury Seat Cushion Characterization
assessment values (IAV). The crash pulse
characterization Vehicle Pulse Index (VPI) was the best Twenty four vehicle rear seat cushions were measured
predictor for head and chest injuries in such occupants. and tested under static loads to measure their dimensions
and stiffness. The vehicles and the cushion dimensions
INTRODUCTION are listed in Appendix A. The static force-deflection test
setup, using an 8-inch diameter indentation plate, is
Twelve percent of passenger vehicle occupants in police shown in Figure 1.
reported crashes are in the rear seat. In addition,
approximately 10 percent of all passenger vehicle
occupants killed are in rear seats. Sixty-four percent of
outboard rear seat occupants involved in frontal crashes
are belted, and among these restrained rear seat
occupants, 64 percent are 12 years old and younger, and
78 percent weigh less than 160 lbs. Sixty-five percent of
rear seat occupants killed are 16 years and older in age.
Therefore, children and older occupants in the rear are of
particular concern. [1]
NHTSA has collected a series of rear seat occupant data

from full-scale frontal vehicle tests. The data set
encompasses Research and Development and New Car
Assessment Program (NCAP) tests and a variety of
dummies, including adults and children in child restraint
systems. The analysis of CRS testing showed that child
occupant protection can not only be affected by the Figure 1. Static Test Setup
characteristic of the crash pulse, but also by other factors Stiffness measurement at the front of the cushion, where
such as vehicle cushion stiffness, seat contour, and seat the cushion is most likely to bottom out in CRS sled tests,
back angle. was considered for this study (Figure 2). The force-
------- deflection characteristics of the vehicle rear seat cushions
1. Kuppa Shashi, et al. Rear Seat Occupant Protection in Frontal
Crashes. Paper #. 05-212, 19th ESV Conference, Washington, DC.
are in Appendix B.
Prasad 1
The indentation forces at 25% and 50% deformation are
22.1 lbf and 34.6 lbf for the soft foam and 79.3 lbf and
114.6 lbf for the hard foam, respectively.
The selected sled seat cushions were tested under

identical conditions as the vehicle seats (Figure 3). The
results are overlaid and shown in Appendix B.
Figure 2. Cushion Test Location
Control Parameters for Rear Seats in Sled Tests
Based on the ranges of shapes, sizes, and stiffness

recorded for the 24 vehicles, the following values were
selected to characterize the rear seat in the sled tests:
Cushion stiffness = soft, hard
Cushion top surface angle = 7º, 16º
Cushion height at front = 225 mm, 100 mm Figure 4. Sled Seat Static Test
Seat frame support angles = 7º, 16º
Crash Pulse Used
Note that the seat support frame angle on the current
FMVSS No. 213 seat is at 15º and the anti-submarining The crash pulse selected for studying the cushion effects
ramp below the seat cushion in the 2007 Ford 500 is 12º. was representative of a high severity frontal impact of a
The seat pan width (1372 mm), depth (508 mm), seat mid-size passenger car. The frontal NCAP 35 mph crash
back angle, seat back shape and seat back foam were kept pulses for the 2000 and 2004 Ford Taurus are shown in
the same as in current FMVSS No. 213 seat. The four Figure 5. The representative sled pulse is also shown in
cushion shapes thus selected are shown in Appendix C. Figure 5. The peak acceleration and ΔV of the sled
pulse were 28.4 G and 36.0 mph (at 106.5 ms).
Two different cushion stiffnesses (soft, hard) were
obtained. They were both polyurethane foam, based on
toluene diisocyanate (TDI), used in the North American
market automobile seats. The foam characteristics, tested
per ASTM D 3574 – 08 (15” x 15” x 4” block using a 8”
diameter indenter) are shown in Figure 3.
150
100
Forceinlbf
50 Figure 5. Sled Pulse
Test Matrix Summary

0
0 20
Strain in %
40
The independent variables defining the seat were:
Foam shapes: 4 (thick, thin; flat, wedge)
Foam Stiffness: 2 (soft; hard)
Base-Plate Angle: 2 (7º; 16º)
Figure 3. Cushion Foam Properties
Prasad 2
That resulted in 16 different rear seats tested in 16 sled
tests. Each test had a belted 5th F and a 3 YO dummy in
an Evenflo Titan Elite DLX Convertible forward facing
CRS. The CRS was mounted to the seat by the lower
anchors and top tether for children (LATCH)
attachments. The sled pulse was an approximation of the
35 mph frontal NCAP crash pulse of a 2004 Ford Taurus.
The 5th F and the 3 YO dummies had instrumentation in

the head, upper neck, and the chest.
Location of Seat Belt and LATCH Anchors
The ranges of cushion thicknesses and stiffnesses result

in the occupant being seated at different heights on the Figure 7. OSCAR on a Thick Cushion
sled for each of the cushion and seat angle combinations.
To ensure that the seat belt and LATCH anchors were at

the same locations relative to the 5th F and 3YO
respectively, belt anchor locations (Figure 6) were
recorded in the 2004 Taurus relative to the H-point
determined using the SAE J826 OSCAR H-point
machine installed in the vehicle.
Figure 8. OSCAR on a Thin Cushion
Belt and LATCH anchor locations (at the same positions

relative to the OSCAR H-point) were located for all 16
cushion-seat configurations. The CRS, belts, and
retractors were changed after each sled test.
A typical test setup is shown in Figures 9 and 10. Each

dummy was photographed by three high speed digital
cameras. The position of the head and other landmarks
on the dummies were calculated using 3D
photogrammetry.
Figure 6. Seat Belt Attachment Locations
The OSCAR H-point machine was installed on each of

the 16 combinations of cushion and seat angles (Figures
7-8).
Prasad 3
ANOVA Analysis
A one-way ANOVA analysis for the effect of cushion

thickness, stiffness, shape, and angle on injury data is
shown in Appendix E.
Variables that were at least 80% likely to be significant

were analyzed using linear regression for each dummy
individually and for scaled data analyzed jointly.
Cushion thickness was the dominant variable.
Observations
Cushion thickness had the most effect on IAV. The

maximum difference in head excursion was 2.3” for the
5th F, and 3.2” for the 3 YO child dummies. The thin
cushion provided a more stable surface, while the thick
cushion may have caused submarining in the 5th
percentile female or slack in the CRS attachment. A
different CRS may produce different results.
Figure 9. Sled Test Setup
CRASH PULSE EFFECTS
Background
In response to the Transportation Recall Enhancement,

Accountability, and Documentation (TREAD) Act,
NHTSA evaluated various CRS in 193 MY 2001-2008
vehicle crash tests [2]. Eighty nine (89) vehicles were
evaluated, equipped with a control CRS (Evenflo
Vanguard). The vehicle pulse severity was found to
affect the dummy performance. However, no solid
correlation was found. (Peak chest acceleration
somewhat correlated to the vehicle crush). For MY 2001
– 2004 tests, when controlling for the child restraint,
vehicle make and model explained 64 percent of the
variation in chest acceleration and 63 percent of the
Figure 10. Sled Test Setup variation in HIC. One confounding factor was the
presence of too many variables (CRS, pulse, vehicle seat)
Test Results in these crash tests.
The test matrix and IAV, normalized to the injury
assessment reference values (IARV) are shown in The test plan selected for this study presented below
Appendix D. The maximum head excursions are addressed some of those factors by keeping the same
normalized to the highest value in all 16 tests. This vehicle seat, CRS (Evenflo Titan Elite DLX), and ΔV,
provides a relative measure of head excursion to the while changing the crash pulse.
worst case result .
5th Percentile Female Test Setup
Test # 6 (thin, flat, soft cushion at 16 degrees) had the
lowest maximum IAV (scaled head excursion of 0.93). Like the seat parameter effect tests, the pulse effect sled
Test # 13 (thick, flat, soft cushion at 16 degrees) had the tests used two occupants (5th percentile female, 3 year old
highest maximum IAV (scaled neck tension of 1.53). child Hybrid III dummies). The seat cushion was
3YO Child selected to be the New Programme for the Assessment of
Test # 14 (thick, flat, soft cushion at 7 degrees) had the Child-restraint Systems (NPACS) foam, 5” thick and 19”
lowest maximum IAV (scaled neck tension of 1.62). -------
Test # 16 (thick, flat, hard cushion at 16 degrees) had the 2. Evaluation of Child Occupant Protection In a 56 km/h (35 MPH)
highest maximum IAV (scaled neck tension of 1.88). Frontal Barrier Crash, Docket Number NHTSA-2004-18682.
Prasad 4
deep. The seat back was the same as used in the current
FMVSS No. 213 seat. The seat cushion and seat back
angles were set to the same values as in the FMVSS No.
213 (cushion at 15 deg, seat back at 20 deg.). The force-
deflection characteristics of the NPACS foam as installed
on the sled, is shown in Appendix F.
Figure 13 NCAP Crash Pulses
Based on the average NCAP crash pulse, the following

criteria were used in selecting the sled pulses:
ΔV = 35 mph
Figure 11. Sled Test Setup Pulse duration = 100 ms +/- 10 ms
The sled pulses from existing HYGE sled pins available
The seat belt anchor locations (for the 5th F) and the at the Transportation Research Center, Inc. (TRC) that
LATCH anchor locations (for the 3 YO in FF CRS) were satisfied these criteria, along with the current FMVSS
adjusted to be in the same relative location to the OSCAR No. 213 pulse (scaled to 35 mph), are shown in Fig. 14.
H-point in the 2006 Ford Taurus rear seat.
Figure 12. Belt anchor Location Figure 14 Sled Pulses Used for Pulse Effect
The CRS, belts and retractors were changed after each Sled Pulse Characterization
sled test. The 5th F and the 3 YO dummies had
instrumentation in the head, upper neck, and the chest. The selected sled pulses were characterized based on
their acceleration values and their shapes. These would
Crash Pulse Selection be used as independent control variables when examining
the dummy IAV’s from the sled tests.
To determine the characteristics of the sled pulses for use
in this study, frontal NCAP crash pulses from 2003 to
2008 were examined. These are shown in Figure 13, The acceleration based pulse characteristics used were as
along with the average of these crash pulses. follows (refer to Figure 15):
Prasad 5
Ratio of area under the curve before the centroid (E)
to area under the curve after the centroid (F)
Vehicle Pulse Index (VPI)
Using 2-step pulse approximation, the peak
acceleration of a belted occupant (estimated from a
1-D model) in a vehicle with seat belts and air bags.
VPI is the "Vehicle Pulse Index." It is the peak
acceleration on a unit mass representing the occupant,
subject to the crash-pulse input and subject to a lumped-
mass spring representing the restraint system (belt+bag
stiffness). While VPI is calculated for the front seat
occupant, it is still a useful measure when comparing
crash pulses.
The pulse characteristics of the 13 sled pulses are shown

in Appendix G. The dummy IAV’s are in Appendix H.
Figure 15. Acceleration-Based Pulse Characterization
Stepwise Linear Regression Model
Peak G’s
The results of a stepwise linear regression model are
Maximum acceleration
shown in Appendix I. The models include all linear
Average G’s
terms significant at the 15% level (i.e., there is at least an
Average acceleration from time zero to return to
85% probability that the term selected affects the results).
zero G’s
Ratio of A/B
The results of the best fit models (predicted value vs.
Ratio of relative maximum G’s (A) to peak G’s (B).
actual value) of the IAV’s are in Appendix J and K.
If multiple relative maximums existed the most
prominent curve was chosen.
Observations
Ratio of C/D
Ratio of the area (blue) before the maximum peak to
For the 5th percentile female:
area (green) after the maximum peak.
VPI was the best predictor of HIC and peak chest
Front or Rear Loading
acceleration.
If the location of the peak is before the mid-point of
Peak sled acceleration was the best predictor of Nij.
the pulse, the pulse is front loaded. If it is after the
Pulse centroid acceleration value was correlated to
mid-point, the pulse is rear loaded.
head excursion.
The shape of the sled pulse was characterized by the
Submarining was observed in some tests.
centroid of the acceleration vs. time plot (Figure 16).
For the 3 year old child:
VPI was the best predictor of HIC and peak chest
acceleration.
There was a weak correlation of VPI to the neck
axial force and head excursion.
Pulse centroid acceleration value was correlated to
the maximum chest deflection.
LIMITATION OF STUDY
The cushion effect and pulse effect tests used a

simplified rear seat design. The intent was to identify the
effects of extreme values of seat parameters on dummy
IAV’s. Actual rear seats in vehicles use contoured
shapes and cushion materials that may be very different
from those used in the study. Some phenomena like
Figure 16. Shape Based Pulse Characterization submarining could be dependent on difference in the
cushions used in this study compared to those used in
Value of Centroid (time, acceleration) vehicles. Also, the results for the 3year old in CRS may
Ratio of E/F not be applicable to other CRS designs.
Prasad 6
APPENDIX A Vehicle Seat Dimensions
Front Seat Foam Seat Depth Back Seat Foam Seat Angle
Vehicle Description Floor to Top of Seat
Thickness (A) Front to Back (B) Thickness (C) Degrees
2008 Ford Taurus X 100 510 90 380 6.7
1999 Volkswagen Beetle 100 450 95 340 8
1994 Honda Civic 105 500 70 275 12.9
2006 Volkswagen Passat 115 530 80 335 11
2002 Ford Focus 120 500 85 375 12.6
2007 Saturn Vue 130 520 80 302 8.6
2008 Subaru Tribeca 140 510 70 325 9
2002 Honda CRV 140 570 40 370 9.4
2007 Ford Expedition 140 520 65 340 10.2
2006 Dodge Durango 140 575 90 372 14.4
2007 Ford Edge 140 520 120 300 15.1
2008 Toyota Highlander 150 505 83 335 8.8
2005 Honda Odyssey 150 570 70 378 12.7
1996 Chevy Cavalier 160 490 60 320 8.2
2009 Chevy Equinox 160 690 60 365 10.8
2007 Jeep Commander 160 560 70 310 12.3
2006 Honda Ridgeline 165 500 50 375 11.4
2007 Mazda CX-9 170 515 50 295 11
2003 Honda Odyssey 170 520 90 373 13.4
1996 Chrysler Concord 170 620 28 330 18
1990 Honda Civic 190 480 90 315 9.3
2007 Ford 500 210 540 70 360 15
1996 Ford Taurus 215 545 40 348 16.8
2008 Nissan Sentra 225 555 48 365 10.3
Prasad 7
APPENDIX B Vehicle Rear Seat and Sled Cushion Force-Deflection Plots
APPENDIX C Sled Cushion Shapes
Prasad 8
APPENDIX D Test Results
Prasad 9
APPENDIX E ANOVA Analysis of Cushion Thickness Effect
APPENDIX F NPACS Foam Cushion Stiffness
NPACS Foam Static Test
Prasad 10
APPENDIX G Sled Pulse Characteristics
Prasad 11
APPENDIX H Pulse Effect Sled Test Results
Prasad 12
APPENDIX I Stepwise Linear Regression Models
Prasad 13
APPENDIX J Best Fit Models (5th Percentile Female)
Prasad 14
APPENDIX K Best Fit Models (3YO Child)
Prasad 15
REAL WORLD ANALYSIS OF REAR SEAT OCCUPANT SAFETY IN FRONTAL CRASHES
Christopher Wiacek1, Rodney Rudd1, Lauren A. Collins2

