This study examines the biofidelity, repeatability, and reproducibility of various anthropomorphic devices in rear impacts. The Hybrid III, the Hybrid III with the RID neck, and the TAD-50 were tested in a rigid bench condition in rear impacts with ΔVs of 16 and 24 kph. The results of the tests were then compared to the data of Mertz and Patrick[1]. At a AV of 16 kph, all three anthropomorphic devices showed general agreement with Mertz and Patrick's data [1]. At a AV of 24 kph, the RID neck tended to exhibit larger discrepancies than the other two anthropomorphic devices. Also, two different RID necks produced significantly different moments at the occipital condyles under similar test conditions.
The Hybrid III and the Hybrid III with the RID neck were also tested on standard production seats in rear impacts for a AV of 8 kph. Both the kinematics and the occupant responses of the Hybrid III and the Hybrid III with the RID neck differed from each other. Comparison testing of the Hybrid III and TRID necks were conducted on production seats with different NIF scores [2] at ΔVs of 8 and 16 kph. The two necks responded similarly and no significant differences were observed. The corrected lower neck moment of both necks were predictive of the seats' NIF scores.
The Hybrid III and the Hybrid III with the pedestrian pelvis were also tested with standard production seats to determine if hip joint stiffness affected the kinematics of the ATD in rear impacts. The standard Hybrid III is a molded pelvis while the pedestrian pelvis is a cut pelvis. The kinematics and occupant responses of the two Hybrid III configurations were similar to each other. From this study, it can be concluded that the standard Hybrid III dummy is suitable for rear impact testing.