This content is not included in your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.
SUMMARY OF IHRA PEDESTRIAN SAFETY WG ACTIVITIES – PROPOSED TEST METHODS TO EVALUATE PEDESTRIAN PROTECTION AFORDED BY PASSENGER CARS
Published June 04, 2001 by National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in United States
Annotation ability available
The IHRA Pedestrian Working Group has conducted investigation and analysis on the current status of pedestrian accidents in the IHRA member countries. We collected the accident data that occurred by 1999, then unified the formats of the accident data and established a dataset that makes it possible to make comparison with each other. According to the current status of pedestrian accidents, three parts of the pedestrian’s body have the highest priority for protection, the child and adult heads, and the adult lower leg/knee.
As for the motor vehicle, we determined which particular parts of the motor vehicle were involved, which pedestrian body parts they injured and the severity of the injuries, and analyzed the effect of their shapes, corresponding to the items above. It was decided that the test methods should be for motor vehicles for passenger use but not buses and coaches. The shapes of passenger cars were investigated and categorized by three groups, Sedan, SUV (Sport Utility Vehicle) and 1-Box (One Box Vehicle), so that the effects of these vehicle shapes could be studied with computer simulations. The simulations to date have focused on the head impact speed, head impact angle, head effective mass, and the Wrap Around Distance to the head impact point (WAD).
We decided to adopt the sub-system methods and to establish specifications for impactors for each sub-system. That is, three subsystem test procedures (adult headform, child headform and legform impact tests) were proposed in high priority identified in the analysis of pedestrian accidents in the IHRA member countries.
The pedestrian test procedures proposed and investigated by the experts of IHRA member countries may in the future provide a basis of technical regulations, however, it was recognized that considerable research and development was required to refine the test procedure. It was deemed necessary to conduct validation study of the test procedures through actual tests using sample vehicles and to explore the car feasibility level prior to the use of the test methods in legislation.
CitationMizuno, Y. and Ishikawa, H., "SUMMARY OF IHRA PEDESTRIAN SAFETY WG ACTIVITIES – PROPOSED TEST METHODS TO EVALUATE PEDESTRIAN PROTECTION AFORDED BY PASSENGER CARS," SAE Technical Paper 2001-06-0136, 2001.
- Isenberg, R.A. Walz, M. Chidester, C. Kaufman, R. “Pedestrian Crash Data Study-An Interim Evaluation,” Fifteenth International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles, Paper No. 96-S9-O-06 1996
- Isenberg, R.A. Chidester, C. Mavros, S. “Update on the Pedestrian Crash Data Study,” Sixteenth International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles, Paper No. 98-S6-O-05 1998
- Commission of the European Communities “Frontal Surfaces in the Event of Impact With a Vulnerable Road User,” Ad-hoc Working Group ERGA Safety, document ERGA S/60, Brussels
- Kajzer, J. Aldman, B. Mellander, H. Planath, I Jonasson K. “Bumper System Evaluation Using an Experimental Pedestrian Dummy,” 12th International Technical Conference on the Experimental Safety of Vehicles 1989
- Kallieris, D Schmidt, G. “New Aspect of Pedestrian Protection Loading and Injury Pattern in Simulated Pedestrian Accidents,” 32 nd Stapp Car Crash Conference, SAE 881725 1988
- Akiyama, A. et al “Development of a Simulation Model and Pedestrian Dummy,” SAE paper No. 1999-01-0082
- Lawrence, G J L Hardy B J Lowne R W “Costs and benefits of the EEVC pedestrian impact requirements,” Crowthorne, UK TRL Limited 1993
- Davies R G Clemo K C “Study of research into pedestrian protection costs and benefits,” Nuneaton, UK Motor Industry Research Association 1997