1
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
2
Alpha Technology Associate, Inc.
USA
11- 0380
ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION
The National Highway Traffic Safety Fatal crashes decreased by 9.9 percent from 2008 to
Administration’s (NHTSA) Vehicle Safety 2009, and the fatality rate on U.S. roads has dropped
Rulemaking and Research Priority Plan 2009 – 2011 to 1.13 per 100 million vehicle miles of travel. The
describes the projects the agency plans to work on in injury rate per 100 million vehicle miles of travel
the rulemaking and research areas in those calendar decreased 6.3 percent from the previous year as well
years. Specific programs identified in the plan [NHTSA, 2010]. While many factors contribute to
included research to improve vehicle safety for rear the reduction in the rate of injurious and fatal crashes,
seat occupants, children, and older people. improvements in occupant protection are likely
responsible for a sizeable portion of the long-term
In support of the priority plan, an analysis of real- reduction. Front-row occupant protection in frontal
world crash data was conducted to determine the crashes has benefited from recent developments in
nature of the crash problem and examine the factors restraint performance and vehicle crashworthiness,
that contribute to rear seat occupant injury, including which have been driven partly by manufacturers’
children and older people. A review of the National efforts to improve vehicle scores in consumer
Automotive Sampling System Crashworthiness Data information tests. Sherwood et al. reported in 2009
System (NASS-CDS) and Crash Injury Research and that 95% of the 2008 model year cars earned four or
Engineering Network (CIREN) case data was five stars in NHTSA’s New Car Assessment Program
conducted for restrained rear seat occupants in frontal and 91% earned the highest frontal crashworthiness
crashes that sustained an Abbreviated Injury Scale rating from the Insurance Institute for Highway
(AIS) 3+ injury in 1998 model year and newer Safety. While much of the improvement in
vehicles. For each occupant identified, a review of performance can be likely linked to improved frontal
the accompanying investigation was conducted using structures, the restraint systems for the occupants
a methodology similar to that described by Bean et tested in those programs have improved as well.
al. [2009]. The authors were then able to identify Kent et al. [2007] reported steadily increasing
occupant and crash characteristics associated with availability of seat belt pretensioner and force-
rear seat occupants commonly sustaining serious limiting mechanisms, which, at the time, were
injuries in frontal crashes. For each occupant, a nearing universal availability in the fleet. Since these
primary cause of the most severe injury was assigned advanced restraint technologies have typically been
and injury sources were identified. This review installed only in the first row, where their inclusion
suggests that in the absence of overly severe frontal helps to improve test scores, occupants in the rear
crash conditions and vulnerabilities due to advanced seating area have not seen the same benefits as their
age, properly belted adults and children in age- and front seat counterparts.
stature-appropriate child restraints are reasonably
well-protected in the rear seat, although Many recent studies have focused on the protection
improvements could be achieved in some cases. offered to rear seat occupants involved in frontal
crashes. Some of these studies have found that, for
some occupants, rear seating positions are associated
with higher injury and fatality risk than front row
Wiacek 1

seating positions. Earlier studies, such as that by maximum AIS 2+ (MAIS) injuries in vehicles from
Evans and Frick [1988], suggested that rear seat the 2000s model years compared to the 1990s,
occupants had 30 to 38 percent lower fatality risk although that risk was still lower than in the right
compared to front seat occupants. When occupant front seat. Further investigating the effects of model
age was considered, Kuppa et al. [2005] found that year on rear seat occupant protection, Sahraei et al.
occupants younger than 50 years of age were more [2009] performed logistic regression analysis on
protected in the rear seat, but those above 50 years of NASS-CDS data and found that newer model year
age saw greater protection in the front seat. That vehicles were associated with a significantly higher
same study included an analysis of frontal barrier AIS 2+ injury risk for belted rear seat occupants.
crash data, which indicated that the rear seat Similar to some of their earlier work, Sahraei et al.
dummies in 2004 model year vehicles experienced [2010] conducted an analysis of model year
higher head and neck injury measures compared to segregated by occupant age group using Fatality
the front seat dummies. An analysis of the 1991 Analysis Reporting System data. They found that the
through 1998 NASS-CDS by Parenteau and Viano relative effectiveness of the rear seat compared to the
[2003] identified teenage and adult occupants front has decreased for belted children (less than 8
restrained by a lap and shoulder belt in the rear years of age) and belted adults (25 years and older)
primarily experienced injuries of the thorax related to for the newer model years. None of the age groups
the shoulder belt. In a follow up study of the 1991 of belted occupants demonstrated significantly better
through 1999 NASS-CDS, Parenteau and Viano protection in the rear seats of newer vehicles, and of
[2003b] identified head and extremity injuries were note was a negative effectiveness for belted adult
the body regions with the most frequent serious occupants in the rear seat of newer vehicles.
injuries (AIS 3+) from interior contact for 4-12 year
old occupants in the rear restrained in a lap and The findings of several researchers presented above
shoulder belt. support further analysis of the rear seat occupant
environment and injury causation problem. Many
More recently, Kent et al. [2007] concluded that rear have concluded that improvements in the rear seat
seat occupants in newer vehicles were less effectively restraint environment would help to restore the rear
protected than front seat occupants, which they seat advantage for all age groups in frontal crashes.
attributed to a relative decline based on increased The work presented in this paper represents one of
effectiveness in the front seating positions due to the the steps necessary to more completely understand
inclusion of advanced restraints in the newer the frontal crash experience of rear seat occupants.
vehicles. Bilston et al. [2010] explored this further
by conducting a matched-cohort analysis of NASS- METHODOLOGY
CDS data to examine the relative risk of AIS 3+
Using a technique similar to Bean et al. [2009], a
injury in the rear seat compared to the front seat.
detailed review of real-world frontal crashes with
Their comparison divided the cases into vehicles of
restrained, seriously injured rear seat occupants was
model year 1990-1996 and 1997-2007, and found
conducted. The review focused on coded and non-
that there was a significant difference in the AIS 3+
coded data (photographs, summaries, crash diagrams,
injury risk based on the model year with less relative
etc.), and resulted in the identification of critical
protection in the rear seat of newer vehicles
factors contributing to the serious injuries of
compared to the front seat. The findings echoed
restrained rear seat occupants. The cases were
those from Kuppa et al. in 2005 that showed
selected from the NASS-CDS for the years 1997
differences based on whether the occupant is a child
through 2009 and the CIREN from 2000 to 2010.
or an adult over 50 years of age.
The following parameters were required for inclusion
Using NASS-CDS data to calculate trends in injury in the data set:
risk for rear seat occupants, Esfahani and Digges
[2009] found that belted and rear-seated adults
between 16 and 50 years of age had a higher risk of
Wiacek 2

 1998 and newer model year vehicles available in the case). For the purposes of this study,
 Frontal crash as primary injurious event out-of-position occupants wearing their seat belts
where the general area of damage (GAD) were still considered properly restrained.
and principle direction of force (PDOF)
o GAD1=’F’ Improperly restrained occupants were not in a
o GAD1=’R’ or ‘L’ and PDOF restraint that was age- and/or size-appropriate, or the
between 320 and 40 degrees restraint was installed and/or positioned improperly
 Restrained rear seat (row 2 or higher) during the event. Lap and shoulder belts, if used,
occupants may have been positioned improperly. An incorrect
o Lap and shoulder belts CRS based on the age and/or size of the child may
o Child restraints have been used, or a child restraint, if one would
 AIS level 3+ injury sustained have been appropriate, may not have been used at all.
Figure 1 demonstrates the age and restraint condition
Fifty occupants in 45 vehicles were included in the distribution for the 79 total cases in the combined
final NASS-CDS data set. There were 29 occupants NASS-CDS and CIREN data set.
in 27 vehicles included in the final CIREN data set.
For the NASS-CDS years examined, there were Improperly Restrained Properly Restrained
approximately 2,000 restrained rear seat occupants 8
involved in frontal crashes prior to restricting the data 7
Count of Occupants
set to only those occupants who sustained an AIS 3+ 6
injury. Injured rear seat occupants included both 5
sexes and affected a wide range of ages. The data 4
was divided by age into occupants twelve years of 3
age and under and those over twelve years of age. It 2
was then determined whether the occupant was in an 1
appropriate restraint condition for his or her stature
0
and age. In effect, the data was divided into the
following four major groups:
Occupant Age
 12 and under, properly restrained

 12 and under, improperly restrained
Figure 1. Age and restraint condition distribution
 Over 12, properly restrained for the combined NASS-CDS and CIREN data
 Over 12, improperly restrained sets.
For ease of discussion, occupants 12 and under will The cases were then divided amongst the authors,
be referred to as “children” while those over the age who then summarized each case using a standard
of twelve are designated “adults.” format. The authors then assessed the primary and, if
applicable, secondary factors associated with the
In order to be classified as properly restrained, the
MAIS injury sustained by the rear seat occupant.
occupant had to be in an age- and size-appropriate
The distinction between primary and secondary
restraint that was installed and/or positioned properly
factors is similar to what was described by Rudd et
during the event. Proper restraint for adult occupants
al. [2009].
meant a lap-and-shoulder belt was used and
positioned properly. Proper restraint for child The following section provides descriptions of the
occupants was assessed according to NHTSA’s Car factors associated with injury causation assigned to
Seat Recommendations for Children [NHTSA, the rear seat occupants in this data set:
2011a] along with the age, height, and weight
guidelines set forth by the manufacturer of the child Improper restraint system used: The restraint
restraint system being used (if that information was system (seat belt, child restraint, or combination
Wiacek 3

thereof) was not able to provide adequate protection  If known, the estimated delta-V crash for
for the occupant due to occupant size and restraint this crash was very high (over 64 km/h) and
mismatch, incorrect belt routing, or other factors that it is not likely the occupant could ride down
interfered with the as-designed performance of the crash forces and survive in the time and
restraint. The type and severity of the occupant’s space available,
injuries were directly associated with being improper  All front seat belted occupants sustained
restrainet. incapacitating injuries or fatalities, and
 The occupant compartment at the position in
Gross CRS misuse: Particular misuse of the child
question was compromised due to extensive
restraint is likely to result in injury to the occupant if
intrusion.
involved in a crash [Decina, 2005]. Due to the
general nature of field data collection, “critical” or Cases classified in this way were expected to be
“gross CRS misuse” was only attributed as a cause of certain to produce moderate to severe injury even for
injury in the most obvious of documented cases, and a restrained rear occupant. All of the rear seat
only when the restraint was appropriate for the child. occupants in crashes classified as exceedingly severe
For the purposes of this study, child restraints that sustained fatal injuries.
were inappropriate for their occupant based on
recommended best practices for child passenger Contact with another occupant: The primary
safety did not fall under the designation of “gross source of the occupant’s severe injury was from
misuse” but were simply categorized as “improper contact with another occupant (restrained or
restraint.” unrestrained) in the vehicle.
High velocity change (delta-V): The deceleration Interior contact: The severe injury was
of the vehicle during the event was of a severity that sustained due to contact with hard interior surfaces
was believed to result in a delta-V near to or greater adjacent to the occupant’s seating position. In most
than the 56 km/h frontal impact test speeds in cases, the direction and/or magnitude of the crash
NHTSA’s Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard forces produced an occupant trajectory that resulted
No. 208 and the New Car Assessment Program in contact with hard interior surfaces that led to
consumer information program. There were no serious injury. In others, this was due to occupant
fatalities primarily attributed to high delta-Vs in this stature with respect to the rear compartment space.
data set.
Rear compartment intrusion: Severe intrusion
It should be noted that in many cases the delta-V was occurred at the occupant’s seating position leading to
not estimated or the WinSMASH delta-V estimate a reduction in ride-down space. These cases were
was considered unreliable or underestimated due to occasionally characterized by restrained (and in
the offset nature of the crash. In these cases, the certain cases, unrestrained) occupants in other vehicle
barrier equivalent speed, crush measures, occupant seating locations sustaining minor or no injuries.
compartment intrusion values and photos were used
as a surrogate to estimate the severity of the crash. Occupant out of position: The coding or
This method is consistent with Niehoff [2006]. The narrative in the case indicated that the occupant was
authors investigated the accuracy of WinSMASH as a not in a normal, upright seating position at the time of
function of crash mode, vehicle type, and vehicle the event, and likely would not have sustained the
stiffness and concluded WinSMASH underestimated same type or level of injury had they been seated
longitudinal delta-V by 29 percent for crashes with a properly during the crash.
frontal overlap less than 50 percent.
Cargo intrusion: The primary source of injury
Exceedingly severe: Similar to the description was attributed to cargo intrusion into the rear seat as
provided in Rudd et al. [2009], exceedingly severe a result of being improperly secured in the trunk or
crashes are those that meet any of the following: cargo area of a vehicle.
Wiacek 4

Vulnerable occupant: The occupant was thought Table 1.
to be at higher risk of injury based on their elevated Causes of Injury to Properly Restrained
age or poor health condition. There was no specific Occupants 12 and Under
minimum age for this factor, though typically these Cause Primary Secondary
occupants were over the age of 65. These occupants’ High delta-V 8 2
injury patterns and severities were more extensive Interior contact 7 1
than what would be expected with a younger Exceedingly severe 2 0
occupant in similar crash conditions. Cargo intrusion 1 0
Occupant out of position 1 0
Given the case-review nature of this work, the Rear compartment
NASS-CDS and CIREN cases have been combined intrusion 1 0
for analysis and presentation purposes. No statistical Undetermined 4 0
analyses have been performed on the combined data, Total 24 3
and no assessment of injury risk can be performed
since case weights were not used.
The two most frequently occurring sources of injury
RESULTS in the properly restrained child occupants was the
belt restraint and the front seat back support. In
The cases were grouped by age and whether the general, abdomen and torso injuries were associated
occupant was properly or improperly restrained at the with the belt restraint and head and extremity injuries
time of the crash. For each grouping, the frequency were associated with the back of the front seats. The
of the primary and secondary causes of the injuries is third most common source of injury was induced
tallied and presented below. tension due to torso restraint, which is when the head
pulls on the cervical spine and restrained torso due to
Occupants 12 and Under deceleration and produces injurious tension and
flexion. Injuries due to this mechanism are coded
Of the 79 occupants involved in the study, 24 differently in CDS and CIREN, but have been
involved children that were properly restrained
(Table 1). The most frequently occurring cause of combined for this study. CDS lists the source as
severe injuries was attributed to a high delta-V crash. “Other noncontact injury,” though there is a contact
There were four cases where none of the factors between the occupant’s torso and the restraint that
stood out, and the primary cause was listed as leads to the injury. CIREN codes the belt as the
undetermined based on all of the available evidence. injury producing component acting on the thorax, and
These four occupants sustained primarily abdominal specifies the tension mechanism in the cervical spine
injuries, but there were no reasons to expect improper
caused by the inertial loading from the head. This
restraint use resulting in poor belt fit or increased risk
due to crash severity. A full assessment summary for mechanism is more common in higher delta-V
each case reviewed in the study is available in the crashes. It should be noted that if there was evidence
Appendix including the type of restraint in use such suggesting the source of the injury was different from
as lap and should belt, forward facing child seat or what was coded in the investigation, the authors
booster seat. reassessed the source of injury for that case.
Wiacek 5

Table 2. neck injuries, though, as with the properly restrained
Source of Primary Injury to Properly Restrained children, extremity injuries occurred as well.
Occupants 12 and Under
Source of Primary Injury No. of Cases Table 4.
Belt restraint webbing/buckle 8 Source of Primary Injury to Improperly
Seat back support 8 Restrained Occupants 12 and Under
Induced tension due to torso Source of Primary Injury No. of Injuries
restraint 5 Seat back support 8
Undercarriage 1 Belt restraint webbing/buckle 5
Unknown 1 Hardware or armrest 2
Unknown (likely driver’s seat
B-pillar 1
encroachment) 1
CRS 1
Total 24
Ground 1
There were 21 children classified as improperly Other occupants 1
Interior surface, excluding
restrained. The most frequently occurring cause of
hardware or armrest 1
injury for improperly restrained children was an
Floor or front center console 1
improper child restraint system being used (according
Total 21
to NHTSA’s 4 Steps for Kids campaign). For older
children, the vehicle seat belt may have been worn For presentation purposes, Figure 2 combines data
incorrectly (Table 3). Of interest, an improper
for the properly and improperly restrained children
restraint system being used was also determined to be 12 and younger by primary injury cause and body
a secondary cause of injury in six cases. In three
region experiencing most severe injury. The data
cases it was assessed that the child seat was shows that the extremities are the most frequent
incorrectly installed. maximum injured body region for children, occurring
in 16 of the 45. Extremity injuries were typically
Table 3. associated with interior contact. Head injuries were
Causes of Injury to Improperly Restrained the most significant injury for 11 of the child
Occupants 12 and Under occupants, and occurred most often in crashes where
Cause Primary Secondary the primary cause was improper restraint system
Improper restraint system 12 6 used; they also occurred in cases of CRS misuse and
Gross CRS misuse 3 0 in exceedingly severe crashes.
Rear compartment
intrusion 2 0
Interior contact 1 4
Cargo intrusion 1 0
Contact with another
occupant 1 0
Occupant out of position 1 0
High delta-V 0 3
Total 21 13
The seat back support (i.e., the front seat back) was
attributed as the primary source of injury for eight
occupants (Table 4). In most cases, the occupant was
not properly restrained or in an improper child seat
and slipped out of the restraint system during the
crash, making contact with the seat back. In the
majority of the cases the occupant sustained head or
Wiacek 6

Abdomen Cervical Spine Chest
torso restraint are also caused by the belt restraint, the
Extremity Head Lower Spine
total number becomes 18. The right side door (three
cases) along with various other hard contact points
9
Number of MAIS 3+ Injuries
8 were also noted as injury sources.

