This content is not included in your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.
Effects of Pretensioners and Load Limiters on 50th Male and 5th Female Seated in Rear Seat during a Frontal Collision
ISSN: 0148-7191, e-ISSN: 2688-3627
Published April 14, 2015 by SAE International in United States
Annotation ability available
This study was conducted to explore the effect of various combinations of seatbelt-related safety components (namely, retractor pretensioners and load limiting retractors) on the adult rear passenger involved in a frontal collision. The study was conducted on a 50th Male and a 5th Female Hybrid III ATD in the rear seat of a mid-sized sedan. Each ATD was seated in an outboard position with 3-point continuous lap-shoulder belts. On these belts were combinations of pretensioners and load limiters. Since the main objective of this test series was to cross-compare the seatbelt configurations, front seats were not included in the buck in order to avoid uncontrollable variables that would have affected the comparison study if the possibility of contact with the front seat were allowed. Nevertheless, there was a short barrier devised to act as a foot-stop for both ATDs.
A design of experiment (DOE) was constructed as a full factorial with and without a pretensioner and three types of load limiters. Each ATD was tested with a progressive load limiter (PLL1). Additionally, the 50th Male was tested with a self-adaptive load limiter (SALL) and the 5th Female was tested with a second type of a progressive load limiter (PLL2). The test pulse was designed to approximate a 35 mph (56 kph) frontal rigid barrier test of a four-door sedan.
In summary, for the specific configurations reported herein, it was found that pretensioners were an appreciable factor in improving ATD values, and that load limiters had a greater positive effect in the absence of pretensioners and more so for the 50th Male than for the 5th Female.
CitationTavakoli, M. and Brelin-Fornari, J., "Effects of Pretensioners and Load Limiters on 50th Male and 5th Female Seated in Rear Seat during a Frontal Collision," SAE Technical Paper 2015-01-1460, 2015, https://doi.org/10.4271/2015-01-1460.
- Esfahani, E. and Digges, K., “Trend of Rear Occupant Protection in Frontal Crashes over Model Years of Vehicles,” SAE Technical Paper 2009-01-0377, 2009, doi:10.4271/2009-01-0377.
- Kuppa, S., Saunders, J., and Fessahair, O., “Rear Seat Occupant Protection in Frontal Crashes,” Enhanced Safety of Vehicles Conference, 05-0212, 2005
- Forman, J., Lopez-Valdes, F., Lessley, D., Kindig, M. et al., “Rear Seat Occupant Safety: An Investigation of a Progressive Force-Limiting, Pretensioning 3-Point Belt System Using Adult PMHS in Frontal Sled Tests,” Stapp Car Crash Journal: 49-74, Nov. 2009.
- Parenteau, C. and Viano, D., “Field Data Analysis of Rear Occupant Injuries Part I: Adults and Teenagers,” SAE Technical Paper 2003-01-0153, 2003, doi:10.4271/2003-01-0153.
- Bilston, L., Du, W., and Brown, J., “A Matched-Cohort Analysis of Belted Front and Rear Seat Occupants in Newer and Older Model Vehicles Shows that Gains in Front Occupant Safety have Outpaced Gains for Rear Seat Occupants,” Accident Analysis and Prevention Journal: 1947-1977, June 2010.
- Lu, H., Andreen, M., Faust, D., Furton, L. et al., “Safety Belt and Occupant Factors Influencing Thoracic & Upper Abdominal Injuries in Frontal Crashes,” SAE Technical Paper 2011-01-1129, 2011, doi:10.4271/2011-01-1129.