Experimental investigation of the effect of occupant characteristics on contemporary seat belt payout behavior in frontal impacts

Objective: The goal of this study was to investigate the influence of the occupant characteristics on seat belt force vs. payout behavior based on experiment data from different configurations in frontal impacts.

Methods: The data set reviewed consists of 58 frontal sled tests using several anthropomorphic test devices (ATDs) and postmortem human subjects (PMHS), restrained by different belt systems (standard belt, SB; force-limiting belt, FLB) at 2 impact severities (48 and 29 km/h). The seat belt behavior was characterized in terms of the shoulder belt force vs. belt payout behavior. A univariate linear regression was used to assess the factor significance of the occupant body mass or stature on the peak tension force and gross belt payout.

Results: With the SB, the seat belt behavior obtained by the ATDs exhibited similar force slopes regardless of the occupant size and impact severities, whereas those obtained by the PMHS were varied. Under the 48 km/h impact, the peak tension force and gross belt payout obtained by ATDs was highly correlated to the occupant stature (P =.03, P =.02) and body mass (P =.05, P =.04), though no statistical difference with the stature or body mass were noticed for the PMHS (peak force: P =.09, P =.42; gross payout: P =.40, P =.48). With the FLB under the 48 km/h impact, highly linear relationships were noticed between the occupant body mass and the peak tension force (R² = 0.9782) and between the gross payout and stature (R² = 0.9232) regardless of the occupant types.

Conclusions: The analysis indicated that the PMHS characteristics showed a significant influence on the belt response, whereas the belt response obtained with the ATDs was more reproducible. The potential cause included the occupant anthropometry, body mass distribution, and relative motion among body segments specific to the population variance. This study provided a primary data source to understand the biomechanical interaction of the occupant with the restraint system. Further research is necessary to consider these effects in the computational studies and optimized design of the restraint system in a more realistic manner.     

Occupant responses in conventional and ABTS seats in high-speed rear sled tests

Objective: This study compared biomechanical responses of a normally seated Hybrid III dummy on conventional and all belts to seat (ABTS) seats in 40.2 km/h (25 mph) rear sled tests. It determined the difference in performance with modern (≥2000 MY) seats compared to older (<2000 MY) seats and ABTS seats.

Methods: The seats were fixed in a sled buck subjected to a 40.2 km/h (25 mph) rear sled test. The pulse was a 15 g double-peak acceleration with 150 ms duration. The 50th percentile Hybrid III was lap–shoulder belted in the FMVSS 208 design position. The testing included 11 <2000 MY, 8 ≥2000 MY, and 7 ABTS seats. The dummy was fully instrumented, including head accelerations, upper and lower neck 6-axis load cells, chest acceleration, thoracic and lumbar spine load cells, and pelvis accelerations. The peak responses were normalized by injury assessment reference values (IARVs) to assess injury risks. Statistical analysis was conducted using Student's t test. High-speed video documented occupant kinematics.

Results: Biomechanical responses were lower with modern (≥2000 MY) seats than older (<2000 MY) designs. The lower neck extension moment was 32.5 ± 9.7% of IARV in modern seats compared to 62.8 ± 31.6% in older seats (P =.01). Overall, there was a 34% reduction in the comparable biomechanical responses with modern seats. Biomechanical responses were lower with modern seats than ABTS seats. The lower neck extension moment was 41.4 ± 7.8% with all MY ABTS seats compared to 32.5 ± 9.7% in modern seats (P =.07). Overall, the ABTS seats had 13% higher biomechanical responses than the modern seats.

Conclusions: Modern (≥2000 MY) design seats have lower biomechanical responses in 40.2 km/h rear sled tests than older (<2000 MY) designs and ABTS designs. The improved performance is consistent with an increase in seat strength combined with improved occupant kinematics through pocketing of the occupant into the seatback, higher and more forward head restraint, and other design changes. The methods and data presented here provide a basis for standardized testing of seats. However, a complete understanding of seat safety requires consideration of out-of-position (OOP) occupants in high-speed impacts and consideration of the much more common, low-speed rear impacts.     