7
6
5
Table 6.
4 Source of Primary Injury to Properly Restrained
3 Occupants Over 12
2
1 Source of Primary Injury No. of Injuries
0 Belt restraint webbing/buckle 16
Right side door 3
Induced tension due to torso
restraint 2
Seat back support 2
Fold down armrest left 1
Interior B-Pillar 1
Unknown 1
Figure 2. Injury Distribution by Primary Injury Total 26
Cause for All Occupants 12 and Under.
For improperly restrained adult occupants, the
Occupants Over 12
improper restraint condition was noted as the primary
Twenty-six adult occupants were in the properly factor in four cases and a high delta-V was attributed
restrained category. The most prominent factor as the cause in four of the eight cases reviewed
(present in ten of the cases) for adults who were (Table 7). In three of the cases, an improper restraint
properly restrained, was occupant vulnerability due to system was the secondary cause of the injury.
elevated age (Table 5). Crash severity (seven cases)
and interior contact (five cases) were also common Table 7.
factors. It should be noted that high delta-V was Causes of Injury to Improperly Restrained
identified as a secondary contributory factor to injury Occupants Over 12
in four cases. Cause Primary Secondary
Improper restraint 4 3
Table 5. system used
Causes of Injury to Properly Restrained High delta-V 4 1
Occupants Over 12 Interior contact 0 1
Vulnerable occupant 0 1
Cause Primary Secondary Total 8 6
Vulnerable occupant 10 1
High delta-V 7 4
Interior contact 5 0 For improperly restrained occupants, the source of
Rear compartment intrusion 2 0 the injury was attributed to the restraint system in
Exceedingly severe 1 0 five cases (Table 8). As further discussed in the
Occupant out-of-position 1 0 paper, generally these were high delta-V crashes
Cargo intrusion 0 3 associated with injuries exclusive to the abdomen
Total 26 8 from the lap belt portion of the belt system.
For the properly restrained category, the restraint

system itself was the most frequent source of the
severe injuries, in 16 of the 26 cases (Table 6).
Considering that induced tension injuries due to the
Wiacek 7

Table 8. that were found in the combined NASS-CDS and
Source of Primary Injury to Improperly CIREN data set.
Restrained Occupants Over 12
Improper Restraint
Source of Injury No. of Injuries
Belt restraint webbing/buckle 5 Though this data set was limited to restrained
Seat back support 3 occupants, closer inspection revealed that the coded
Total 8 restraint status for some of the occupants did not
reflect their actual status at the time of the crash.
For presentation purposes Figure 3 combines the data This was especially the case with occupants twelve
for the properly and improperly restrained adults by and under: 21 out of 45 had their injuries attributed to
primary injury cause and injured body region. The being improperly restrained in some way. Premature
most injured body region was the chest with fourteen graduation, as discussed in NHTSA [2001], was
cases; eight of those were related to occupant responsible for 18 of these 21 cases, while the
vulnerability. The second most common cause of remaining three were attributed to gross misuse of the
chest injury was a high delta-V crash. In six cases, child restraint. The most common type of premature
the occupant sustained abdominal injuries because of graduation was booster-aged children being
a high delta-V crash or being improperly restrained. restrained only by the vehicle seat belt (as
Interior contact was primarily responsible for the demonstrated in CDS case 2000-13-222 or CIREN
extremity injuries. The findings are consistent with 286006919).
Parenteau and Viano [2003].
The most common serious injuries for improperly
Abdomen Cervical Spine Chest restrained children were brain injuries, which
Extremity Head Lower Spine occurred in seven of the 21 cases where the children
9 were improperly restrained. Two of the properly
Number of MAIS 3+ Injuries
8
7 restrained children sustained severe head injury, but
6 they were in what was considered exceedingly severe
5
4 crashes. In addition, a skull fracture and a facial
3 fracture were also observed for improperly restrained
2
1 children. The next most common injury for
0 improperly restrained children were extremity
fractures. These findings are also consistent with
Paranteau [2003].
Of the three cases of injury assigned to gross CRS

misuse, two of these children were seated in child
restraints secured by a seat belt whose retractor was
never properly locked. The third child in question
Figure 3. Injury Distribution by Primary Injury
(CDS No. 2006-12-161) was an infant restrained
Cause for All Occupants Over 12.
rear-facing (RF) in an infant-style CRS that did not
DISCUSSION receive the proper recall repair (per NHTSA recall
No. 03C005000). The carrier separated from the base
The objective of this study was to identify specific without this repair in place. The child was
factors that lead to injuries for restrained rear seat subsequently ejected from the vehicle and sustained
occupants in frontal crashes in order to better fatal injuries.
understand some of the recent statistical analyses that
have suggested decreased protection in the second Improper restraint was also observed for seven of the
and third rows of newer vehicles. The following 34 adult occupants. For teenagers and adults,
sections offer insight to some of the specific issues improper positioning of the vehicle seat belt was
considered as such, if at the time of the event the
Wiacek 8

harness was not worn properly across the chest or Tethers for Children (LATCH) installed CRS in this
there was potential slack in the shoulder harness. data set. This may be due to the relatively recent
Though poor belt fitment or discomfort due to introduction of the system in vehicles and on CRS, or
restraint routing geometry is usually thought of as a it also may be a real-world indicator that there is a
problem for smaller-statured occupants, individuals reduced chance of gross misuse with LATCH
of a wide range of ages and statures were noted installations and therefore reduced chances of
placing the shoulder belt portion under their arm or serious injuries occurring [Decina, 2006].
allowing the lap belt to sit too high on their abdomen
(CDS No. 2009-11-113). Furthermore, slack in the Booster-aged children in seat belts alone:
shoulder harness may allow the occupant to slip out Though not recommended by NHTSA or other child
of the shoulder harness and sustain abdominal passenger safety groups, the small number of fatal
injuries from the lap belt especially in oblique or injuries seen in this data set for children of booster
offset frontal impacts (CDS No. 2008-75-08). age may be evidence that lap and shoulder belts have
Although it cannot be conclusively determined from the ability to offer some protection to children who
the data, the seated posture of the occupant at the would be best restrained by a booster seat. This is
time of the crash event may have contributed to the encouraging given that children between the ages of
inadequate restraint of the upper body. Generally, four and seven are only using booster seats and other
these occupants sustained either abdominal injuries CRS 55 percent of the time, with another 32 percent
from the lap portion of the restraint or cervical spine using seat belts only and thirteen percent completely
injuries from impacting the front seat back because unrestrained [NHTSA, 2010]. The children in this
the upper torso was not properly used. study that had prematurely graduated out of a booster
seat typically sustained abdomen injuries due to poor
As a result of improper positioning or seat belt lap belt fit and interaction with the pelvis.
misuse during the event, injuries to both children and
adults occurred. When improper seat belt positioning Child passenger safety best practices: There
was observed in this data set, occupants may have was one case in this data set (CDS No. 2007-12-122)
sustained more serious injuries than if their seat belt where two properly restrained children in the same
had been positioned correctly, and especially vehicle suffered tension-based spinal injuries due to
experienced a high frequency of injuries to the soft restraint of the torso and motion of the head. For
tissues and organs of the lower abdomen. Improper each occupant, there is the possibility that they may
positioning or intentional misuse of the shoulder belt not have experienced these injuries had they been in
portion of the seat belt puts a greater reliance on the more “optimal” restraints. In the left rear seat of the
lap belt to distribute loading, hence the propagation vehicle in question (a 2006 Dodge Caravan), a 11 kg
of injury to the areas of the body the lap belt covers. (24 lb), 86 cm (34”) tall 18 month-old female was
Occupants improperly using the shoulder belt also properly restrained in a forward-facing convertible
rarely sustained even minor upper torso injuries. The seat, but suffered an AIS 3 cervical spine fracture
injury patterns were also similar to those occupants in attributed to a high delta-V. Though she met the
a vehicle equipped with a lap only belt [Paranteau minimum requirements to ride forward facing, she
2003b]. It is a reasonable assumption that if their would likely have benefitted from remaining rear-
seat belts were positioned properly, their injury facing in that convertible, as NHTSA’s Car Seat
patterns would have been different, even if they Recommendations for Children state, “[c]onvertible
eventually sustained similar levels of injury. and 3-in-1 car seats typically have higher height and
weight limits for the rear-facing position, allowing
Poorly installed CRS: Given known rates of you to keep your child rear-facing for a longer period
poor CRS installation at 72.6 percent [Decina, 2005], of time.” Though the make and model of her CRS
this data implies that CRS being installed with minor was unknown, according to NHTSA (Ease of Use
misuses are still offering some level of protection to Ratings, 2011) the majority of convertibles in the
children. It is also of interest to note that there were U.S. market would have continued to accommodate a
only three cases containing a Lower Anchors and child of her size rear-facing for some time.
Wiacek 9

In the right rear of the same vehicle, a 109 cm (43”), Vulnerable Occupants
20 kg (44 lb) three year-old male was restrained in a
booster of unknown make and model and similarly Twelve of the 34 adult occupants in this data set
suffered an AIS 3 cervical spine fracture. By most experienced injury due in some way to physical
recommended child passenger safety best practices, vulnerabilities as a result of age. They included eight
he was too young for a booster seat; however, it is women and four men, and ranged in age from 64 to
possible that he met the height and weight 86 years. Eleven were properly restrained, and most
requirements of the booster seat he was using. He sustained their highest AIS injury as a result of seat
would likely have benefitted from being restrained in belt loading on the thorax, which led to rib fractures,
a five-point harness and may not have suffered the lung contusions, other thoracic cavity injuries, and in
cervical spinal fracture if he had been. three cases fatal heart lacerations. The two CIREN
cases in which occupant vulnerability was a primary
Another similar case, CIREN 286037005, was a cause involved occupants who had been clinically
crash with a two year-old female seated in a five- diagnosed with osteoporosis, which was a critical
point harness forward-facing seat who was 97 cm factor in their injury. Of the five fatalities to adult
(38”) tall and 14 kg (31 lb). Next to her, in the right occupants observed in this data set, four were
seat position, was a three year-old male of 104 cm attributed directly to the occupant’s vulnerability and
(41”) height weighing 17 kg (37 lb) seated also in a the fifth was to a 75 year old female in an
five-point harness forward-facing seat (CIREN No. exceedingly severe crash due to the intrusion (CDS
286036859). She sustained upper cervical spine No. 2001-73-141). It should be noted that there was
fractures and dislocations in a moderate severity a 22 year old male seated next to the 75 year old
crash, while the three year-old male in the next seat female who sustained abdominal injuries sourced to
sustained only upper extremity fractures due to front improper restraint. This occupant was not exposed to
seat back contact. Her tension-related neck injury the significant intrusion and for his position the event
may have been prevented had she been seated rear- was not considered exceedingly severe. CDS case
facing (as long as her CRS could have 2004-3-096 was fairly benign, with an estimated 32
accommodated her). km/h (20 mph) delta-V; however, the 72 year-old rear
seat occupant sustained fatal thoracic injuries sourced
Interior Contact to the seat belt. CDS case 2007-08-118 is another
example where the risk of injury to older rear seat
Another common cause of injury in both the child
occupants is seen. Though the event was relatively
and adult cases was interior contact. The cases in this
severe, with an estimated 53 km/h (33 mph) delta-V,
study demonstrate that the most common maximum
the front seat occupants suffered moderate belt-
injuries for restrained occupants 12 and under were
related injuries while the 86 year-old occupant in the
upper and lower extremity fractures, most commonly
right rear sustained a fatal heart laceration along with
sourced to the seat back. As demonstrated in
numerous rib fractures, a basilar skull fracture, and
Parenteau [2003], the majority of injuries to properly
brain injuries. This occupant’s chest, because of age-
restrained (lap-shoulder belted) children in the rear
related vulnerabilities, was not able to handle the
seat are upper and lower extremity injuries.
severe loading from the shoulder belt. The elevated
Properly restrained adults also sustained injuries due risk for older occupants in the front versus the rear
to interior contact, with four sustaining extremity seat has been documented in many recent
fractures associated with seat back or door panel studies[Kuppa et al., 2005; Sahraei et al., 2010;
contact. Though the extremity injuries seen in this Bilston et al., 2010] and the review of these field
study are AIS 3, many of the occupants sustaining crashes affirms those findings.
these injuries were not injured significantly
Efforts to address the increased risk to vulnerable
otherwise. Given that the restraint of extremities is
occupants in all seating positions are underway and
difficult in the rear seat environment, efforts to
further justified by these findings. Based on the
address the stiffness of various contact points may
earlier findings in the statistical analyses by Kuppa et
help to ameliorate some of these injuries.
Wiacek 10

