This content is not included in
your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.
The Highway Safety Research Institute Dummy Compared with General Motors Biofidelity Recommendations and the Hybrid II Dummy
Annotation ability available
Sector:
Language:
English
Abstract
Two Highway Safety Research Institute (HSRI) dummies were tested and evaluated. Based on the analysis given, the HSI dummy should not be used for vehicle qualification testing. However, many of its components offer viable alternatives for future dummy development.
The dummy was found to have inadequate biomechanical fidelity in the head, neck, and chest, although its characteristics were very promising and, as a whole, biomechanically superior to the Hybrid II. Its repeatability and reproducibility in dynamic component tests were better than the Hybrid II dummy. In particular, the HSRI friction joints were outstanding in repeatability and had a significant advantage in usability in that they do not require resetting between tests.
In three-point harness and ACRS systems tests, the values of injury criteria produced by the HSRI dummy were generally lower than those obtained with the Hybrid II, especially the femur loads in the ACRS tests. However, the repeatability and reproducibility of the HSRI dummy were significantly poorer than the Hybrid II. Also, significant durability problems exist with the skin and lumbar spine of the HSRI dummy.
Recommended Content
Authors
Topic
Citation
Neathery, R., Mertz, H., Hubbard, R., and Henderson, M., "The Highway Safety Research Institute Dummy Compared with General Motors Biofidelity Recommendations and the Hybrid II Dummy," SAE Technical Paper 740588, 1974, https://doi.org/10.4271/740588.Also In
References
- McElhaney J. H. Mate P. L. Roberts V. L. “A New Crash Test Device - ‘Repeatable Pete’,” Paper 730983 , Proceedings of Seventeenth Stapp Car Crash Conference Society of Automotive Engineers New York 1973
- Hubbard R. P. McLeod D. G. “A Basis for Crash Dummy Skull and Head Geometry,” Human Impact Response Plenum Press New York 1973
- General Motors Corporation “Anthropomorphic Test Dummy, Vol. II, Design, Development and Performance, Final Report,” National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Department of Transportation Report No. DOT-HS-2993-569 Washington, D. C. December 1973
- Mertz H. J. Neathery R. F. Culver C. C. “Performance Requirements and Characteristics of Mechanical Necks,” Human Impact Response Plenum Press New York 1973
- Lobdell T. E. et al. “Impact Response of the Human Thorax,” Human Impact Response Plenum Press New York 1973
- Melvin J. W. McElhaney J. H. Roberts V. L. “Improved Neck Simulation for Anthropometric Dummies,” Paper No. 720958 , Proceedings of Sixteenth Stapp Car Crash Conference Society of Automotive Engineers New York 1972
- Anthropomorphic Test Dummy 38 62 2 April 1973
- LeFevre R. L. Silver J. N. “Dummies - Their Features and Use,” Proceedings of Automotive Safety Engineering Seminar General Motors Corporation 1973
- McElhaney J. H. “Final Report, Crash Test Device Development.” HSRI Report No. UM-HSRI-73-3 June 1973
- Naab K. N. Massing D. E. “Performance Evaluation of the Highway Safety Research Institute (HSRI) Anthropomorphic Test Dummy.” Calspan Report No. ZS-5352-V-1 March 1974
- Culver C. C. Neathery R. F. Mertz H. J. “Mechanical Necks with Humanlike Responses.” Paper No. 720959 , Proceedings of Sixteenth Stapp Car Crash Conference Society of Automotive Engineers New York 1972
- Mertz H. J. Patrick L. M. “Strength and Response of the Human Neck.” Paper No. 710855 , Proceedings of the Fifteenth Stapp Car Crash Conference Society of Automotive Engineers New York 1971
- Mertz H. J. Neathery R. F. Culver C. C. “Performance Requirements and Characteristics of Mechanical Necks.” Human Impact Response Plenum Press New York 1973
- Ewing C. L. Thomas D. J. “Torque Versus Angular Displacement Response of Human Head to -G x Impact Acceleration.” Paper No. 730976 , Proceedings of Seventeenth Stapp Car Crash Conference Society of Automotive Engineers New York 1973