Evaluation of the effectiveness of toe board energy-absorbing material for foot,ankle, and lower leg injury reduction

Objective: Since 2000, numerous improvements have been made to the National Association for Stock Car Auto Racing, Incorporated (NASCAR®) driver restraint system, resulting in improved crash protection for motorsports drivers. Advancements have included seats, head and neck restraints (HNRs), seat belt restraint systems, driver helmets, and others. These enhancements have increased protection for drivers from severe crash loading. Extending protection to the driver's extremities remains challenging. Though the drivers’ legs are well contained for lateral and vertical crashes, they remain largely unrestrained in frontal and frontal oblique crashes.

Method: Sled testing was conducted for the evaluation of an energy-absorbing (EA) toe board material to be used as a countermeasure for leg and foot injuries. Testing included baseline rigid toe boards, tests with EA material–covered toe boards, and pretest positioning of the 50th percentile male frontal Hybrid III anthropomorphic test device (ATD) lower extremities. ATD leg and foot instrumentation included foot acceleration and tibia forces and moments.

Results: The sled test data were evaluated using established injury criteria for tibial plateau fractures, leg shaft fractures, and calcaneus, talus, ankle, and midfoot fractures.

Conclusion: A polyurethane EA foam was found to be effective in limiting axial tibia force and foot accelerations when subjected to frontal impacts using the NASCAR motorsport restraint system.     

Validation of a booted finite element model of the WIAMan ATD lower limb in component and whole-body vertical loading impacts with an assessment of the boot influence model on response

Objective: A novel anthropomorphic test device (ATD) representative of the 50th percentile male soldier is being developed to predict injuries to a vehicle occupant during an underbody blast (UBB). The main objective of this study was to develop and validate a finite element (FE) model of the ATD lower limb outfitted with a military combat boot and to insert the validated lower limb into a model of the full ATD and simulate vertical loading experiments.

Methods: A Belleville desert combat boot model was assigned contacts and material properties based on previous experiments. The boot model was fit to a previously developed model of the barefoot ATD. Validation was performed through 6 matched pair component tests conducted on the Vertically Accelerated Loads Transfer System (VALTS). The load transfer capabilities of the FE model were assessed along with the force-mitigating properties of the boot. The booted lower limb subassembly was then incorporated into a whole-body model of the ATD. Two whole-body VALTS experiments were simulated to evaluate lower limb performance in the whole body.

Results: The lower limb model accurately predicted axial loads measured at heel, tibia, and knee load cells during matched pair component tests. Forces in booted simulations were compared to unbooted simulations and an amount of mitigation similar to that of experiments was observed. In a whole-body loading environment, the model kinematics match those recorded in experiments. The shape and magnitude of experimental force–time curves were accurately predicted by the model. Correlation between the experiments and simulations was backed up by high objective rating scores for all experiments.

Conclusion: The booted lower limb model is accurate in its ability to articulate and transfer loads similar to the physical dummy in simulated underbody loading experiments. The performance of the model leads to the recommendation to use it appropriately as an alternative to costly ATD experiments.     

Differences in the kinematics of booster-seated pediatric occupants using two different car seats

Objective: The objective of this article is to compare the performance of forward-facing child restraint systems (CRS) mounted on 2 different seats.

Methods: Two different anthropomorphic test device (ATD) sizes (P3 and P6), using the same child restraint system (a non-ISOFIX high-back booster seat), were exposed to the ECE R44 regulatory deceleration pulse in a deceleration sled. Two different seats (seat A, seat B) were used. Three repetitions per ATD and mounting seat were done, resulting in a total of 12 sled crashes. Dummy sensors measured the head tri-axial acceleration and angular rate and the thorax tri-axial acceleration, all acquired at 10,000 Hz. A high-speed video camera recorded the impact at 1,000 frames per second. The 3D kinematics of the head and torso of the ATDs were captured using a high-speed motion capture system (1,000 Hz). A pair-matched statistical analysis compared the outcomes of the tests using the 2 different seats.

Results: Statistically significant differences in the kinematic response of the ATDs associated with the type of seat were observed. The maximum 3 ms peak of the resultant head acceleration was higher on seat A for the P3 dummy (54.5 ± 1.9 g vs. 44.2 ± 0.5 g; P =.012) and for the P6 dummy (56.0 ± 0.8 g vs. 51.7 ± 1.2 g; P =.015). The peak belt force was higher on seat A than on seat B for the P3 dummy (5,488.0 ± 198.0 N vs. 4,160.6 ± 63.6 N; P =.008) and for the P6 dummy (7,014.0 ± 271.0 N vs. 5,719.3 ± 37.4 N; P =.015). The trajectory of the ATD head was different between the 2 seats in the sagittal, transverse, and frontal planes.

