This content is not included in
your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.
Design and Damageability: Persuasion or Regulation?
Annotation ability available
Sector:
Language:
English
Abstract
Designers have the capability to produce damage resistant bumpers-bumpers that can protect automobiles against low speed collision damage. If design changes are not made in the areas of truck underride, panic brake dip and dive, and the multi-purpose vehicle bumper interface, the automotive industry faces further increased federal regulation. Crash tests and real-world experience indicates that improved bumpers are cost-effective and can bring about better loss control. There is a gap that must be eliminated between current car designs and their future repair costs. The alternative could be even more stringent federal regulations. Professional societies and designers can provide the answer through self-policed future designs that recognize both the initial sales appeal of cars and the latent consumer cost of repair when operating automobiles.
Recommended Content
Authors
Citation
Martens, J., "Design and Damageability: Persuasion or Regulation?," SAE Technical Paper 740064, 1974, https://doi.org/10.4271/740064.Also In
References
- Executive Office of the President-Office of Science and Technology, Cumulative Regulatory Effects on the Cost of Automotive Transportation (RECAT) Final Report of the Ad Hoc Committee Washington, D.C. February 28 1972 45
- U.S. Department of Transportation-National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Title II Automobile Consumer Information Study; Planning Task Force Report for Title II Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act, Public Law 92-513 Washington, D.C. April 18 1973 10
- Pierce, Bert et al “Symposium Reveals What Motoring Public Craves,” SAE Transactions Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc. New York 1945 53 504
- “NTSB: Underride Protection Need ‘Apparent’,” Status Report 6 23 Insurance Institute for Highway Safety Washington, D.C. December 6 1971 1
- Crash Damage to Automobiles; An Insurance Research Study Allstate Insurance Company Kemper Insurance Companies Liberty Mutual Insurance Companies State Farm Mutual Insurance Company American Mutual Insurance Alliance October 1972 45
- Crash Damage to Automobiles; An Insurance Research Study Allstate Insurance Company Kemper Insurance Companies Liberty Mutual Insurance Companies State Farm Mutual Insurance Company American Mutual Insurance Alliance October 1972 2 3
- Crash Damage to Automobiles; An Insurance Research Study Allstate Insurance Company Kemper Insurance Companies Liberty Mutual Insurance Companies State Farm Mutual Insurance Company American Mutual Insurance Alliance October 1972 7 8
- House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce Report Together with Dissenting Views; To accompany H.R. 11627, Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act Washington, D.C. April 28 1972 16
- Trees, John S. Vice-President Allstate Insurance Company Remarks before National Association of Insurance Commissioners Miami, Florida May 2 1973
- “Some 1974 Models More Damage-Prone,” Status Report 9 2 Insurance Institute for Highway Safety Washington, D.C. January 28 1974 1 3 6
- “Some 1974 Models More Damage-Prone,” Status Report 9 2 Insurance Institute for Highway Safety Washington, D.C. January 28 1974 1 2 6
- Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act, Title I, Section 102 (c)
- Status Report 6 23 1
- Status Report 6 23 2
- “Legal Action Urged,” Status Report 5 10 Insurance Institute for Highway Safety Washington, D.C. June 16 1970 5
- RECAT Report 59
- Haddon, William Jr. Testimony before Senate Subcommittee on Antitrust and Monopoly June 6 1969