al. [2007] and Sahraei et al. [2010], there may be a child occupants, and the severity levels of these
need to encourage older, and potentially more crashes were not believed to be high. CIREN cases
vulnerable, adult occupants to occupy first row seats 286000006 and 608090285 involved ten year-old
whenever possible so they may benefit from features males wearing the three-point lap and shoulder belt
of advanced restraint systems. (both were at or above the recommended height of
145 cm for graduation out of a booster) who
High Delta-V and Exceedingly Severity Crashes sustained abdominal injuries attributed to the lap belt.
CIREN cases 377037363 and 608063219 involved
Twenty-nine of the 79 rear seat occupants’ maximum
four and five year-old females who were properly
injuries were due either primarily or secondarily to a
restrained in booster seats. CIREN case 377037363
high level of compartment deceleration during the
was borderline high severity in an underride
crash, which was based on delta-V or crush. Five
situation, but the restrained driver sustained very
were sourced to intrusion of the rear seat
minor injuries while the booster-seated four year-old
compartment at the occupant’s location, which
female sustained multiple rib fractures and lung
caused injury due to a reduction in the occupant’s
contusions from belt loading. CIREN case
ride-down space. Another three were deemed
608063219 involved a five year-old female who
exceedingly severe, or close to unsurvivable as was
sustained a bladder rupture in a very minor crash in
described by Bean et al. [2009].
which all of the other properly restrained occupants
Due to limitations associated with comparing delta-V were not injured. She exhibited abrasions over her
in field crashes to those in laboratory tests, the extent waistline from lap belt contact. The CIREN center
to which some of these crashes were more severe noted that the belt fit may have been sub-optimal, but
than consumer information or regulatory tests could the child was in an appropriate restraint. Regardless,
not be determined. The crashes in which occupant these four cases suggest that even properly restrained
injuries were attributed to a high delta-V were children in moderate severity crashes are sustaining
potentially of a similar severity as that present in injuries due to the restraints.
NCAP or IIHS frontal tests. There is potential for
CONCLUSION
rear occupant crash protection improvements in some
of these crashes, since some of them had front Given the relatively large number of occupants
occupants who sustained less severe injuries. The injured as a result of perceived improper restraint use,
injuries in these crashes were typically sourced to the there is a potential need to reinforce NHTSA’s CRS
belt restraint, suggesting that attention should be paid use recommendations as well as increase awareness
to fit or energy management of rear seat belts in order of proper belt use by adults seated in the rear seat.
to increase rear occupant protection. While proper restraint use may not have protected the
occupant from all injuries, the conditions of the cases
Exceedingly severe crashes where properly restrained
in this study did suggest that many of the injuries
rear seat occupants suffer a fatality are likely to show
were directly related to a failure to use the restraint
corresponding front seat fatalities. For example, the
system appropriately.
rear seat injuries in CDS case 2002-12-186 were
attributed to the exceedingly severe nature of the Of the adult occupants in this dataset, physical
crash. In this case, all three occupants (driver, right vulnerabilities due to advanced age were responsible
front passenger, and right rear passenger) sustained for a large number of the major injuries. Injuries
fatal injuries. from interior contact, typically involving the
extremities, were also common when crash severity
Undetermined Cause
was not considered an issue. The majority of the
A few of the cases included in this study did not remaining adult cases were attributed to crash
exhibit any of the other factors previously discussed, severity, which was considered high enough that the
and were therefore not categorized with the other level of injury sustained was not unexpected. Many
cases. All of the cases involved properly restrained
Wiacek 11

children were also considered to be injured due to Esfahani, E.S. and Digges, K. (2009) “Trend of rear
high delta-V and exceedingly severe crashes. occupant protection in frontal crashes over model
years of vehicles.” SAE World Congress, paper no.
While many of the crashes were considered to be a 2009-01-0377.
higher severity, this does not, however, suggest there
is no room for improvement in the area of rear seat Evans, L. and Frick, M. (1988) “Seating position in
occupant protection. As suggested by the data shown cars and fatality risk.” American Journal of Public
by prior researchers, the relative protection in the rear Health, 78(11), 1456-1458.
seat has decreased in newer model year vehicles.
Furthermore, there is concern that as vehicle front Kent, R., Forman, J. Parent, D.P and Kuppa, S.
structures become stiffer to manage intrusion in the (2007) “Rear seat occupant protection in frontal
occupant compartment, the vehicle crash pulse will crashes and its feasibility.” 20th International
also increase in magnitude. This may increase the Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of
risk of serious injury to rear seat occupants whose Vehicles, paper 07-0386.
primary protection is only the seat belt. Incorporation
Kuppa, S., Saunders, J. and Fessahaie, O. (2005)
of enhanced occupant energy management features to
“Rear seat occupant protection in frontal crashes.”
improve ride-down and better distribute the loading
19th International Technical Conference on the
across the chest, along with improved fitment of the
Enhanced Safety of Vehicles, paper 05-212.
restraints to reduce slack and improved belt
positioning across the torso, may have mitigated the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
serious injury sustained by some of the occupants in (2001) Premature Graduation of Children to Seat
these crashes. Belts. Traffic Tech: Technology Transfer Series,
Number 253, Washington, DC.

REFERENCES
(2010) The 2009 National Survey of the Use of
75FR70670, Docket NHTSA-2009-0108 Booster Seats. DOT HS 811 377 National Center for
Statistics and Analysis, Washington, DC.
Bean James D., et al. (2009) Fatalities in Frontal
Crashes Despite Seat Belts and Air Bags. DOT HS National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
811 202, National Highway Traffic Safety (2010) “Traffic Safety Facts – Early Edition.” DOT
Administration, Washington, DC. HS 811 402.
Bilston, L.E., et al. (2010) “A matched-cohort
analysis of belted front and rear seat occupant in
newer and older model vehicles shows that gains in (2011a) Car Seat Recommendations for Children,
front occupant safety have outpaced gains for rear http://www.nhtsa.gov/Safety/CPS. Accessed March
seat occupants.” Accident Analysis and Prevention, 22, 2011.
doi:10.1016/j.aap.2010.06.002.
Decina L.E., et al. (2005) Misuse of Child Restraints: (2011b) Ease-of-Use Ratings,
Results of a Workshop to Review Field Data Results. http://www.nhtsa.gov/Safety/Ease-of-Use. Accessed
DOT HS 809 851, National Highway Traffic Safety January 6, 2011.
Administration, Washington, DC.
Niehoff, P., & Gabler, H. (2006). The Accuracy of
Decina, L.E., et al. (2006) Child Restraint Use WinSMASH Delta-V Estimates: The Influence of
Survey: LATCH Use and Misuse. DOT HS 810 679, Vehicle Type, Stiffness, and Impact Mode. Paper No.
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 06B-306, Society of Automotive Engineers,
Washinton, DC. Warrendale, PA.
Wiacek 12

Parenteau, C. and Viano, D.C. (2003a) “Field Sahraei, E., Soudbakhsh, D. and Digges, K. (2009)
Analysis of Rear Occupant Injuries Part I: Adults and “Protection of rear seat occupants in frontal crashes,
Teenagers.” SAE World Congress, paper no. 2003- controlling for occupant and crash characteristics.”
01-153. Stapp Car Crash Journal, vol. 53, pp. 75-91.
Parenteau, C. and Viano, D.C. (2003b) “Field Sahraei, E., Digges, K. and Marzougui, D. (2010)
Analysis of Rear Occupant Injuries Part II: Children, “Reduced protection for belted occupants in rear
Toddlers, and Infants.” SAE World Congress, paper seats relative to front seats of new model year
no. 2003-01-154. vehicles.” Annals of Advances in Automotive
Medicine, vol. 54.
Rudd, R.W., Bean, J., Cuentas, C., Kahane, C.J.,
Mynatt, M. and Wiacek, C. (2009) “A Study of the Sherwood, C.P., Nolan, J.M. and Zuby, D.S. (2009)
factors affecting fatalities of air bag and belt- “Characteristics of small overlap crashes.” 21st
restrained occupants in frontal crashes.” 21st International Technical Conference on the Enhanced
International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles, paper 09-0423.
Safety of Vehicles, paper number 09-0555.
Wiacek 13

Appendix
PROPERLY RESTRAINED OCCUPANTS

CAUSE OF INJURY UNDER 12 OVER 12
Primary Secondary
 NASS 2007-75-146 (2L, UE, FF)  NASS 2000-12-086 (2R, AB)
Cargo intrusion
 NASS 2008-13-134 (2R, TH)
 CIREN 459042257 (2L, LS)
Primary Primary
Exceedingly severe  NASS 2000-11-130 (2L, H, RF)  2001-73-141 (2R, LS)
 NASS 2002-12-186 (2R, H, L&S)
Primary Primary
 NASS 2007-41-218 (2L, LE, RF)  NASS 2008-73-176 (2L, TH)
 NASS 2007-12-122 (2L, CS, FF)  NASS 2000-12-086 (2R, AB)
 NASS 2007-12-122 (2R, CS, B)  NASS 2004-43-036 (2R, TH)
 NASS 2008-13-222 (2R, TH, B)  CIREN 100121436 (2L, AB)
 CIREN 286037005 (2L, CS, FF)  CIREN 459042257 (2L, LS)
High severity delta-V  CIREN 554089295 (3L, AB, L&S)  CIREN 830069711 (2R, LS)
 CIREN 842003310 (2R, AB, L&S)  CIREN 852174467 (2L, TH)
 CIREN 842023821 (2C, CS, B) Secondary
Secondary  NASS 2000-12-091 (2R, TH)
 NASS 2006-12-161 (2L, LE, FF)  NASS 2009-81-70 (2C, TH)
 CIREN 286036859 (2R, UE, FF)  NASS 2006-48-261 (2L, CS)
 CIREN 591142661 (2L, AB)
Primary Primary
 NASS 2007-78-102 (2R, LE, B)  NASS 2002-43-095 (2R, UE)
 CIREN 160139577 (2L, UE, B)  NASS 2005-09-028 (2R, UE)
 CIREN 286008946 (2L, LE, FF)  NASS 2004-48-059 (2R, UE)
 CIREN 286035771 (2L, LE, B)  NASS 2003-75-031 (2L, TH)
Interior contact
 CIREN 286036859 (2R, UE, FF)  CIREN 551091328 (2R, UE)
 CIREN 558020414 (2L, LE, FF)
 CIREN 608042073 (2L,UE, FF)
Secondary
 NASS 2007-41-218 (2L, LE, RF)
Primary Primary
Occupant out of position
 NASS 2006-48-19 (2L, UE, FF)  CIREN 591142661 (2L, AB)
Primary Primary
Rear compartment intrusion  NASS 2006-12-161 (2L, LE, FF)  NASS 2005-02-011 (2L, H)
 NASS 2004-45-227 (2R, TH)
Primary
 CIREN 286000006 (2R, AB, L&S)
Undetermined  CIREN 377037363 (2L, TH, B)
 CIREN 608063219 (2C, AB, B)
 CIREN 608090285 (2R, AB, L&S)
Primary
 NASS 2009-82-163 (2L, TH)
 NASS 2000-12-091 (2R, TH)
 NASS 2004-03-096 (2L, TH)
 NASS 2009-81-70 (2C, TH)
 NASS 2006-48-261 (2L, CS)
Vulnerable occupant  NASS 1999-45-809 (2L, TH)
 NASS 2008-13-134 (2R, TH)
 NASS 2007-08-118 (2R, TH)
 CIREN 165428 (2L, CS)
 CIREN 591139732 (2R, TH)
Secondary
 CIREN 551091328 (2R, UE)
Wiacek 14

IMPROPERLY RESTRAINED OCCUPANTS
CAUSE OF INJURY UNDER 12 OVER 12
Primary
Cargo intrusion
 NASS 2006-12-070 (2R, H, L&S)
Primary
Contact with another occupant
 NASS 2004-79-188 (2L, TH, L&S)
Primary
 NASS 2006-12-161 (2L, H, RF)
Gross CRS misuse
 NASS 2001-04-065 (2L, H, FF)
 NASS 2005-48-125 (2L, H, B)
Secondary Primary
 NASS 2008-13-222 (2R, H, B)  NASS 2008-75-08 (2R, AB)
 NASS 2004-04-069 (2L, H, B)  NASS 2002-79-016 (2R, LS)
High severity delta-V  CIREN 591152151 (2R, AB, L&S)  NASS 2002-79-016 (2L, AB)
 NASS 2001-73-141 (2L, TH)
Secondary
 NASS 2000-81-053 (2L, AB)
Primary Primary
 NASS 2008-13-222 (2R, H, B)  NASS 2009-11-113 (2R, LS)
 NASS 2004-04-069 (2L, H, B)  NASS 2000-81-053 (2L, AB)
 NASS 1999-45-190 (2C, CS, L&S)  NASS 1999-73-062 (2L, LS)
 NASS 2000-13-222 (2L, AB, L&S)  CIREN 286020311 (2R, H)
 NASS 2002-43-127 (2L, H, L&S) Secondary
 NASS 2006-13-117 (2R, UE, L&S)  NASS 2008-75-08 (2R, AB)
 CIREN 286006919 (2R, AB, L&S)  NASS 2002-79-016 (2R, LS)
 CIREN 286016523 (2L, H, L&S)  NASS 2002-79-016 (2L, AB)
 CIREN 286021930 (2L, LE, L&S)
Improper restraint system
 CIREN 286021946 (2R, LE, L&S)
 CIREN 377044044 (2L, AB, B)
 CIREN 591152151 (2R, AB, L&S)
Secondary
 NASS 2000-12-157 (2R, LE, L&S)
 NASS 2004-79-188 (2L, TH, L&S)
 NASS 2002-78-151 (2R, H, L&S)
 NASS 2004-48-94 (2R, OS, L&S)
 NASS 2004-73-122 (2L, LE, L&S)
 NASS 2006-12-070 (2R, H, L&S)
Primary Secondary
 NASS 2000-12-157 (2R, LE, L&S)  CIREN 286020311 (2R, H)
Secondary
 NASS 2002-43-127 (2L, H. L&S)
Interior contact  CIREN 286016523 (2L, H, L&S)
 CIREN 286021930 (2L, LE, L&S)
 CIREN 286021946 (2R, LE, L&S)
Primary
Occupant out of position
 NASS 2004-48-94 (2R, LS, L&S)
Primary
Rear compartment intrusion  NASS 2002-78-151 (2R, H, L&S)
 NASS 2004-73-122 (2L, LE, L&S)
Secondary
Vulnerable occupant
 NASS 2001-73-141 (2L, TH)
2 - Second row, 3 - Third row, L – Left side position, C - Center position, R - Right side position, UE - Upper
extremity injury, H - Head injury, LE - Lower extremity injury, CS - Cervical spine injury, TH - Thorax injury
AB - Abdomen injury, LS - Lower spine injury, RF – Rear-facing restraint, FF – Forward-facing restraint, B –
Booster, L&S – Lap and shoulder
Wiacek 15