Conclusion: The results suggest that the overall response of the booster-seated occupant exposed to the same impact conditions was different depending on the seat used regardless of the size of the ATD. The differences observed in the response of the occupants between the 2 seats can be attributed to the differences in cushion stiffness, seat pan geometry, and belt geometry. However, these results were obtained for 2 particular seat models and a specific CRS and therefore cannot be directly extrapolated to the generality of vehicle seats and CRS.     

Comparison of current ATDs with Chinese adults in anthropometry

Objective: Crash test dummies are full-scale anthropomorphic test devices (ATDs) that simulate the dimensions, weight proportions, and articulation of the human body and are used to measure human injury potential in vehicle crashes. The Hybrid III dummy family, which is widely used currently, takes selected percentiles of anthropometry dimensions of U.S. adults as design references. The objective of this study was to assess the difference in anthropometry between Chinese adults and the currently used dummy.

Methods: Based on the Chinese National Physical Fitness Surveillance of the year 2000, 2005, 2010 and National Standard of China GB/T 10000–1988, a series of anthropometric parameters for Chinese adults were obtained, and data analysis was conducted between Chinese adults and ATDs that are currently used.

Results: The comparison revealed distinct anthropometric difference between ATDs and Chinese adults. Based on the latest data, median Chinese females were about 2.6% lower in stature and about 8.03% lower in body weight than the ATD design targets. Similarly, median Chinese males were about 3.48% shorter and weighed 11.89% less than the ATD design targets.

Conclusions: Although the anthropometric differences between Chinese adults and the Hybrid III ATD specifications were modest and growing smaller, it is advisable to take the differences in anthropometry between ATDs and Chinese adults into consideration when developing new vehicles in China to provide effective protection specifically for Chinese occupants.     

Computational investigation of the effects of knee airbag design on the interaction with occupant lower extremity in frontal and oblique impacts

Objective: The lower extremity of the occupant represents the most frequently injured body region in motor vehicle crashes. Knee airbags (KABs) have been implemented as a potential countermeasure to reduce lower extremity injuries. Despite the increasing prevalence of KABs in vehicles, the biomechanical interaction of the human lower extremity with the KAB has not been well characterized. This study uses computational models of the human body and KABs to explore how KAB design may influence the impact response of the occupant's lower extremities.

Methods: The analysis was conducted using a 50th percentile male occupant human body model with deployed KABs in a simplified vehicle interior. The 2 common KAB design types, bottom-deploy KAB (BKAB) and rear-deploy KAB (RKAB), were both included. A state-of-the-art airbag modeling technique, the corpuscular particle method, was adopted to represent the deployment dynamics of the unfolding airbags. Validation of the environment model was performed based on previously reported test results. The kinematic responses of the occupant lower extremities were compared under both KAB designs, 2 seating configurations (in-position and out-of-position), and 3 loading conditions (static, frontal, and oblique impacts). A linear statistical model was used to assess factor significance considering the impact responses of the occupant lower extremities.

Results: The presence of a KAB had a significant influence on the lower extremity kinematics compared to no KAB (P <.05) by providing early restraint and distributing contact force on the legs during airbag deployment. For in-position occupants, the KAB generally tended to decrease tibia loadings. The RKAB led to greater lateral motion of the legs compared to the BKAB, resulting in higher lateral displacement at the knee joint and abduction angle change (51.2 ± 21.7 mm and 15° ± 6.0°) over the dynamic loading conditions. Change in the seating position led to a significant difference in occupant kinematic and kinetic parameters (P <.05). For the out-of-position (forward-seated) occupant, the earlier contact between the lower extremity and the deploying KAB resulted in 28.4° ± 5.8° greater abduction, regardless of crash scenarios. Both KAB types reduced the axial force in the femur relative to no KAB. Overall, the out-of-position occupant sustained a raised axial force and bending moment of the tibia by 0.8 ± 0.2 kN and 21.1 ± 8.7 Nm regardless of restraint use.

Conclusions: The current study provided a preliminary computational examination on KAB designs based on a limited set of configurations in an idealized vehicle interior. Results suggested that the BKAB tended to provide more coverage and less leg abduction compared to the RKAB in oblique impact and/or the selected out-of-position scenario. An out-of-position occupant was associated with larger abduction and lower extremity loads over all occupant configurations. Further investigations are recommended to obtain a full understanding of the KAB performance in a more realistic vehicle environment.     

