This content is not included in
your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.
Evaluation of Anti-Whiplash Seat Robustness for Multi-Peak Crash Pulses in Low-Speed Rear-End Crashes
Technical Paper
2009-01-1202
ISSN: 0148-7191, e-ISSN: 2688-3627
Annotation ability available
Sector:
Language:
English
Abstract
The mechanism of whiplash is not well understood and thus preventing a certain motion or force in an occupant might not mitigate this injury. However, a number of injury criteria have been proposed to evaluate the neck injury risk in a rear-end crash. In the safety design of the seat and the headrest assembly, robustness or invariability of whiplash protection must be secured not only under the assessment pulses applied in sled tests but also under such pulses that show random multiple peaks in real-world car-to-car rear-end crashes.
The aim of this study is to investigate a method of evaluating the invariability of whiplash protection performance in low-speed rear-end crashes, not with multiple injury criteria but with a single newly proposed objective function. The function was determined based on the hypothesis that the ideal seat is rigid in terms of such invariability. A series of finite element simulations were performed based on the design of experiments to obtain car-to-car rear-end crash pulses (delta Vs = 16 km/h and 24 km/h). The signal-to-noise (SN) ratio of the objective function was then evaluated based on the dynamic characteristics of the Taguchi method, using both the BioRID II model and a human model under actual usage conditions (seat and headrest configurations, including reactive and proactive types of headrest) and environmental conditions (car-to-car crash pulses) at the customer level. The optimal configuration, which maximized the SN ratio, reduced all the injury criteria used in this study except Nkm for the BioRID II model. The proactive type of headrest, having a configuration similar to the optimal one, showed more invariability in reducing the injury indicator values than the reactive type did. The neck width can affect the invariability of flexion and head-forward motion. The validity of the objective function, or the robustness evaluation method, might be verified by adding the detailed geometry and material characteristics of the superficial soft tissue of the neck to the human model.
Recommended Content
Citation
Murakami, D., Chinmoy, P., and Asano, H., "Evaluation of Anti-Whiplash Seat Robustness for Multi-Peak Crash Pulses in Low-Speed Rear-End Crashes," SAE Technical Paper 2009-01-1202, 2009, https://doi.org/10.4271/2009-01-1202.Also In
References
- Euro NCAP 2008 “Euro NCAP Whiplash Test Protocol Version 2.8 “ http://www.euroncap.com
- Krafft M. Kullgren A. Ydenius A. Tingvall C. 2002 “Influence of crash pulse characteristics on whiplash associated disorders in rear impacts: crash recording in real life crashes” Journal of Crash Prevention and Injury Control 3 2 141 149
- Linder A. Avery M. Krafft M. Kullgren A. 2003 “Change of velocity and pulse characteristics in rear impacts: real world and vehicles test data” 18th ESV Conference, Paper 285
- Kitagawa Y. Yasuki T. Hasegawa J. 2008 “Research study of neck injury lessening with active head restraint using human body FE model” Traffic Injury Prevention 9 6 574 582
- Boström O. Svensson M. Aldman B. Hansson H Haland Y. Lovsund P. Seeman T. Suneson A. Saljo A. Ortengren T. 1996 “A new neck injury criterion candidate based on injury findings in the cervical spinal ganglia after experimental neck extension trauma” IRCOBI Conference” 123 136
- Schmitt K. Muser M. Niederer P. 2001 “A new neck injury criterion candidate for rear-end collisions taking into account shear forces and bending moments” 17th ESV Conference, Paper 124
- Viano D. Davidsson J. 2002 “Neck displacement of volunteers, BioRID P3 and Hybrid III in rear impacts: implications to whiplash assessment by a Neck Displacement Criterion (NDC)” Traffic Injury Prevention 3 105 116
- Research Council for Automobile Repairs 2008 “RCAR-IIWPG Seat/Head Restraint Evaluation Protocol Version 3” http://www.iihs.org
- Folksam and Swedish Road Administration 2004 “Assessment of Whiplash Protection in Rear Impacts” http://www.vv.se/
- Matsubayashi K. Yamada Y. Iyoda M. Koike S. Kawasaki T. Tokuda M. 2007 “Development of rear pre-crash safety system for rear-end collisions” 20th ESV Conference, Paper 07–0146
- Quality Engineering Society http://www.qes.gr.jp/
- Eriksson L. Zellmer H. 2007 “Assessing the BioRID II repeatability and reproducibility by applying the objective rating method (ORM) on rear-end sled tests” 17th ESV Conference, Paper 07–0201
- Adalian C. Sferco R. Fay P. 2005 “The repeatability and reproducibility of proposed test procedures and injury criteria for assessing neck injuries in rear impact” 19th ESV Conference, Paper 05–0340
- Sugimoto T. Yamazaki K. 2005 “First results from the JAMA Human Body Project” 19th ESV Conference, Paper 05–0291
- Muser M. Walz F. Zellmer H. 2000 “Biomechanical significance of the rebound phase in low speed rear-end impacts” IRCOBI Conference, Paper 393–410
- Langwieder K. Hell W. 2002 “Proposal of an International Harmonized Dynamic Test Standard for Seats/Head Restraints” Traffic Injury Prevention 3 2 150 158
- Carlsson A. Linder A. Svensson M. Davidsson J. Schick S. Horion S. Hell W. 2008 “Female volunteer motion in rear impact sled tests in comparison to results from earlier male volunteer tests” IRCOBI Conference 461 464