DEVELOPMENT OF A TEST TOOL TO ANALYSE AIRBAG INDUCED INJURIES
Arturo, Dávila
Mario, Nombela
IDIADA Automotive Technology SA
Spain
Paper number 11-0345
ABSTRACT To estimate the risk of auditory injury, a specially

designed dummy head made use of special
Currently, the airbag is the most important and microphones to measure the sound and pressure
effective restraint system available on the market. levels found in the cabin during airbag activation.
Nevertheless, its activation is related to some This head can be used both in static and dynamic
facial, ocular and auditory injuries. The principal tests.
objective of this project was to develop an
evaluation tool capable of predicting injuries to the For intoxication and skin abrasion injuries, a
face. protocol and a tool to measure the amount of toxic
gases released from the explosion of the airbag was
The project was designed because previous developed. In this particular case, the most relevant
research shows that the above-mentioned injuries toxic gases were selected and the adequate
occur under velocities that vary in the limits of instrumentation established for the development of
activation/no activation set by each manufacturer the test.
(ΔV < 48 km/h). The majority of these injuries
occur in frontal impacts where the interaction With the three elements combined, an overall
between driver and airbag is the greatest. evaluation on the severity of the airbag system to
be assessed can be made, allowing manufacturers
Furthermore, shorter occupants (<1.60 m) tend to and designers to create more effective yet non-
receive the most severe injuries due to their injurious systems.
proximity to the airbag. The most common injuries
are facial, ocular and skin abrasion. The noise The results of the project are in line with the
produced by an activating airbag is generally over proposed objectives, and the developed tools and
the safe limit for a person, and can cause permanent the protocols are good enough to provide a more
damage to the internal ear. The explosion is stringent evaluation of restraint systems and will
generated by the chemical reaction of gases that also help in research regarding injury mechanisms
may produce intoxication or skin injury. in various accident configurations.
Therefore, the first task of this project was to INTRODUCTION

evaluate the injury map related to airbag activation
in frontal impact, although other configurations Airbags, in spite of being perhaps the most
were considered. A revision of the state of the art effective safety restraint system in combination
and the direct relation with possible facial, ocular with the seat belt, are also associated with facial
and auditory injuries and intoxication was also and hearing injuries. They have been linked to
performed. The next task was to develop a set of numerous nonfatal injuries of different severities
testing procedures for the evaluation of the which include eye, face, upper extremities, aortic
established injuries that airbag deployment causes rupture, lung contusions and thoracic abdominal
to the occupants. To finalize, an assessment of the injuries. The most frequent are injuries to the head,
developed tools and protocols was made. including audition.
The project activities focussed on the development Research has shown that the injuries induced by the
of a measuring system designed to predict facial airbag deployment are mostly minor, although
and ocular injuries resulting from blunt impacts some occupants did suffer more serious injuries,
during contact with the airbag, estimating the risk according to the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS)
of suffering facial bone fractures or severe ocular (Otte, 1995). Nevertheless, the use of airbags has
injury. This was accomplished through a special led to an overall reduction in AIS 2+ injuries
mask that measures the pressure applied at specific (Kuhn, Morris and Witherspoon, 1995). Another
points of the head, such as nose tip, eyes, study conducted with European and Japanese
eyebrows, jaw, etc. airbag deployed vehicles (Morris, 1996) examined
186 frontal crashes, and the majority of the drivers
Dávila 1
sustained AIS 1 injuries, being the head and the most severe scenarios for serious injuries but
face the most commonly injured body region. From remains as an added system that, in certain cases,
the analysed injuries involving airbag deployment, can cause more damage than the damage it was
Kuhn, Morris and Witherspoon (1993) found that intended to avoid.
half of them were attributed to the airbag itself.
In this paper, three approaches to analyse injuries
One of the reasons for sustaining airbag induced caused by deploying airbags have been carried out:
injuries is the proximity of body regions to the the injuries to the face and eyes, the injuries to the
deploying airbag. Drivers who must sit close to the hearing system and the toxicity of the chemicals
steering wheel to drive because of their height or found in the cabin after airbag explosion. The
any medical reason are more susceptible to being objective was to develop a system that was able to
injured in case of accident. Sixteen of the 38 adult measure the amount of injury suffered by the
drivers whose deaths have been attributed to passengers in the case of an accident in the nearby
airbags were 160 cm tall or shorter, and all but one threshold of 50 km/h, where the effectiveness of
with fatal neck injuries were women. airbags is questioned due to the injury potential
they also represent. To achieve the objective, a
Adams and Petri (1996) have suggested that the special force measuring mask, a microphone
airbag induced injuries may be associated with adapted dummy head and a toxicity analysis
specific design features, such as the amount of procedure were evaluated.
released energy, the speed of inflation, the volume,
shape or folding pattern of the bag, etc. Also DEVELOPMENT
chemicals involved in inflating the bag have been
implicated in injuries, so as the utilized pyrotechnic Facial Injury Analysis
device. Some of the injuries come from the non-
deployment, spontaneous deployment, airbag slap Facial injury analysis was set to obtain the amount
and bottom out. of force or pressure that the occupant receives
when interacting with the airbag. By design, the
We can state that airbags have a net injurious effect airbag is intended to act as a cushion between the
when activated in low severity crashes whereas user’s head and upper chest and the steering wheel,
they have a net protective effect in high severity dashboard and other components. To achieve this, a
accidents, meaning that the generality of the very fast chemical reaction inflates the airbag in
provoked injuries arise from low severity collisions less than 50 milliseconds, time when the occupant
or misfire situations. Also, the crash severity level is about to reach the contact point with the airbag
at which airbags are protective is relatively higher and provide energy absorption of the user dynamic
for women than for men. movement. Generally, the energy exerted by the
airbag is in the same range as that of the user,
Vehicle speed at the time of the impact has been eliminating some of the negative effects on the
analyzed, showing that severe injuries such as user. In some cases, especially when the crash is
orbital fractures, traumatic cataract and vitreous or under 50 km/h and the airbag activates, the energy
retinal haemorrhage are found for speeds over 48 of the passenger is not enough to offset the energy
km/h. Meanwhile, below this velocity threshold, from the airbag, leading to face injuries.
other severe injuries occur such as retinal
detachment, ruptured globe, and worsened vision. In order to measure the amount of damage
In the case of hearing loss or auditory injury, the produced to the face of an occupant, a special vinyl
injurious mechanism is due to the elevated sound dummy mask was developed. This mask is
level of the explosion, the vehicle deformation and equipped with a series of force sensors that are
the pressure generated inside the cabin. These distributed throughout the face in specific locations
produce different effects inside the human ear, where injury can occur. The mask comes from a
which can translate into temporal loss of hearing or Hybrid III 50th percentile male dummy, which is
permanent ear damage. the most widely used crash test dummy in the
world for the evaluation of automotive safety
One important aspect to mention is that an airbag restraint systems in frontal crash testing. The
increases the amount of energy being released dummy is a regulated test device in the European
during an accident, which in turn increases the ECE regulations and in the US safety standards.
frequency of injuries sustained by the driver, yet The skull and cap of Hybrid III 50th percentile
they drastically reduce the probabilities of severe male dummy are one piece cast aluminium parts
and fatal injuries to the body. This means that an with removable vinyl skins. The head skin of the
airbag exerts distributed restraining forces over the dummy offers high bio-fidelity with its
head, face and upper chest region of the passenger, anthropomorphic structure.
acting as a cushioning system and minimizing the
Dávila 2
To develop and improve the prototype, the required face, since all the dynamic energy of the test is
instrumentation had to comply with certain criteria, eliminated from the system. The system was tested
such as reliability, robustness, repeatability, ease of and evaluated for correct functionality, with
mounting, time response and functionality. All of admissible levels of repeatability and
these capable of being mounted over a vinyl reproducibility.
dummy skin. The time response of the sensor was
of special importance since the airbag inflates and The test was carried out with the dummy having a
starts deflating in about 0.2 seconds after the 20º incline to the front, achieving a close to the
impact. For this task, Flexiforce sensors were steering wheel position. This is required because
selected because they can measure both static and the airbag volume is designed to fit between the
dynamic forces of up to 4500 N and are thin dummy and the steering wheel, and without any
enough to enable non-intrusive measurement. The dynamic activity, it would not contact the dummy
sensors do not interfere with the dummy head face at all. With this inclined position, the airbag
profile and bio-fidelity. They use a resistive-based has full face contact at mid distance.
technology in which resistance is inversely
proportional to applied force. Their flexibility
enables them to be placed on non-planar surfaces
such as a dummy face. The sensing area is a circle
with a diameter of 9.53 mm, which is very
adequate for positioning on critical points for
precise measurement.
Figure 2. Dummy positioning.

Figure 1. Modified dummy mask.
To validate the prototype and the latter evaluation

of facial damage, three types of tests were
established:
• Static tests with airbag deployment

• Dynamic tests on sled using UNECE 16
Standard pulse
• Full vehicle dynamic test (Full frontal
with rigid barrier at 50 km/h)
To carry out all the tests, the same model of airbag

was used. In this way a greater homogeneity and
representativity of the tests and the performance is
achieved. The selected airbag has the following
characteristics:
• Airbag: Driver airbag.

• Vent hole diameter: 25 mm. Figure 3. Static test results.
• Series mounted
The results from these tests show the mask
Static tests The main objectives of the static functionality and are a base measurement for the
tests were to verify that the mask and the sensors airbag forces. The signals shown in the graphs are
were working correctly and to obtain a basic the ones obtained from the mask sensors. The
reference value of the force exerted on the dummy larger curves are the ones for the sensors located in
Dávila 3
the most critical zones, that is, the front and centre not available, then it should be fully
of the face. With this test, we could be able to retracted.
know the damage caused exclusively by the • The seat arms will be set to their
exploding airbag. functional position, as long as they allow
for correct dummy positioning.
Dynamic tests The next step was to perform • The seat belt will be set according to the
dynamic tests using a sled. The main objectives manufacturer.
were to obtain the forces received on the face with
a typical accident pulse and to be able to analyse Dummy positioning The dummy must be
the possible injuries caused. The tests were seated according to the EuroNCAP test protocols
performed according to the following criteria: for frontal impact.
• Type of test: Frontal impact

• Velocity: 50 ± 1 km/h
• Pulse: Standard UNECE 16
The required instrumentation to carry out these

tests can be classified into three groups: mask,
dummy and sled.
Mask instrumentation The mask is made out

of 18 load cells. When installing the mask on the
dummy, these cells are located on different points
where the most typical injuries occur.
Dummy instrumentation The dummy

instrumentation is comprised of three
accelerometers located on the head’s centre of Figure 4. Sled test positioning.
gravity, one for each direction X, Y and Z.
Sled instrumentation The sled includes two

accelerometers installed in the X direction
(redundancy)
Prior to carrying out the test, the dummy must be

correctly positioned. For this reason, a number of
requirements for seating the dummy were
established. This allows having a reference initial
position in all the tests.
Seat position
• The seat must be located in mid position.

In case there are no position slots at the
mid point, the seat should be located in the
slot immediately after.
• The seat must be in the lowest position.
• The seat back may be located according to
the manufacturer. If such requirement is Figure 5. Sled test results.
not available, the seat back must be
reclined 25º to the back with respect to the
vertical line.
• The headrest will be in the highest
possible position.
• The headrest angle may be set according
to the manufacturer. If such measure is not
available, it should be in the mid position.
• The seat’s lumbar support will be set
according to the manufacturer. If this is Figure 6. Sled pulse.
Dávila 4
The results from the dynamic tests clearly show an mid point, the seat should be located in the
increase in the overall pressure exerted over the slot immediately after.
mask sensors, accompanied by higher head • The seat base must be inclined according
acceleration provoked by the higher energy of the to the manufacturer’s data up to the mid
tests. It is important to say that the readings from position as maximum.
the sensors become more precise when the energy • The seat must be in the lowest position.
of the test increases. In this scenario, the force • The seat back may be located according to
received by the central part of the face is much the manufacturer. If such requirement is
more than in the static tests. not available, the seat back must be
reclined 25º to the back with respect to the
Full vehicle test To complete the validation of vertical line.
the system, a full scale vehicle test was performed. • The headrest will be in the highest
This test helped us to verify that the mask can be possible position.
used in more aggressive environments. Also, this • The headrest angle may be set according
test allows a comparison amongst the sled test to the manufacturer. If such measure is not
values and the crash scenario test. The latter data available, it should be in the mid position.
shows the existing relation between the laboratory • The seat’s lumbar support will be set
results and the ones observed and defined during according to the manufacturer. If this is
the accidentology study phase. With these tests we not available, then it should be fully
have closed the Laboratory – full vehicle – real life retracted.
scenario circle, defining a simplified methodology
• The seat arms will be set to their
for the validation of the protocol (using the sled functional position, as long as they allow
with the UNECE 16 standard) and comparing the
for correct dummy positioning.
results obtained with a full scale vehicle crash.
• The seat belt will be set according to the
manufacturer. If the data is unavailable, it
General test parameters:
should be set to the middle position or the
slot right above the middle.
• Type of test: Full frontal impact.
• The steering wheel must be located in the
• Impact velocity: 50 ± 1 km/h
mid position, horizontally and vertically.
• Barrier: rigid
• All vehicle windows must be in the lowest
position.
The required instrumentation to carry out these
• The gear change lever must be in neutral
tests can be classified into three groups: mask,
position.
dummy and vehicle.
• The pedals must be at resting position.
Mask instrumentation The mask is made out • Vehicle doors must be closed and
of 18 load cells. When installing the mask on the unlocked.
dummy, these cells are located on different points • Rear-view mirrors should be in normal use
where the most typical injuries occur. position.
Dummy instrumentation The dummy Dummy positioning The dummy must be

instrumentation is comprised of three seated according to the EuroNCAP test protocols
accelerometers located on the head’s centre of for frontal impact.
gravity, one for each direction X, Y and Z.
Vehicle instrumentation The vehicle includes

two accelerometers installed in the X direction
(redundancy). They must be located in the tunnel,
at halfway in the longitudinal direction.
Prior to carrying out the test, the dummy must be

correctly positioned. For this reason, a number of
requirements for seating the dummy were
established. This allows having a reference initial
position.
Seat position Figure 7. Vehicle test setup.
• The seat must be located in mid position.

In case there are no position slots at the
Dávila 5
microphones was established considering that they
must be the same place as the average human ear.
Figure 9. Microphones in dummy heads.
The microphones are protected in such a way that

during the tests, these do not receive any damage
and maintain their listening capability. To validate
the protective device, a couple of tests were carried
out. The system proved effective in protecting the
device and maintaining its functionality.
Figure 8. Crash test results.
Results from this impact show that the mask is still

receiving the sensor data correctly, maintaining an
adequate repeatability level. The forces found in
this test are similar to those obtained from the sled
test. A few slight differences are found regarding
the head acceleration, mainly due to the fact that
the pulse in the vehicle impact is different, and Figure 10. Protected microphone.
which will vary from case to case. Nevertheless,
the vehicle has a greater energy absorption The following equipment was used
capacity, which makes the sled test more
representative since the pulses can be repeated in - Microphones Bruel & Kjaer 4938 modified
an easier way and sets a worse case scenario for the according to WB 1418
dummy in terms of energy absorption. - Microphone preamplifiers Bruel & Kjaer 2670
modified according to WB 1419
Auditory system injuries - Microphone conditioners Bruel & Kjaer 2690-
Another important step was the generation and OS4
validation of a tool to measure the sound level and - Multichannel acquisition system LMS Pimento
pressure generated inside the vehicle’s cabin during - TMON software from the LMS CADA-X
airbag activation. This is with the aim of evaluating Package
the risk of suffering injuries, either temporal or - Workstation Hewlett Packard C360
permanent, to the hearing system. Generally, these
injuries occur due to the high level of the sound Apart from the microphones installed in the
generated by the airbag explosion and the accident dummy heads, an additional microphone is
noise itself and also because of the sudden increase installed in the rear part of the vehicle, in the
in cabin pressure that occurs when the airbag central position. This microphone allows measuring
inflates and displaces an extra amount of air equal the sound and pressure levels from a further
to the volume of the airbag. position and compares the data from the front
(closer to the users) and the rear, where a passenger
As mentioned earlier, the system designed to may also receive some of the effects.
measure the sound level and pressure is also based
on Hybrid III 50th percentile dummy heads. In this
case, the heads have been modified to receive a
couple of special microphones to measure the right
and left side sound and pressure of the occupants.
Two versions of the head exist: one in which the
microphones are set in place through a special
attachment harness and another one where the
microphones were built in. The position of the Figure 11. Rear seat microphone.
Dávila 6
The data obtained from the microphones of the Shown next are the main configurations for tests to
heads and rear seat are used to calculate the amount measure sound and pressure levels inside a car:
of noise generated in the cabin. Two times are
selected to make the calculation of acoustic Static
pressure and sound level: 1 ms and 0,2 ms. • Driver and/or passenger airbag, windows
up.
Calculation of the moving average of the squared • Driver and/or passenger airbag, windows
acoustic pressure, with the following expression down.
(Equation 1): • Lateral airbags, windows up.
• Lateral airbags, windows down.
1 t 2
T ∫t −T
2
p AV (t ) = p (t )dt Dynamic
(1). • Frontal impact with driver and/or
passenger airbag activation, windows up.
• Frontal impact with driver and/or
Where AVp 2 (t )
is the moving average of the passenger airbag activation, windows
squared acoustic pressure in squared pascals, down.
T is the time window (1 ms or 0,2 ms were used), • Lateral and curtain airbag activation,
windows up.
p (t ) is the acoustic pressure in pascals. • Lateral and curtain airbag activation,
windows down.
Calculation of the sound pressure level of the • Pole impact with lateral and curtain airbag
moving average with the following expression activation, windows up.
(Equation 2): • Pole impact with lateral and curtain airbag
activation, windows down.
2
p AV (t )
SPL(t ) = 10 log 2
Reference values The reference values that are
p 0 (2).
considered for the evaluation correspond to the
intensity which the human ear is able to withstand
for a certain period of time. If the intensity is low,
Where
SPL(t ) is the sound pressure level in dB, the human ear can tolerate the sound for a longer
2 period of time. If the intensity is high, then a short
p AV (t ) is the moving average of the squared
period of exposure could result in temporal or
permanent injuries, especially to the inner ear.
acoustic pressure in squared pascals,
p
0 is the
A sound that exceeds 125 dB is considered to be
reference pressure equal to 20·10-6 pascals.
above the human pain threshold and has a large
probability of permanently damaging the ear, even
With the idea of quantifying the noise and pressure
in short time exposures. It is not recommended to
values inside the cabin during an accident and
be exposed to sounds that exceed 140 dB, even if
airbag deployment, static and dynamic tests are
the threshold time is in the range of 50 ms. Since
performed. This is done in order to compare the
the airbag explosion takes place in less than 1 ms, a
difference in the level of sound and pressure with
person could theoretically withstand a sound in the
the airbags only and then with the added noise
range between 157 dB and 160 dB.
coming from the vehicle while crashing
(deformation, breaking parts, other systems).
The system allows measuring the sound and