An energy-absorbing sliding seat for reducing neck injury risks in rear impact—analysis for prototype built

Objective: This study investigated overall performance of an energy-absorbing sliding seat concept for whiplash neck injury prevention. The sliding seat allows its seat pan to slide backward for some distance under certain restraint force to absorb crash energy in rear impacts.

Methods: A numerical model that consisted of vehicle interior, seat, seat belt, and BioRID II dummy was built in MADYMO to evaluate whiplash neck injury in rear impact. A parametric study of the effects of sliding seat parameters, including position and cushion stiffness of head restraint, seatback cushion stiffness, recliner characteristics, and especially sliding energy-absorbing (EA) restraint force, on neck injury criteria was conducted in order to compare the effectiveness of the sliding seat concept with that of other existing anti-whiplash mechanisms. Optimal sliding seat design configurations in rear crashes of different severities were obtained. A sliding seat prototype with bending of a steel strip as an EA mechanism was fabricated and tested in a sled test environment to validate the concept. The performance of the sliding seat under frontal and rollover impacts was checked to make sure the sliding mechanism did not result in any negative effects.

Results: The protective effect of the sliding seat with EA restraint force is comparable to that of head restraint–based and recliner stiffness–based anti-whiplash mechanisms. EA restraint force levels of 3 kN in rear impacts of low and medium severities and 6 kN in impacts of high severity were obtained from optimization. In frontal collision and rollover, compared to the nonsliding seat, the sliding seat does not result in any negative effects on occupant protection. The sled test results of the sliding seat prototype have shown the effectiveness of the concept for reducing neck injury risks.

Conclusion: As a countermeasure, the sliding seat with appropriate restraint forces can significantly reduce whiplash neck injury risk in rear impacts of low, medium, and high severities with no negative effects on other crash load cases.     

The effect of precrash velocity reduction on occupant response using a human body finite element model

Objective: The objective of this study is to use a validated finite element model of the human body and a certified model of an anthropomorphic test dummy (ATD) to evaluate the effect of simulated precrash braking on driver kinematics, restraint loads, body loads, and computed injury criteria in 4 commonly injured body regions.

Methods: The Global Human Body Models Consortium (GHBMC) 50th percentile male occupant (M50-O) and the Humanetics Hybrid III 50th percentile models were gravity settled in the driver position of a generic interior equipped with an advanced 3-point belt and driver airbag. Fifteen simulations per model (30 total) were conducted, including 4 scenarios at 3 severity levels: median, severe, and the U.S. New Car Assessment Program (U.S.-NCAP) and 3 extra per model with high-intensity braking. The 4 scenarios were no precollision system (no PCS), forward collision warning (FCW), FCW with prebraking assist (FCW+PBA), and FCW and PBA with autonomous precrash braking (FCW + PBA + PB). The baseline ΔV was 17, 34, and 56.4 kph for median, severe, and U.S.-NCAP scenarios, respectively, and were based on crash reconstructions from NASS/CDS. Pulses were then developed based on the assumed precrash systems equipped. Restraint properties and the generic pulse used were based on literature.

Results: In median crash severity cases, little to no risk (<10% risk for Abbreviated injury Scale [AIS] 3+) was found for all injury measures for both models. In the severe set of cases, little to no risk for AIS 3+ injury was also found for all injury measures. In NCAP cases, highest risk was typically found with No PCS and lowest with FCW + PBA + PB. In the higher intensity braking cases (1.0–1.4 g), head injury criterion (HIC), brain injury criterion (BrIC), and chest deflection injury measures increased with increased braking intensity. All other measures for these cases tended to decrease. The ATD also predicted and trended similar to the human body models predictions for both the median, severe, and NCAP cases. Forward excursion for both models decreased across median, severe, and NCAP cases and diverged from each other in cases above 1.0 g of braking intensity.

Conclusions: The addition of precrash systems simulated through reduced precrash speeds caused reductions in some injury criteria, whereas others (chest deflection, HIC, and BrIC) increased due to a modified occupant position. The human model and ATD models trended similarly in nearly all cases with greater risk indicated in the human model. These results suggest the need for integrated safety systems that have restraints that optimize the occupant's position during precrash braking and prior to impact.     

