This paper presents the results of an analysis of 12 full-scale side impact crash tests that were conducted to compare the responses of the SAE BioSID with the NHTSA SID. Dummies were tested in the front and the rear seat with both a baseline (production) door interior and a 3-inch-thick Arcel 512™ foam pad.
The responses of the two dummies were significantly different. Peak rib accelerations were higher for the BioSID in the front seat. In the rear seat, peak rib accelerations were lower for the BioSID. However, the values of the Thoracic Trauma Index from the two dummies were not significantly different when tested in the front seat. The addition of padding significantly reduced the Thoracic Trauma Index (TTI), peak rib accelerations, and peak pelvis acceleration in both the front and rear seat for both dummies.
For the BioSID, the addition of padding produced significantly greater rib compression and Viscous Criterion in the front seat, but not in the rear seat. In general, the acceleration-based measures indicated that the padding used in these tests would reduce the potential for injury, while the compression-based measures indicated the opposite.