Browse Topic: Rear-end crashes
Accidents during lane changes are increasingly becoming a problem due to various human based and environment-based factors. Reckless driving, fatigue, bad weather are just some of these factors. This research introduces an innovative algorithm for estimating crash risk during lane changes, including the Extended Lane Change Risk Index (ELCRI). Unlike existing studies and algorithms that mainly address rear-end collisions, this algorithm incorporates exposure time risk and anticipated crash severity risk using fault tree analysis (FTA). The risks are merged to find the ELCRI and used in real time applications for lane change assist to predict if lane change is safe or not. The algorithm defines zones of interest within the current and target lanes, monitored by sensors attached to the vehicle. These sensors dynamically detect relevant objects based on their trajectories, continuously and dynamically calculating the ELCRI to assess collision risk during lane changes. Additionally
Rear-facing infant seats that are positioned behind front outboard vehicle seats are at risk of being compromised by the rearward yielding of occupied front seat seatbacks during rear-impact collisions. This movement can cause the plastic shell of the infant seat to collapse and deform, increasing the risk of head injuries to the infant. Current designs of rear-facing infant seats typically do not consider the loading effects from the front seatback during rear-impact situations, which results in weak and collapsible shell structures. Moreover, regulatory compliance tests, such as FMVSS 213, do not include assessments of rear-facing infant seats under realistic rear-impact conditions. as the bench used for the regulatory test lacks realistic vehicle interior components. This study emphasizes the need for revised testing methodologies that employ sled tests with realistic seatback intrusion conditions to facilitate the development of improved infant seat designs. Research shows that
Safety improvements in vehicle crashworthiness remain a primary concern for automotive manufacturers due to the increasing complexity of traffic and the rising number of vehicles on roads globally. Enhancing structural integrity and energy absorption capabilities during collisions is paramount for passenger protection. In this context, longitudinal rails play a critical role in vehicle crashworthiness, particularly in mitigating the effects of rear collisions. This study evaluates the structural performance of a rear longitudinal rail extender, characterized by a U-shaped, asymmetric cross-section, subjected to rear-impact scenarios. Seventy-two finite-element models were systematically developed from a baseline configuration, exploring variations in material yield conditions, sheet thickness, and targeted geometric modifications, including deformation initiators at three distinct positions or maintaining the original geometry. Each model was simulated according to ECE R32 regulation
This SAE Recommended Practice describes the test procedures for conducting rear impact occupant restraint and equipment mounting integrity tests for ambulance patient compartment applications. Its purpose is to describe crash pulse characteristics and establish recommended test procedures that will standardize restraint system and equipment mount testing for ambulances. Descriptions of the test set-up, test instrumentation, photographic/video coverage, and the test fixtures are included.
Theory and principles of occupant protection for automobiles in rear-end collisions have experienced significant evolution over the decades. Performance of the seatback, specifically the stiffness of the structure, during such a collision has been a subject of particular interest and debate among design engineers, accident reconstruction experts, critics, etc. The majority of current seat designs rely on plastic deformation of the seatback structure to protect the occupant from the dynamics of the crash. In attempt to highlight and provide background information for understanding this subject, this work highlights significant events, research, and publications over the past five decades to illustrate how this subject, automobile design, government regulation and public opinion has evolved. It is observed that technology and design for improving rear-impact protection has received less attention than collisions of other principal directions of force. The different types of
Rear-end vehicle collisions may lead to whiplash-associated disorders (WADs), comprising a variety of neck and head pain responses. Specifically, increased axial head rotation has been associated with the risk of injuries during rear impacts, while specific tissues, including the capsular ligaments, have been implicated in pain response. Given the limited experimental data for out-of-position rear impact scenarios, computational human body models (HBMs) can inform the potential for tissue-level injury. Previous studies have considered external boundary conditions to reposition the head axially but were limited in reproducing a biofidelic movement. The objectives of this study were to implement a novel head repositioning method to achieve targeted axial rotations and evaluate the tissue-level response for a rear impact condition. The repositioning method used reference geometries to rotate the head to three target positions, showing good correspondence to reported interverbal rotations
This study was conducted to assess the occupant restraint use and injury risks by seating position. The results were used to discuss the merit of selected warning systems. The 1989-2015 NASS-CDS and 2017-2021 CISS data were analyzed for light vehicles in all, frontal and rear tow-away crashes. The differences in serious injury risk (MAIS 3+F) were determined for front and rear seating positions, including the right, middle and left second-row seats. Occupancy and restraint use were determined by model year groups. Occupancy relative to the driver was 27% in the right-front (RF) and 17% in the second row in all crashes. About 39% of second-row passengers were in the left seat, 15% in the center seat and 47% in the right seat. Restraint use was lower in the second row compared to front seats. It was 43% in the right-front and 32% in the second-row seats in all crashes involving serious injury. Restraint use increased with model year groups. It was 63% in the ‘61-‘89 MY vehicles and 90
Items per page:
50
1 – 50 of 200