Predictors of restraint use among child occupants

Objectives: The objective of this study was to identify factors that predict restraint use and optimal restraint use among children aged 0 to 13 years.

Methods: The data set is a national sample of police-reported crashes for years 2010–2014 in which type of child restraint is recorded. The data set was supplemented with demographic census data linked by driver ZIP code, as well as a score for the state child restraint law during the year of the crash relative to best practice recommendations for protecting child occupants. Analysis used linear regression techniques.

Results: The main predictor of unrestrained child occupants was the presence of an unrestrained driver. Among restrained children, children had 1.66 (95% confidence interval, 1.27, 2.17) times higher odds of using the recommended type of restraint system if the state law at the time of the crash included requirements based on best practice recommendations.

Conclusions: Children are more likely to ride in the recommended type of child restraint when their state's child restraint law includes wording that follows best practice recommendations for child occupant protection. However, state child restraint law requirements do not influence when caregivers fail to use an occupant restraint for their child passengers.     

Driver and front passenger injury in frontal crashes: Update on the effect of unbelted rear occupants

Purpose: This is a study of the influence of an unbelted rear occupant on the risk of severe injury to the front seat occupant ahead of them in frontal crashes. It provides an update to earlier studies.

Methods: 1997–2015 NASS-CDS data were used to investigate the risk for severe injury (Maximum Abbreviated Injury Score [MAIS] 4+F) to belted drivers and front passengers in frontal crashes by the presence of a belted or unbelted passenger seated directly behind them or without a rear passenger. Frontal crashes were identified with GAD1 = F without rollover (rollover ≤ 0). Front and rear outboard occupants were included without ejection (ejection = 0). Injury severity was defined by MAIS and fatality (F) by TREATMNT = 1 or INJSEV = 4. Weighted data were determined. The risk for MAIS 4+F was determined using the number of occupants with known injury status MAIS 0+F. Standard errors were determined.

Results: The risk for severe injury was 0.803 ± 0.263% for the driver with an unbelted left rear occupant and 0.100 ± 0.039% with a belted left rear occupant. The driver's risk was thus 8.01 times greater with an unbelted rear occupant than with a belted occupant (P <.001). With an unbelted right rear occupant behind the front passenger, the risk for severe injury was 0.277 ± 0.091% for the front passenger. The corresponding risk was 0.165 ± 0.075% when the right rear occupant was belted. The front passenger's risk was 1.68 times greater with an unbelted rear occupant behind them than a belted occupant (P <.001). The driver's risk for MAIS 4+F was highest when their seat was deformed forward. The risk was 9.94 times greater with an unbelted rear occupant than with a belted rear occupant when the driver's seat deformed forward. It was 13.4 ± 12.2% with an unbelted occupant behind them and 1.35 ± 0.95% with a belted occupant behind them.

Conclusions: Consistent with prior literature, seat belt use by a rear occupant significantly lowered the risk for severe injury to belted occupants seated in front of them. The reduction was greater for drivers than for front passengers. It was 87.5% for the driver and 40.6% for the front passenger. These results emphasize the need for belt reminders in all seating positions.     

Effect of posture on forces and moments measured in a Hybrid III ATD lower leg

Objective: Anthropomorphic test devices (ATDs) are used to assess real injury risk to occupants of vehicles during injurious events. In the lower leg, values from load cells are compared to injury criteria developed in cadaveric studies. These criteria are typically developed with the leg in a neutral posture, whereas the ATD may assume a wide range of postures during safety evaluation tests. The degree to which the initial posture of an ATD has an effect on the measured forces and moments in the lower leg is unknown.

Methods: A Hybrid III ATD lower leg was impacted in a range of postures under conditions representing a crash test, and peak axial force and adjusted tibia index injury measures were evaluated. Ankle posture was varied in 5° increments using a custom-made footplate, and dorsi/plantarflexion (20° DF to 20° PF) and in/eversion (20° IV to 5° EV) were evaluated. Tibia angle was also varied (representing knee flexion/extension) by ±10° from neutral.

Results: Peak axial force was not affected by ankle flexion or tibia angulation. Adjusted tibia index was lowest for plantarflexion, as well as for tibia angles representative of knee extension. Both peak axial force and adjusted tibia index were lowest for postures of great inversion and were highest in neutral or near-neutral postures.