pressure levels from the lateral and head airbags
too. As the microphones act as the human ear, and
are in the same location, the amount of noise
perceived by them is the same in all accident
configurations. All these tests can be carried out
with the windows up or down, and that will also
make a difference in the pressure levels. It is
important to mention that front and lateral airbag
tests must be carried out separately, since these Figure 12. IDIADA’s FTIR machine.
systems never activate at the same time in a real
accident. The last test should be the dynamic test,
since in this case, the test is destructive. Table 1.
Dávila 7
Sound level time exposures This test passed the threshold of the 168 dB.
According to the risk exposition timetable, this
Continuous
dB seconds
sound is enough to cause permanent damage to the
85 28800,000000 human ear, even with very low exposure time.
100 900,000000 Comparatively, the three tests made with the
115 28,125000 windows open reveal lower sound and pressure
124 3,515625
130 0,878906
levels; nevertheless, the difference is not much and
142 0,054932 the sound level is still over the 140 dB maximum
145 0,027466 recommended limit.
151 0,006866
157 0,001717
160 0,000858
Toxicity analysis
166 0,000215
172 0,000054 The airbags while deploying expel gases that result
184 0,000003
from the detonation used to inflate. This explosion
needs to be controlled and extremely quick. Some
For the tests, the pressure and sound levels were manufacturers measure the resultant gases expelled
recorded in the following positions: through the vent holes and the effects they have on
• Driver left ear persons.
• Driver right ear
• Passenger right ear The following list of gases, which may represent a
• Rear central area risk to the health of people, are taken from the
Standard AK-ZV 01 “Pyrotechnic Retention
Finally, ten tests were considered, which included Systems in Vehicles” used by: Volkswagen AG,
eight with airbag deployment only, the ninth is an Audi AG, Bayerische Motoren Werke AG (BMW),
impact test with airbag deployment and the tenth is Daimler AG (Mercedes-Benz) and Porsche AG.
an impact with no airbag deployment. This standard is applicable to different types of
airbag available on the market and establishes the
Table 2. tests and limits of gas concentration that can be
Test setup present after airbag deployment.
The list of gases and the limits are shown next:
Table 4.
Dangerous gases list
The established values are considerably under the

IDLH (Immediate Danger for Live and Health)
Table 3.
Test results These limits are considered as the TLV (Threshold
Limit Value) – TWA (Time Weighted Average) for
* open windows Test Number a person within an 8 hour exposure time.
1 2 3* 4 5 6* 7 8* 9 10
Driver left ear According to the substance, the TLV – STEL
(dB) 163,7 163,6 157,7 160,6 161,8 160,1 164,6 161,8 166,2 149,1
Driver right ear (Threshold Limit Value Short Term Exposure
(dB)
Passenger left
165,2 164,2 159,3 156,8 157,2 155,3 164,7 157,9 168,5 149,6
Limit) or the TLV – C (Threshold Limit Value
ear (dB) 167,2 165,2 156,0 157,6 157,8 153,8 164,5 156,9 165,9 150,0
Ceiling) is used. The TLV –STEL is the total
Center rear (dB) 163,0 162,7 153,4 155,6 157,7 155,7 163,0 156,2 162,8 150,7 amount of gas to which a person can be exposed
during a maximum period of 15 minutes, and up to
The results show that the most critical 4 times in one day. The TLV –C is the maximum
configuration is test number 9, which is the value that should never be exceeded.
dynamic test with frontal airbags deployment,
pyrotechnic seatbelt retractor and windows closed.
Dávila 8
On international material safety data sheets, the Preparation To prepare for measurement,
value can be given in any of these three categories. the measuring setup is stabilized by means of room
These limits have been established by the ACGIH air measurements 5 minutes before module
(American Conference of Governmental Industrial detonation; the module does not need to be in the
Hygienists). Parallel to the ACGIH, the MAK from chamber at this point. The airbag module is
the Federal Republic of Germany considers some mounted on a fixture in as-installed position or
different values for each gas. optionally rigidly mounted with vertical airbag
unfolding (Figure 1) in a 2.5 m3 chamber. Ambient
To determine the quantity and concentration of the air is present in the 2.5 m3 chamber. The module is
gases present in the cabin of a car after airbag detonated in the pressure-tight chamber using a
deployment, a test in a sealed chamber must be suitable power source.
carried out. To correctly obtain the data,
measurements should be taken for the following 30 Samples for further analyses, if necessary, shall be
minutes after explosion. All the installed modules taken from this chamber. The interior chamber
in the vehicle must comply with the requirements temperature and the ambient temperature around
established in the AK-ZV 01 “Pyrotechnic the chamber shall equal room temperature
Retention Systems in Vehicles”. immediately prior to detonation.
The chamber must have an approximate volume of Gas analysis The tests must occur (60 ± 5)
2,5 m3 with a cubic form. The modules must be sec. after detonation of the module in the 2.5 m3
detonated in a controlled manner. There are two chamber, whereby the airbag must not be pressed
different configurations to measure the released out after module detonation and the gases that
gases: occur during or after detonation must not be
agitated (as with a ventilator, for example). The
Measuring setup 1 For Cl2 (Chlorine) y HCl measurements must be taken over a period of 30
(Hydrogen Chloride) Dräger tubes must be used. minutes. The average must then be calculated.
To measure NO (Nitrogen Oxide) and NO2 Measuring setup 1 When measuring using
(Nitrogen Dioxide), CLD (Chemical Luminescence Dräger Tubes, measurements are carried out in 5
Detection) or an infrared system can be used. An minute intervals, whereby the cross sensitivities
infrared system must be used to determine the other must be taken into consideration. The sample is
toxic gases in the list. removed directly from the chamber using a bypass,
for example. When using CLD, the volume
All the measurements shall be taken in parallel in a removal is in the order of 1.2 l/min.; when using
30 minute range. FTIR, a flow rate of 0.5 to 2.5 l/min must be
selected.
Measuring setup 2 A mass spectrometer, which
is able to measure all gases simultaneously. Measuring setup 2 When using a mass
spectrometer, a flow rate of approximately 10 l/min
Measuring lines shall be selected.
For measuring setup 1: fluoropolymers (e.g. Viton, For all the installed modules in the vehicle (front,
Teflon etc.) lateral, pyrotechnic) the following distribution is
For measuring setup 2: heated stainless steel pipe proposed:
of TTL quality
Inside diameter: max. 5 mm • 50% frontal protection systems (driver,
Length: max. 5 m passenger and knee airbags)
• 25% lateral protection systems (head,
Dust filter CLD does not involve a filter, all thorax and window airbags)
other devices require a filter with 5 mm pore width. • 25% seatbelt pyrotechnic retractor
The NO and NO2 measurements shall be
performed without a filter. The manufacturer establishes the value distribution
in between the different components in the
Test point Test point: Centre of the sidewall in condition statement. The tests are carried out with a
the unfolding direction fully-equipped vehicle. These tests must be carried
out as mentioned before in setups 1 and 2.
Test conditions Test temperatures: Room
temperature Measurement location The measurement of the
gases is to be done in the front seat, in the dummy
Test procedure head area, on the side of the deployed airbags.
Dávila 9
The work carried out during this project showed
Test conditions that airbags are very useful in reducing fatalities
and serious injuries in road accidents. Nonetheless,
Temperature inside vehicle: 23ºC ± 5ºC their activation in near-threshold situations, where
Atmospheric humidity: 40-60% relative humidity. the dynamic requirements are not always met, may
cause injuries to the occupants.
To determine the generated gases after airbag
deployment, we have an infrared spectroscopy gas The most common injuries are directly to the face,
measurement machine (FTIR). Our equipment is to hearing and skin abrasion and possible inhalation
designed to calculate the gases from the exhaust or contact with toxic substances. During this
pipe from combustion engines; however some of project, we developed a set of tools that allowed us
the gases released from airbag activation are the to investigate more deeply the effects of airbags
same as those produced in the combustion of fuel. and their interaction with the passengers. The
designed tools aim at helping airbag designers and
The components we can analyse with our FTIR manufacturers along with automobile
machine are: manufacturers to analyse the specific situations in
which their product may or may not meet safety
Carbon monoxide CO listed requirements in near-threshold situations.
Carbon dioxide CO2 listed
Nitrogen oxide NO listed The special dummy mask modified with pressure
Nitrogen dioxide NO2 listed sensors showed very good results in measuring
Nitrous oxide N2O forces during accidents, these tests being carried
Water H2O out statically and dynamically in a sled and full
Ammonia NH3 listed frontal vehicle crash. The dynamic data were very
Sulphur dioxide SO2 listed well correlated and the difference between static
Formaldehyde HCHO listed tests and dynamic tests (both sled and car) showed
Formic acid HCOOH a slight difference in pressure.
Methane CH4
Ethylene C2H4 Regarding hearing damage, the installed
Ethane C2H6 microphones in the dummy heads were able to
Propylene C3H6 withstand the energy and dynamics of a crash and
1,3-Butadiene 1,3-C4H6 still provide accurate measurement of sound level
Isobutylene iso-C4H8 and pressure. This fact makes them ideal for
Benzene C6H6 analysing the behaviour of sound waves and
Toluene C7H8 pressure distribution throughout the cockpit.
Ethanol C2H5OH
Acetaldehyde CH3CHO In the toxicity analysis, we discovered that
Acetone CH3COCH3 important amounts of several gases are released,
Xylene C8H10 and each gas has a different toxicity level on the
Ethyl benzene C6H5C2H5 human being. In our special case, we were not able
HFC-134a CH2FCF3 to measure all the required gases for the study.
However, we now know what we need to measure
The gas measurement can be done directly inside and are searching for suitable equipment to do this.
the vehicle or in a special chamber dedicated to the If possible, we will try to use equipment that can be
test. fitted into vehicles and tested in the same run.
The gases that we cannot measure with the FTIR Further work needs to be done, and we are aiming
machine are: Cl2 (Chlorine), COCl2 (Phosgene), to combine the pressure mask with the
HCl (Hydrogen chloride), H2S (Hydrogen microphones to generate single test measurement
Sulphide), HCN (Hydrogen Cyanide). equipment. We will also optimize the mask
sensors, since not all of them may be required in
The equipment readily available at IDIADA for the future.
this study was not capable of measuring all
required gases, Consequently we will not be able to
perform the tests established in the protocol. To
this end, we need to use instrumentation or similar
equipment, which indeed has the capabilities.
CONCLUSION
Dávila 10
REFERENCES
[1] Adams S. L., Petri R. W. 1996. “Injury with

spontaneous deployment of an automobile air bag”.
Journal of Accident and Emergency Medicine, Vol.
3, pp. 179–180.
[2] Barrios, J.M. “Desarrollo del Procedimiento de

Certificación de las Lentes Correctoras de Visión
para la Protección de los Ocupantes en Relación
con las Lesiones Oculares y Faciales producidas
por los Airbags Frontales durante un Choque”.
2006.
[3] Dundar, S. 2007. “The Mask Project. Airbag

Induced Facial and Ocular Injury Test Device”.
[4] Kuhn F., Morris R., Witherspoon C. D. 1993.

“Air bag: Friend or Foe?” Archives of
Ophthalmology, Vol. 111, pp. 1333-1334.
[5] Kuhn F., Morris R., Witherspoon C. D. 1995.

“Eye injury and the air bag. Current Opinion in
Ophthalmology”, Vol. 6, pp. 38-44.
[6] Morris A., Thomas P., Brett M., Bruno-Foret J.,

Thomas C., Otte D. & Ono K. 1996. “A Review of
driver airbag deployments in Europe and Japan to
date”. Proceedings of 15th ESV, Melbourne,
Australia
[7] Otte D. 1995. “Review of the air bag

effectiveness in real life accidents demands for
positioning and optimal deployment of air bag
systems”. 39th Stapp Car Crash Conference,
952701, San Diego.
Dávila 11
UPDATE ON LATERAL IMPACT TEST PROCEDURE FOR CHILD RESTRAINT
SYSTEMS
Heiko Johannsen
Technische Universität Berlin
Farid Bendjellal
Britax Childcare Group
Germany
François Renaudin
Dorel Europe
France
Peter Claeson
SIS Swedish Standards Institute
Sweden
ABSTRACT However, the hinged door principle is considered

by a large number of organisations to be too
After years of research and discussion ISO complicated. In the following the latest
published a side impact test procedure for CRS as developments with respect to lateral impact test
Technical Specification ISO/TS 29062:2009. At the procedures are summarised.
same time of the finalisation of the technical
specification, the GRSP Informal Group on CRS ACCIDENT ANALYSIS
decided to establish a more simple approach than
specified in ISO/TS 29062:2009 and asked ISO for The severity of injuries in side impacts depends on
support. As a response to this request ISO prepared the seating position. It can be noticed that the
the Publicly Available Specification ISO/PAS severity of injuries is much higher for children
13396:2009 which summarises the most important sitting on the struck side than sitting on the non-
input data for the development of a side impact test struck side. The share of injuries on the non-struck
procedure. That represented a significant input to side is comparable to frontal impacts, while the
the Informal Working Group on CRS to develop injury probability is much higher in struck side
their own test procedure. The new GRSP lateral accidents, see Figure 1.
impact test procedure is currently under validation.
It is expected that the validation will be completed
by spring 2011.
weighted injury frequency [%]
The new test procedure will become mandatory as

part of the planned new regulation for the
homologation of CRS.
INTRODUCTION
In lateral impact accidents two mechanisms are

causing injuries; on the one hand the lateral Figure 1. Injury frequency depending on the
acceleration and on the other hand intrusion of the impact direction [Arbogast, 2004].
side structure. This combination makes the
development of a suitable test procedure more The relative number of children suffering MAIS 2+
difficult compared to frontal impact test injuries is much higher in lateral impact accidents
procedures. Proposals for lateral impact test than for the other impact directions, as shown in
procedures considered lateral intrusion only, lateral Figure 2.
acceleration only and the combination of both. One
of the problems for the combination was that the
intrusion velocity in cars was higher than the delta-
v following the lateral acceleration. TRL developed
the hinged door principle to address this issue
which was the base for ISO and NPACS activities.
Johannsen 1
50 total MAIS 1 MAIS 2-4 MAIS 5-6
45
40
35
30
no. of children
[%]
25
20
15
10
0
head neck thorax arm abdomen pelvis leg
Figure 5. Injury probability of different body