Conclusions: The range of postures tested herein spanned published injury criteria and thus would have made the difference between pass and fail in a safety evaluation. In/eversion had the largest influence on injury metrics, likely due to the change in axial stiffness and altered impact durations in these postures. Results suggest increased injury risk at neutral or near-neutral postures, whereas previous cadaveric studies have suggested that in/eversion does not influence injury risk. It is unclear whether the ATD appropriately represents the natural lower leg for impacts in out-of-position testing. Great care must be taken when initially positioning ATDs for safety evaluations, because small perturbations in posture were shown herein to have large effects on the measured injury risk using this tool.     

Study of chest injuries to 3-year-old child occupants seated in impact shield and 5-point harness CRSs

Objective: The objective of this study was to investigate whether the 5-point harness or the impact shield child restraint system (CRS) or both have the potential to cause chest injuries to children. This is determined by examining whether the loading to the chest reaches the internal organ injury threshold for children.

Method: The chest injury risk to a child occupant in a CRS was investigated using Q3 dummy tests, finite element (FE) simulations (Q3 dummy and human models), and animal tests. The investigation was done for 2 types of CRSs (i.e., the impact shield CRS and 5-point harness CRS) based on the UN R44 dynamic test specifications.

Results: The tests using a Q3 dummy indicated that although the chest deflection of the dummy in the impact shield CRS was large, it was less than the injury threshold (40 mm). Computational biomechanics simulations (using finite element FE analysis) showed that the Q3 dummy's chest is loaded by the shield and deforms substantially under this load. To clarify whether chest injuries due to chest compression can occur with an impact shield or with the 5-point harness CRS, 7 experiments were performed using Tibetan miniature pigs with weights ranging from 9.7 to 13 kg. Severe chest and abdominal injuries (lung contusion, coronary artery laceration, liver laceration) were found in the tests using the impact shield CRS. No chest injuries were present when using the 5-point harness CRS.

Conclusion: When using the impact shield CRS, the chest deformed substantially in dummy tests and FE simulations, and chest and abdominal injuries were observed in pig tests. It is possible that these chest injuries could also occur to child occupants sitting in the impact shield CRS.     

Cross-correlation between the controlled collision environment and real-world motor vehicle collisions: Evaluating the protection of the thoracic side airbag

Objective: Thoracic side airbags (tSABs) were integrated into the vehicle fleet to attenuate and distribute forces on the occupant's chest and abdomen, dissipate the impact energy, and move the occupant away from the intruding structure, all of which reduce the risk of injury. This research piece investigates and evaluates the safety performance of the airbag unit by cross-correlating data from a controlled collision environment with field data.

Method: We focus exclusively on vehicle–vehicle lateral impacts from the NHTSA's Vehicle Crash Test Database and NASS-CDS database, which are replicated in the controlled environment by the (crabbed) barrier impact. Similar collisions with and without seat-embedded tSABs are matched to each other and the injury risks are compared.

Results: Results indicated that dummy-based thoracic injury metrics were significantly lower with tSAB exposure (P <.001). Yet, when the controlled collision environment data were cross-correlated with NASS-CDS collisions, deployment of the tSAB indicated no association with thoracic injury (tho. MAIS 2+ unadjusted relative risk [RR] = 1.14; 90% confidence interval [CI], 0.80–1.62; tho. MAIS 3+ unadjusted RR = 1.12; 90% CI, 0.76–1.65).

Conclusion: The data from the controlled collision environment indicated an unequivocal benefit provided by the thoracic side airbag for the crash dummy; however, the real-world collisions demonstrate that no benefit is provided to the occupant. This has resulted from a noncorrelation between the crash test/dummy-based design taking the abstracting process too far to represent the real-world collision scenario.     

Implications of head and neck restraint test repeatability for specification improvement

Objective: Since 2005, National Association for Stock Car Auto Racing, Incorporated (NASCAR) drivers have been required to use a head and neck restraint system (HNR) that complies with SFI Foundation, Inc. (SFI) 38.1. The primary purpose of the HNR is to control and limit injurious neck loads and head kinematics during frontal and frontal oblique impacts. The SFI 38.1 performance specification was implemented to establish a uniform test procedure and minimum standard for the evaluation of HNRs using dynamic sled testing. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the repeatability of the current SFI 38.1 test setup and explore the effects of a polyester seat belt restraint system.

Method: Eight sled tests were conducted using the SFI 38.1 sled test protocol with additional test setup constraints. Four 0° frontal tests and 4 30° right frontal (RF) oblique tests were conducted. The first 3 tests of each principal direction of force (PDOF) used nylon SFI 16.1 seat belt restraint assemblies. The fourth test of each PDOF used polyester SFI 16.6 seat belt restraint assemblies. A secondary data set (Lab B Data) was also supplied by the HNR manufacturer for further comparisons. The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 18571 objective comparison method was used to quantify the repeatability of the anthropomorphic test device (ATD) resultant head, chest, and pelvis acceleration and upper neck axial force and flexion extension bending moment time histories across multiple tests.

Results: Two data sets generated using the SFI 38.1 test protocol exhibited large variations in mean ISO scores of ATD channels. The 8 tests conducted with additional setup constraints had significantly lower mean ISO score coefficients of variation (CVs). The Lab B tests conducted within the current specification but without the additional test setup constraints had larger mean ISO score standard deviation and CV for all comparisons. Specifically, tests with the additional setup constraints had average CVs of 3.3 and 2.9% for the 0° and 30° RF orientations, respectively. Lab B tests had average CVs of 22.9 and 24.5%, respectively. Polyester seat belt comparisons had CVs of 5.3 and 6.2% for the 0° and 30° RF orientations, respectively.

Conclusion: With the addition of common test setup constraints, which do not violate the specification, the SFI 38.1 test protocol produced a repeatable test process for determining performance capabilities of HNRs within a single sled lab. A limited study using polyester webbing seat belt assemblies versus the nylon material called for in SFI 38.1 indicates that the material likely has less effects on ATD upper neck axial force and flexion extension bending moment time histories than the test setup freedom currently available within the specification. The additional test setup constraints are discussed and were shown to improve ATD response repeatability for a given HNR.     

Child restraint use and parental perceptions of comfort

Objective: Suboptimal child restraint use includes incorrect and/or inappropriate restraint use and increases the risk of injury. Comfort has been suggested as an important factor impacting on optimal use of restraints by children. This article aims to examine the relationships between parent reported comfort and restraint misuse and age-appropriate restraint choice.

Methods: This is an analysis of data from a cross sectional observation study of child restraint use in New South Wales. Logistic regression was used to model the relationship between parent-reported comfort and restraint misuse and age-appropriate restraint choice.

Results: There was no significant relationship between either parent-reported comfort and restraint misuse or parent-reported comfort and age-appropriate restraint choice.

Conclusions: Parent perceptions of comfort of children in child restraints do not appear to be associated with incorrect child restraint use or age appropriate restraint choice. It is possible that the actual comfort of the child may be related to incorrect use but this remains to be tested. Further investigation of the relationship between parent-perceived comfort and the actual comfort of the child, as well as the impact of child comfort on optimal child restraint use is warranted.     

Restraint use in the Eastern Province of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

Objectives: This study set out to examine seat belt and child restraint use in the Dammam Municipality of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, based on the premise that an increase in seat belt use would significantly reduce personal injury in traffic crashes. It was expected that local data would help identify intervention strategies necessary to improve seat belt use in the region.

Methods: The research involved 2 methodologies. First, 1,389 face-to-face interviews were conducted with male and female adults in regional shopping plazas regarding their own and their children's restraint use in their vehicles and reasons for these attitudes and beliefs. Second, 2 on-road observation studies of adult and child restraint use were conducted by trained observers. Occupants of approximately 5,000 passenger vehicles were observed while stopped at representative signalized traffic intersections.

Results: The findings showed front seat belt use rates of between 43 and 47% for drivers and 26 to 30% for front seat passengers; rear seat belt use rates were lower. While there seemed to be some knowledge about the purpose and reasons for restraining both adults and children in suitable restraints, this failed to be confirmed in the on-road observations.

Conclusions: Reasons for these rates and findings are discussed fully, and recommendations for improving seat belt use in the Dammam Municipality are included.     

Rating child passenger safety laws relative to best practice recommendations for occupant protection

Background: State laws regarding child passenger protection vary substantially.

Objectives: The objective of this study was to develop a scoring system to rate child passenger safety laws relative to best practice recommendations for each age of child.

Methods: State child passenger safety and seat belt laws were retrieved from the LexisNexis database for the years 2002–2015. Text of the laws was reviewed and compared to current best practice recommendations for child occupant protection for each age of child.