Figure 2. Share of different impact directions regions in side impact accidents between 1991
[Langwieder, 2002]. and 1996 [Otte, 2003].
Regarding the different body regions the risk for 50 total MAIS 1 MAIS 2-4 MAIS 5-6
45
severe injuries decreases from the head down to the 40
legs. The frequently observed injuries of arms and 35
legs are not of high severity, but may cause long 30
[%]
25
term impairments. The focus for investigations 20
concerning improvements of CRS should be 15
primarily on the head but to certain extent also on

10
neck and thorax/thorax, see Figure 3. 0

head neck thorax arm abdomen pelvis leg
injury frequency of injured children [%]
Figure 6. Injury probability of different body

regions in side impact accidents between 1997
and 2001 [Otte, 2003].
These accident data show that side impact

accidents are severe ones especially for those
children (age up to 12 years) sitting at the struck
Figure 3. Injury risk of different body regions side. Especially head, and to some degree neck and
of 68 injured children in side impacts chest need to be protected.
[Langwieder, 1996].
In a study of the Swedish accident situation
Jakobsson et al. [Jakobsson, 2005] did not find any
Looking at the distribution of injuries in lateral moderate-severe (AIS2+) head injuries in children
impacts from 1985 to 2001 it is obvious that the using rear-facing (RF) CRS involved in lateral
injury probability decreased since 1985 while the impact accidents, while children using forward
risk to suffer neck injuries increased and the chest facing (FF) booster seats or the car belt only
remained unchanged, see Figures 4, 5, and 6. suffered from moderate-severe injuries (AIS2+) in
side impacts.
Based on results of the EC funded CHILD project

and the EEVC/WG18 Report (Feb 2006), non-head
containment combined with intrusion loading is
found to be the major reasons for head injuries in
[%]
side impacts involving rearward facing and forward

facing harness type CRS as well as high back
booster and backless booster [Johannsen, 2006;
EEVC, 2006].
Analysis of accident data involving children in side

Figure 4. Injury probability of different body impacts from different sources and different
regions in side impact accidents between 1985 regions of the world (Germany, Sweden and USA)
and 1990 [Otte, 2003]. indicates that the purely lateral impact (due to the
accident data coding with ± 15° deviation) is
possibly more severe than angled ones while the
share of perpendicular and angled impacts with
forward component is nearly equal [Johannsen,
2007a]. Although all three sources show the same
Johannsen 2
tendency, final conclusions are not possible as the Figure 7 shows the set-up according to ISO/TS
number of involved children is too small to allow 29062:2009 for FF CRS. In order to avoid a gap
statistical significant results. This data regards all between backrest and panel the backrest is
types of impact objects and restraint use. moveable in Y direction.
Henary et al [Henary, 2007] found when comparing

the risk of injury between children (aged 0-23
months) in side impacts, using US crash data
(NASS-CDS), a significant higher benefit for
children in rearward facing compared to forward
facing harness type CRS. The authors conclude that
this is likely because a forward component in the
vehicle travel direction in many of the cases will
move the head forward during the crash.
The struck car is in many cases subject to an angled

acceleration due to its initial speed. The main
expected influence of a possible forward
component would be an increase in head forward
motion. Head forward trajectory can also be
influenced by pre-braking conditions. Maltese et al
[Maltese, 2007] mapped probable head contact
points for 4 to 15 year old injured children (not
using child seats) involved in a side impact seated
on the struck side in the rear seat. The contacts
were mainly found adjacent to the likely initial
position of the head of the in-position rear seat Figure 7. Side impact test bench according to
child occupant, and adjusted forward. The authors ISO TS 29062 for FF CRS.
state this forward adjustment is likely due to the
forward component. In order to test RF and FF CRS in comparable
severity conditions the set-up is different for both
ACTIVITIES OF THE DIFFERENT CRS types. Using a hinged door test procedure it is
WORKING GROUPS important to have the maximum intrusion close to
the dummy’s head. The set-up for RF CRS is
ISO TC22 SC12 WG1 shown in Figure 8.
The ISO Working Group on Child Safety of Sub

committee on Passive Safety and Crash Protection
started in the nineties with the development of a
side impact test procedure.
ISO 14646 was the first project concerning the

standardisation of a lateral impact test procedure.
After the disapproval of ISO DIS 14646 by a small
margin ISO working group on child safety decided
to summarise the knowledge gained for the
development as a Technical Report. The ISO/TR
14646:2007 was published in 2007. A summary of
the Technical Report is given in [Johannsen,
2007b].
ISO/TS 29062:2009 was the follow up project

of ISO 14646 which concluded as a Technical
Specification. In parallel to the ISO/TR
14646:2007 ISO restarted the project to publish a
side impact test procedure. ISO/TS 29062:2009
was published in 2009. The test procedure is
comparable to the NPACS test procedure. Similar
to the original DIS 14646 procedure a hinged door Figure 8. Side impact test bench according to
test procedure was utilised. ISO TS 29062 for RF CRS.
Johannsen 3
During the ISO voting process for the test Table 1 lists the essential input parameters and their
procedure mentioned above the GRSP Informal respective weight as a proposed tool to assess
Group on CRS reviewed several existing side different test procedures.
impact test procedures for CRS and came to the
Table 1.
conclusion that the ISO one would not be
Matrix of essential parameters to support the
acceptable for ECE regulation. This finding
assessment of side impact test procedures
resulted in two implications:
[ISO/PAS 13396:2009, 2009]
- GRSP decided to develop a suitable test
procedure based on existing (and draft)
procedures and asked ISO to provide
essential input parameters for this
development (see below).
- The ISO test procedure has scarcely been
used since the publication of ISO/TS
29062:2009
ISO/PAS 13396:2009 is the ISO TC22 SC12

WG1 reaction to the official request for assistance
expressed in April 2008 by GRSP IG CRS, ISO
working group on child safety compiled a summary
of ISO/TR 14646:2007 and added recent research
results. A draft of the document was presented to
GRSP IG CRS in April 2009. ISO/PAS
13396:2009 was published in November 2009.
In summary the ISO PAS stated the following:

GRSP IG CRS
Intrusion loading is the most frequent cause of
In order to develop a new regulation for the
injuries in side impacts. For the protection of
homologation of CRS to replace current ECE R44,
children in car side impact, a combined assessment
UNECE Working Party on Passive Safety (GRSP)
of body kinematics and energy management
formed an Informal Group on CRS to prepare the
capabilities of the CRS is important.
new standard. One of the aims of this group is the
Looking at the different body regions, the head introduction of a lateral impact test procedure.
needs to be protected with highest priority, Analysis of several lateral impact test procedures
followed by neck and chest. for CRS resulted in the judgement that these are
either not reflecting enough real world needs (fixed
The test input parameters are defined by the door), are in development (NHTSA) or are too
intrusion (specified by intrusion shape, intrusion complicated so that repeatability and
depth and intrusion velocity), the bench reproducibility issues can be expected (ISO and
acceleration and Δv, as well as by geometrical NPACS). Following that, the group decided to
properties. The parameters are summarised below: develop its own test procedure. As considerable
- intrusion velocity: maximum between 7 experience was gained during the development of
m/s and 10 m/s at approximately 30 ms the ISO test procedures, GRSP sent a formal
close to the dummy's head; request to ISO to support this activity by
- intrusion depth: dynamic intrusion depths summarising the most important parameters that
should be between 200 mm and 300 mm; need to be considered for the development (see
- sled acceleration range: 10 g to 14 g (sled above). The specifications described in ISO/PAS
Δv should be approximately 25 km/h); 13396:2009 were considered as important input
- intrusion surface height: approx. 500 mm data for the GRSP test procedure. The intrusion
with respect to CR point; velocity profile was considered as the most
- initial distance between CRS centre line important parameter, as shown in Figure 9.
and intrusion surface: approximately 300
mm.
Based on the results of the analysis of impact

angles, the test procedure should focus on
perpendicular impact.
Johannsen 4
Table 2.
Current proposal for lateral impact criteria
Q0 Q1 Q1.5 Q3 Q6
HIC 600 600 600 800 800
a3ms 75g 75g 75g 80g 80g
head
head Head shall not pass through head
contain- containment plane which is positioned in
ment a distance of [55] mm from panel outside
Following the experience of ISO TC22 SC12 WG1

the GRSP group considered the intrusion velocity
as the main loading parameter which needs to be
controlled precisely at the time of dummy loading.
The intrusion velocity characteristics displayed in
Figure 9. Intrusion velocity profile according to
Figure 9 shows a fast increase of intrusion velocity
ISO/PAS 13396:2009.
in the beginning and a decreasing part of the
Design requirements for the GRSP side velocity after the maximum. Figure 10 shows the
impact test procedure were defined in order to general velocity change during lateral impact.
fulfil the following characteristics: Relative velocity
v Bullet vehicle between door
and impacted
• simple in order to ensure good: vehicle
Impacted door
o repeatability
o reproducibility
• reasonable cost Impacted vehicle
• potential to be used in different sled

t
systems t0 tc tf
o deceleration sleds with different

Figure 10. Velocity change during lateral
braking systems
impact (tc: time of contact between CRS and
o acceleration sleds
side structure, tf: time of end of crash phase).
• capable to replicate the basics of lateral
impact As the velocity characteristic before the contact
between CRS and side structure is felt to be
irrelevant for the test procedure the idea of the
Following the advice of ISO/PAS 13396:2009 it is GRSP method was to replicate only the period after
essential for a lateral impact test procedure for CRS the contact (tc to tf). Figure 11 shows the part of
to replicate intrusion loading and acceleration velocity characteristic that is considered for the
loading. GRSP test procedure.
In addition the dimensions of the intrusion surface,
the allowed degree of freedom of the ISOFIX v
Relative velocity
anchorages amongst others were considered. As a between door
first step the group decided to focus on the head: and impacted
namely head containment with addition of vehicle
parameters such as head acceleration and HIC.
Given the lack of scientific validated criteria and
limits for lateral impact it was decided to use the
head criteria and limits as defined for frontal
impact. This approach was deemed to be
pragmatic. Table 2 shows the current proposal for t0 tc tf t
the lateral impact criteria to be used for the new
ECE regulation. Figure 11. Velocity characteristics to be
considered for the GRSP side impact test
procedure for CRS.
In order to ensure the new test procedure can easily

be installed in different labs the ECE R44 rear
impact test procedure (initial velocity and stopping
distance) was considered as a starting point. The
Johannsen 5
(new) frontal impact test bench is mounted in an barrier face compared to ECE R95, and a small van
angle of 90° relative to the sled. A velocity change introduced in 2006, a comparable situation can be
corridor between test bench and intrusion plane observed. For a infant carrier (baby shell) at the
defines the test severity. Figure 12 shows an rear seat head loads and neck forces were
example for the practical realisation of the test considerably higher in the test procedure than in the
procedure. car, while neck moments and chest and pelvis
accelerations were at a comparable level, see
Figure 14.
160 test procedure AEMDB test
140
a3ms [g], HIC [0.1], F [0,1 N], M [Nm]

120
100
80
60
40
20
Figure 12. Example for test set-up realisation. 0

head a3ms HIC neck FZ neck MX chest a3ms pelvis a3ms
Analysis of test severity became relevant Figure 14. Comparison of dummy readings
because testing showed considerable high dummy between test procedure and small van AEMDB
readings especially looking at the smallest dummy car test RF CRS.
for each CRS group. Initially the delta-v corridor
was using the maximum intrusion velocity as In a forward facing group I CRS with top tether and
observed in the ISO research as the start velocity. installed at the front passenger seat, the dummy
In addition to the high dummy loading observed in readings were comparable, see Figure 15.
the testing programme the optimisation of a group
1 FF CRS with a support leg for Q1 dummy to 160 test procedure AEMDB test
reduce the head acceleration resulted in worse head 140
acceleration in a car-to-car test, although the head 120

a3ms [g], HIC [0.1], F [0.1 N]
acceleration was reduced by 20% in the test 100

procedure. Following that the test results were
compared with results from recent car tests. 80
60
In an ECE R95 like test with a small family car 40
produced between 2002 and 2009 the same baby 20

shell as in the test procedure was used. The
0
comparison of test results show considerable higher head a3ms HIC neck FZ chest a3ms pelvis a3ms
dummy readings in the test procedure compared to

the car test, see Figure 13. Figure 15. Comparison of dummy readings
between test procedure and small van AEMDB
car (R95 test procedure) test procedure car test FF CRS.
120
100
From past testing it is well known that the
acceleration loading is smaller with heavier
a3ms [g] / HIC [0.1] / FR [0.1 N]
80 dummies, which is mainly caused by the higher

mass in conjunction with a comparable force level
60
defined by the padding stiffness of intrusion
40 surface and CRS. In contrast it becomes more
challenging to keep the head inside the CRS with
20
larger dummies. That means that the validation
0
results with smaller dummies are more important
head a3ms HIC neck FR neck MR chest a3ms pelvis a3ms than those with larger ones with respect to dummy
readings such as accelerations, forces and
Figure 13. Comparison of dummy readings moments.
between test procedure and small family car
test. The analysis of the reasons for the higher severity
indicated that the main idea of the test procedure
In a more severe lateral impact test involving the (to consider the intrusion velocity profile for the
AEMDB, i.e. using a heavier trolley and a stiffer loading relevant period only) was not considered
Johannsen 6
correctly. Indeed no analysis of the timing issue 8
took place before. 7
6
Analysis of videos and time histories from different 5
barrier-to-car and car-to-car lateral impact tests 4
Lower corridor
Upper corridor
involving child dummies indicated that the time of 3
3 m/s @ 40 ms
maximum head loading would be the best

2
reference.
1
Maximum head loading was identified in these 0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
tests between 35 and 70 ms with average at 50 ms,
see Figure 16. Figure 18. New lateral impact delta-v corridor.
80
Originally the corridor with reduced severity was
70 more open in the beginning. However, based on
60
numerical simulation results (see below) the
corridor was made smaller. The stopping distance
50 standard
mean
deviation shall be 250 mm and the deceleration shall start
time [ms]
40
when the distance between intruding surface and
30 test bench centre line is 350 mm.
20
10
Bench Centreline
0 100 mm
mean min max 350 mm
Figure 16. Time of maximum head acceleration

in lateral impact tests with 6 different car
models and 2 to 6 different CRS per car model. At t0 Maximum Intrusion
As a result the average intrusion velocity at the Figure 19. Definition of t0 and intrusion.
time of maximum head acceleration (50 ms) would
be approx. 3 m/s, see Figure 17. The intrusion surface is defined to meet the
14
requirements proposed by ISO/PAS 13396:2009
older cars (before 1995)
newer cars (after 1995) (height 500 mm above CR point) and covers the
12
length of ISO R3 fixture in order not to miss any
10
part of CRS, see Figure 20.
intrusion velocity [m/s]
8
approx. 3 m/s at
time of maximum
6
head acceleration
0
0 0,01 0,02 0,03 0,04 0,05 0,06 0,07 0,08 0,09 0,1
500
-2 time [s]
Figure 17. Relevant loading time in intrusion

ax
20 m
velocity characteristics proposed by ISO/PAS

13396:2009.
Description of the test procedure. Taking into 600
account the new requirement for the relative