Results: A 0–4 scale was developed to rate the strength of the state law relative to current best practice recommendations. A rating of 3 corresponds to a law that requires a restraint that is sufficient to meet best practice, and a rating of 4 is given to a law that specifies several options that would meet best practice. Scores of 0, 1, or 2 are given to laws requiring less than best practice to different degrees. The same scale is used for each age of child despite different restraint recommendations for each age. Legislation that receives a score of 3 requires rear-facing child restraints for children under age 2, forward-facing harnessed child restraints for children aged 2 to 4, booster seats for children 5 to 10, and primary enforcement of seat belt use in all positions for children aged 11–13. Legislation requiring use of a “child restraint system according to instructions” would receive a score of 1 for children under age 2 and a 2 for children aged 2–4 because it would allow premature use of a booster for children weighing more than 13.6 kg (30 lb).

Conclusions: The scoring system developed in this study can be used in mathematical models to predict how child passenger safety legislation affects child restraint practices.     

Seat strength in rear body block tests

Purpose: This study collected and analyzed available testing of motor vehicle seat strength in rearward loading by a body block simulating the torso of an occupant. The data were grouped by single recliner, dual recliner, and all belts to seat (ABTS) seats.

Methods: The strength of seats to rearward loading has been evaluated with body block testing from 1964 to 2008. The database of available tests includes 217 single recliner, 65 dual recliner, and 18 ABTS seats. The trends in seat strength were determined by linear regression and differences between seat types were evaluated by Student's t-test. The average peak moment and force supported by the seat was determined by decade of vehicle model year (MY).

Results: Single recliner seats were used in motor vehicles in the 1960s to 1970s. The average strength was 918 ± 224 Nm (n = 26) in the 1960s and 1,069 ± 293 Nm (n = 65) in the 1980s. There has been a gradual increase in strength over time. Dual recliner seats started to phase into vehicles in the late 1980s. By the 2000s, the average strength of single recliner seats increased to 1,501 ± 335 Nm (n = 14) and dual recliner seats to 2,302 ± 699 Nm (n = 26). Dual recliner seats are significantly stronger than single recliner seats for each decade of comparison (P < .001). The average strength of ABTS seats was 4,395 ± 1,185 in-lb for 1989–2004 MY seats (n = 18). ABTS seats are significantly stronger than single or dual recliner seats (P < .001). The trend in ABTS strength is decreasing with time and converging toward that of dual recliner seats.

Conclusions: Body block testing is an quantitative means of evaluating the strength of seats for occupant loading in rear impacts. There has been an increase in conventional seat strength over the past 50 years. By the 2000s, most seats are 1,700–3,400 Nm moment strength. However, the safety of a seat is more complex than its strength and depends on many other factors.     

Effects of whole spine alignment patterns on neck responses in rear end impact

Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate the whole spine alignment in automotive seated postures for both genders and the effects of the spinal alignment patterns on cervical vertebral motion in rear impact using a human finite element (FE) model.

Methods: Image data for 8 female and 7 male subjects in a seated posture acquired by an upright open magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) system were utilized. Spinal alignment was determined from the centers of the vertebrae and average spinal alignment patterns for both genders were estimated by multidimensional scaling (MDS). An occupant FE model of female average size (162 cm, 62 kg; the AF 50 size model) was developed by scaling THUMS AF 05. The average spinal alignment pattern for females was implemented in the model, and model validation was made with respect to female volunteer sled test data from rear end impacts. Thereafter, the average spinal alignment pattern for males and representative spinal alignments for all subjects were implemented in the validated female model, and additional FE simulations of the sled test were conducted to investigate effects of spinal alignment patterns on cervical vertebral motion.

Results: The estimated average spinal alignment pattern was slight kyphotic, or almost straight cervical and less-kyphotic thoracic spine for the females and lordotic cervical and more pronounced kyphotic thoracic spine for the males. The AF 50 size model with the female average spinal alignment exhibited spine straightening from upper thoracic vertebra level and showed larger intervertebral angular displacements in the cervical spine than the one with the male average spinal alignment.

Conclusions: The cervical spine alignment is continuous with the thoracic spine, and a trend of the relationship between cervical spine and thoracic spinal alignment was shown in this study. Simulation results suggested that variations in thoracic spinal alignment had a potential impact on cervical spine motion as well as cervical spinal alignment in rear end impact condition.