velocity between the test bench and the intruding Figure 20. Dimensions of the intrusion surface.
panel the following corridor was plotted, Figure 18.
In order to adjust the severity in accordance with The intrusion panel padding follows the ISO/PAS
the findings mentioned above the timing of head 13396:2009 proposal. In addition to the dummy
acceleration was analysed in the test procedure. readings the head containment will be determined.
While in car tests the maximum head acceleration In order to have an objective criterion a head
occurs at approx. 50 ms head loading takes place in containment plane with a distance of 55 mm to the
the test procedure at approx. 40 ms. Following that intrusion surface was defined. The dummy’s head
the corridor was designed to reach an average shall not pass beyond that plane, see Figure 21.
delta-v of 3 m/s at 40 ms.
Johannsen 7
the intrusion surface can be fixed at the brake
system of deceleration sleds, a double sled system
Head containment is needed for an acceleration sled device. IDIADA
plane decided to use a so called sled on sled system. The
facility accelerates the main sled to which the
intrusion surface is fixed. The test bench is fixed to
another sled which is fixed to the main sled by a
translational joint. In addition to the complexity of
the sled system the interpretation of the input
parameter is also less simple. While in deceleration
sled devices the sled velocity is equal to the relative
Figure 21. Head containment plane marked velocity between intruding surface and test bench,
with red line, CRS failed criterion. in the acceleration sled device both intrusion
surface and test bench are moving. However, it was
In addition to the technical parameters of the test possible to install the lateral impact test procedure
procedure, CRS and dummy installation are of high on an acceleration sled system and the test results
importance in order to reach repeatable and are highly comparable with those of deceleration
reproducible test results. Therefore an installation sled systems.
procedure was defined. Key aspects of this
installation procedure are summarised below: None of the tested CRS models (babyshell with
• exact alignment of CRS with test bench base and support leg, group I RF with support leg,
centre line, group I FF with support leg and group I FF with
top tether) showed any issue to be reported.
• exact alignment of dummy centre line
with CRS centre line, That means that the feasibility of the test procedure
• arms shall be positioned symmetrical with is quite acceptable.
elbows aligned with sternum,
• legs shall be positioned symmetrical, In order to check the severity level the AEMDB
• pre-impact dummy stability shall be tests mentioned above are considered as reference.
controlled.
The tests with an infant carrier even with the
Validation of the test procedure took place updated severity level indicate a considerably high
considering the following areas to be important: dummy loading for the head in the test procedure.
• feasibility, The other values are at a more comparable level,
• appropriate test severity, see Figure 22.
• repeatability,
• reproducibility.
Britax 1 Dorel 1 Dorel 2 TUB 1 TUB 2 car w/o airbag car with airbag
160
140
Concerning feasibility it was considered to be
120
important that the test procedure is usable with
deviation from average [%]
different types of CRS (i.e., infant carriers, large 100
RF CRS, CRS with top tether and CRS with 80
support leg) and with different types of test 60
facilities (i.e., acceleration vs. deceleration sled 40
systems and different braking systems). These 20
parameters were considered when preparing the test 0

head a3ms HIC 36 neck Fres neck Mres chest a3ms pelvis a3ms
matrix for the check of repeatability and
reproducibility. Figure 22. Comparison of results of test
procedure and car tests for the baby shell.
Up to date the following labs have contributed to
the validation programme: In contrast to the infant carrier dummy readings in
• Britax (Deceleration - PU tubes), the group 1 FF CRS with top tether are at a
• Dorel (Deceleration - hydraulic brake), comparable level, see Figure 23.
• IDIADA (Acceleration sled)
• TUB (Deceleration - bar brakes).
While the original delta-v corridor caused problems

with PU tubes this issue was solved by the updated
corridor. No other problems were observed with the
other deceleration sled systems. The test procedure
is less simple with acceleration sled systems. While
Johannsen 8
Britax 1 TUB 1 TUB 2 IDIADA 1 IDIADA 2 car w/o airbag car with airbag 20 group 0+ group 1 RF group 1 SL group 1 TT
180
18
160
140 16
deviation from average [%]
120
14
coefficient of variation [%]

100
12
80
60 10
40
8
20
6
0
head a3ms HIC 36 neck Fres neck Mres chest a3ms pelvis a3ms
4
Figure 23. Comparison of results of test 2
procedure and car tests for the group I CRS 0
with TT. head a3ms HIC neck F neck M chest a3ms pelvis a3ms
A comparison of tests with old and new corridor Figure 25. Analysis of repeatability.
with different CRS and different dummies shows
The analysis of reproducibility took place using the
that even the new corridor is challenging for
new test severity. The plan was to test different
industry especially when looking at the smallest
types of CRS in at least 3 different labs.
dummy per CRS size group, Figure 24.
Unfortunately the programme has not been
HIC head a3ms finalised. In these three labs at least 2 tests for each
140 product were conducted. Again the coefficient of
120 variation was used to assess reproducibility. For
actual measurement / limit [%]
100 most of the body regions, except the head, the

80
coefficient of variation in the reproducibility tests
60
exceeded 10%, see Figure 26.
40
20 group 0+ group 1 RF group 1 SL group 1 TT
20 18
head two labs only
0 16
Babyshell BabyShell Babyshell Group 1 Group 1 Group 1 Babyshell Group I
coefficient of variation [%]
14
head two labs only
Q0 new Q1.5 old Q1.5 new FF TT Q1 FF TT Q3 FF TT Q3 Q1.5 FF TT Q3

corridor corridore corridor new old new AEMDB AEMDB
corridor corridor corridor test test 12
two labs only
two labs only
10
two labs only
Figure 24. Comparison of head loading 8
depending on severity level, dummy size and 6

two labs only
tested product.
two labs only
two labs only

4
During the tests for the validation of the protocol 0

head a3ms HIC neck F neck M chest a3ms pelvis a3ms
several products were found showing shortcomings
with respect to the head containment criterion Figure 26. Analysis of reproducibility.
which is a must to protect children in lateral impact
accidents. The analysis of repeatability and reproducibility
indicates that the test procedure is sufficiently
Repeatability was analysed by running 5 tests with repeatable and reproducible for the main target
the same product in one lab. For different CRS body region, the head. Following the observation
products different labs were running the that reproducibility of head a3ms is much better than
repeatability tests. The tests were performed using HIC it is recommended to take only head a3ms as
the original higher severity pulse. The coefficient head criterion into account.
of variation was used to assess repeatability. In
well controlled dummy tests (e.g., pendulum tests) In parallel to the testing validation programme
a coefficient of variation of 5% is considered to be parameter studies using numerical simulation and
good [Mertz, 2005]. For sled testing where sled testing took place. The main aim of the
variation is coming from the CRS, the dummy and parameter studies by simulation was to assess the
CRS installation as well as variation in the sled influence of CRS position and delta-v
behaviour higher variations can be expected. For characteristics on the test results. A group 0+
head and pelvis acceleration the 5% limit is passed model in combination with Q1.5 dummy model
for all labs and CRS types. HIC and chest was used for this study. Generally the dummy
acceleration variation are close to 5% but exceed readings of physical tests and simulation runs were
the threshold for one CRS type or in one lab, see in a comparable level although the CRS model was
Figure 25.
Johannsen 9
not explicitly validated for lateral impact 140
v1 0 mm
v30 10 mm towards impact surface
conditions. v31 10 mm away from impact surface
120
The variation of the sled pulse showed considerable
variation to baseline [%]

100
differences in the dummy readings. The sled pulse 80

was varied in a way that borders of the corridor
were used. The delta-v curves used for this study 60
are shown in Figure 27. The time of “engagement” 40
of the head is visualised for information. 20
0
head a3ms chest a3ms chest deflection pelvis a3ms
Figure 30. Dummy readings depending on CRS

positioning.
140 v1 0° v20 +5° v21 +10° v22 -5°
120
deviation from baseline [%]

100
Figure 27. Sled velocity variation for numerical 80

parameter analysis.
60
In the study the head a3ms varied between -20 and 40

+40% compared to the baseline test, see Figure 28.
20
v1 6.6 m/s v5 6.1 m/s v6 7.2 m/s 0

160 head a3ms chest a3ms chest deflection pelvis a3ms
140
Figure 31. Dummy readings depending on CRS
deviation from baseline [%]
120
angle from upright to reclined.
100
80
In further sled tests the influence of the variable
60 ISOFIX anchorages was checked and angled tests
40 with 10° impact angle were analysed.
20
0 Restricting the ISOFIX anchorage points seems not

head a3ms chest a3ms chest deflection pelvis a3ms to have major influence on the dummy readings for
the tested products, see Figure 32. Earlier analysis
Figure 28. Influence of pulse variation on of the timing of the movement of the anchorages is
dummy readings. supporting this result. The movement of the
ISOFIX anchorages seems to start after maximum
The main reason for the variation seems to be the
dummy readings.
CRS velocity at the time of impact as shown in
Figure 29. Reference reduced ISOFIX moveability gr. 0+
blocked ISOFIX gr. 0+ reduced ISOFIX moveability gr. 1 FF
blocked ISOFIX gr. 1 FF
140%
120%
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Figure 29. CRS velocity profiles for the sled head a3ms HIC neck FR chest a3ms
delta-v variation.
Figure 32. Dummy readings depending on the
Small Deviations in the positioning of the CRS allowed travel amount of ISOFIX anchorages.
with respect to the bench centre line seems to cause
a smaller variation, see Figure 30 and Figure 31. The influence of introducing an impact angle
depends mainly on the individual product.
However, for most of the tested CRS the influence
was small, see Figure 33.
Johannsen 10
140%
Reference A - Gr0+ B - Gr1 FF C - Gr1 FF D - Gr 1 FF Systems in Side Impact Crashes
E - Gr 1 FF F - Gr0+
IRCOBI Conference, Graz 2004
120%
100% Crandall, J.; Sherwood, C.

80%
Factors Influencing the Performance of Rear
Facing Restraints in Frontal Vehicle Crashes
60%
3rd International Conference – Protection of
40% Children in Cars, Munich, 2005
20%
EEVC Working Group 18
0%
head a3ms HIC neck FR chest a3ms
Report Child Safety
February 2006
Figure 33. Dummy readings depending on
impact angle. Henary B, Sherwood CP, Crandall JR, Kent RW,
Vaca FE, Arbogast KB, Bull MJ;
CONCLUSIONS Car safety seats for children: rear facing for best
protection. Injury Prevention 2007; 13:398-402
Existing test procedures for the assessment of the
lateral impact performance of child restraint Johannsen, H.; Weber, S.; Schindler, V.:
systems were felt to be either too complicated to be CHILD Technical Report Selection of Side Impact
used for the homologation of CRS or do not Test Procedure
represent real world side accidents in a sufficient 2006
way. Following that the GRSP Informal Group on
CRS developed a new test procedure utilising the Johannsen, H.; Menon, R.A.
knowledge gained in ISO TC22 SC12 WG1. This Short Report Forward Component in ISO Side
test procedure has been analysed in order to check Impact Test Procedure for CRS
the feasibility with different sled systems and ISO TC22 / SC12 / WG1 / TF1, 2007a (ref.
different CRS types, test severity as well as ISO/TC22/SC12/WG 1 N 797)
repeatability and reproducibility. The results to date
indicate that the procedure is feasible at different Johannsen, H.; Barley, G.; Carine, S.; Claeson, P.;
sled systems (deceleration sleds: PU tubes, bar Lundell, B.; Nojiri, K.; Renaudin, F.; van Rooij, L.;
brake and hydraulic brake; acceleration sled: sled Siewertsen, A.
on sled were tested so far) with different ISOFIX Review of the Development of the ISO Side Impact
integral harness CRS types. The severity level Test Procedure for Child Restraint Systems
tends to be higher than in reference tests for infant ESV Conference, Lyon, 2007b
carriers and at an equal level for larger CRS.
Jakobsson, L.; Isaksson-Hellmann, I.; Lundell, B.
However, for larger CRS the fulfilment of the head
Safety for the Growing Child – Experience from
containment criterion is more challenging. Good
Swedish Accident Data
repeatability and reproducibility were obtained at
19th ESV Conference, Washington DC, June 2005
least for the head acceleration, which is rated as the
target body region. Although validation of the test Langwieder, K.; Hell, W.; Willson, H.
procedure is still ongoing, it is expected that the Performance of Child Restrain systems in Real-Life
procedure will be ready on time for introduction Lateral Collisions
into ECE regulation. 40th STAPP-Conference, Albuquerque, 1996.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Langwieder K.
Verletzungsfolgen für Kinder als Insasse bei Pkw-
Part of the work presented in this paper was co-
Unfällen
funded by the European Commission within the 7th
Innovative Kindersicherungen im Pkw, 2002 (in
Frame Work Programme (CASPER project, Grant
German).
Agreement no. 218564).
Maltese MR, Locey CM, Jermakian JS, Nance ML,
Further information concerning the CASPER
Arbogast KB
project is available at the CASPER web site
Injury causation scenarios in belt-restrained
www.casper-project.eu.
nearside child occupants
REFERENCES Stapp Car Crash Journal. Vol 51, 2007
Arbogast, K.B.; Chen, I.; Durbin, D.R.; Winston, Mertz, H.

F.K. Calculation Methods & Acceptance Levels for
Injury Risks for Children in Child Restraint Assessing Repeatability and Reproducibility (R &
Johannsen 11
R)
ISO/TC22/SC12/WG5 Document N751, 2004
Otte, D.
Injury Risk of Children in Cars
1st Conference Protection of Children in Cars,
Cologne, 2003
Johannsen 12

Advanced Occupant Detection System PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Advanced Occupant Detection System PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Advanced Occupant Detection System PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ADVANCED OCCUPANT DETECTION SYSTEM: DETECTION OF HUMAN VITAL

SIGNS BY SEAT-EMBEDDED FERROELECTRIC FILM SENSORS AND BY VIBRATION

ABSTRACT static (sleeping like) and non-static scenarios.

INITIAL PROOF OF CONCEPT

In the early part of our study we employed an A4-

Discrimination Algorithm Final Class Call:

Steady vehicle with Cruising

In this conceptual study, extraction of the vital

Country road driving test: FFT spectra

5kg object 15kg object empty seat

Figure 4. Detection trials with child restraint

All tests were repeated at least 5 times with both

This assessment demonstrated the conceptual

was selected as the trigger between vital signals DB25 JP4

by retrieving this information from the CAN bus or Acquisition Card

by installing a dedicated, vertical accelerometer.

A new, dedicated algorithm was developed,

In total, the performance validation sample

6YO child A - 91% - 100% - 97%

signal was saturated to the point that precise

This paper describes the use of a conceptual

Based on this study, further research into the

Chung-Kyu (CK) Park

ABSTRACT had much higher head and neck injury-assessment

ANALYSIS OF HEAD ACCELERATION

In Table 2, the pass rate of HIC15 of adult dummies

Figure 1. HIC15 of the driver vs. HIC15 of the

Table 3. Cases of [(HIC15 of the child) > (HIC15

X-Driver Z-Driver X-6YO Z-6YO X-3YO Z-3YO

140 2nd Peak due to rear seat contact

Table 4. Relationship between 1st Peak and 2nd

(b) at 2nd peak time of head acceleration

The velocity histories of dummies are helpful to

Fundamentally, the ridedown contributes for

-0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30

3.47 kg in 6YO child dummy and 2.73 kg in 3YO

2500 crash. Thus Fexternal is the force caused by that the

As mentioned in the previous section, the rotational

Fexternal = maz – Fneck , (1)

Chest MAX Resultant G's

3-Year-Old Child 100

Chest MAX Resultant G's

Figure 11. Max Z-upper neck force(FNeck) vs. Max 100

Figure 13. Maximum chest resultant G’s vs.

ANALYSIS OF CHEST ACCELERATION AND

In Table 2, the pass rate of chest G’s of the child

[1] Tylko, S. and Dalmotas, D., Protection of rear

ABSTRACT The enhanced system retains similar belt geometry

The Lifebelt is a development of the existing

The Iteration 1 version of the Lifebelt, discussed

Figure 4. (left) Position of the lap belt in the

Control Test 2 also resulted in the dummy

Lifebelt Test 1 performed well in restraining the

post test or in the instrumentation responses and

Test Series 3 – Front Seat Control Test

Test Series 3 consisted of a single test (D1-4306)

The HIII 5F dummy responses for these tests are

Figure 7. (left) HIII 50M Post Lifebelt Test 5. 120%

(right) HIII 50M post Lifebelt Test 6.