滑套式井下安全阀设计及动态特性分析

为防止井喷、保证油气井正常生产,设计了1种滑套式井下安全阀,对其结构、控制方式和工作原理进行了介绍;采用有限元的方法对井下安全阀由开启到关闭的动态过程进行模拟,在滑套阀不同倒角情况下,对滑套阀内部流场特性和所受压力的变化规律进行分析。分析结果表明,在滑套阀关闭过程中流体最大速度达到275 m/s,滑套阀所承受最大压力超过40 MPa;流体速度和滑套阀所受压力都随着滑套阀开度的减小而增大,随滑套阀倒角的增大而减小。此滑套式井下安全阀采用压力脉冲控制方式,液压管线只需要传递压力脉冲信号,杜绝了因管线泄漏而造成的井下安全阀失效。同时,驱动方式改为电机驱动,直接控制滑套式阀门的开合,反应迅速,提高了安全性和可靠性,具有较好的实用价值。     

危化品罐车自封堵式安全截断阀设计与分析

为解决危化品罐车的储罐阀门管线等关键部件易损坏造成危化品泄漏的问题,基于系统本质安全原理设计1种内置自封堵式安全截断阀并对其关键部件强度进行校核计算,建立实现阀芯阀座有效密封的三维实体模型并完成有限元分析。结果表明:在阀座密封面与球形阀芯接触处出现最大应力,阀座承受的最大应力小于材料的最大屈服应力,内置自封堵式安全截断阀具有较高的可靠性,可为危化品储运相关安全装置设计提供理论参考。     

Dynamic behaviour of direct spring loaded pressure relief valves in gas service: II reduced order modelling

A previous study of gas-service direct-spring pressure relief valves connected to a tank via a straight pipe is continued by deriving a reduced-order model for predicting oscillatory instabilities such as valve flutter and chatter. The reduction process uses collocation to take into account a finite number N of acoustic pressure waves within the pipe, resulting in a set of 2N+3 ordinary differential equations. Following a novel non-dimensionalization, it is shown analytically that the model can exhibit, at experimentally realistic parameter values, instabilities associated with coupling between the valve and acoustic waves in the pipe. The thresholds for each instability are such that for a given flow rate, the first mode to go unstable as the inlet pipe length increases is the quarter-wave mode, then a three-quarter wave, a 5/4-wave etc. Thus the primary mode of instability should always be due to the quarter wave. In the limit of low flow rates, a simple approximate expression is found for the quarter-wave instability threshold in the form of inlet pipe length against mass flow rate. This threshold curve is found to agree well with simulation of the full model. For higher flow rates there is a need to include fluid convection, inlet pressure loss and pipe friction in order to get good agreement. The reduced model enables the dependence of the stability curve on key dimensionless physical parameters to be readily computed.     

Factors contributing to serious and fatal injuries in belted rear seat occupants in frontal crashes

Abstract

Objectives: Earlier research has shown that the rear row is safer for occupants in crashes than the front row, but there is evidence that improvements in front seat occupant protection in more recent vehicle model years have reduced the safety advantage of the rear seat versus the front seat. The study objective was to identify factors that contribute to serious and fatal injuries in belted rear seat occupants in frontal crashes in newer model year vehicles.

Methods: A case series review of belted rear seat occupants who were seriously injured or killed in frontal crashes was conducted. Occupants in frontal crashes were eligible for inclusion if they were 6 years old or older and belted in the rear of a 2000 or newer model year passenger vehicle within 10 model years of the crash year. Crashes were identified using the 2004–2015 National Automotive Sampling System Crashworthiness Data System (NASS-CDS) and included all eligible occupants with at least one Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) 3 or greater injury. Using these same inclusion criteria but split into younger (6 to 12 years) and older (55+ years) cohorts, fatal crashes were identified in the 2014–2015 Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) and then local police jurisdictions were contacted for complete crash records.

Results: Detailed case series review was completed for 117 rear seat occupants: 36 with Maximum Abbreviated Injury Scale (MAIS) 3+ injuries in NASS-CDS and 81 fatalities identified in FARS. More than half of the injured and killed rear occupants were more severely injured than front seat occupants in the same crash. Serious chest injury, primarily caused by seat belt loading, was present in 22 of the injured occupants and 17 of the 37 fatalities with documented injuries. Nine injured occupants and 18 fatalities sustained serious head injury, primarily from contact with the vehicle interior or severe intrusion. For fatal cases, 12 crashes were considered unsurvivable due to a complete loss of occupant space. For cases considered survivable, intrusion was not a large contributor to fatality.

Discussion: Rear seat occupants sustained serious and fatal injuries due to belt loading in crashes in which front seat occupants survived, suggesting a discrepancy in restraint performance between the front and rear rows. Restraint strategies that reduce loading to the chest should be considered, but there may be potential tradeoffs with increased head excursion, particularly in the absence of rear seat airbags. Any new restraint designs should consider the unique needs of the rear seat environment.     

An experimental study of viscous flows in contractions

The need to improve the methods used when designing emergency, pressure-relief systems on polymerisation reactors, has made the flow of highly viscous fluids in pipeline fittings highly topical. This paper investigates the flow processes involved in single-phase, viscous flows in nozzles and orifice plates. These fittings were chosen because they would give an insight into the behaviour of highly viscous flows in other geometries, such as the flow upstream of the seat in a pressure relief valve. Experimental data are presented for a pipe, two conical nozzles and a sharp-edged orifice plate for laminar flows in the Reynolds number range 50–400 and for turbulent flows. The volume flow rate—pressure drop characteristics are presented for both nozzles and the orifice plate. The discharge momentum flow rate for the pipe, a nozzle and the orifice plate are also given. Analysis of the data shows that nozzles and orifice plates that are geometrically similar have a similar resistance to flow. It is also shown that the contraction coefficient for an orifice plate tends to unity at low Reynolds numbers.     

The dynamic response of pressure relief valves in vapor or gas service,part I: Mathematical model

In order to prevent unstable operation, or “chatter”, of a pressure relief the API guidelines recommend limiting the irreversible pressure loss in the inlet line to a pressure relief valve to no more than 3% of the valve set pressure. This criterion is based on steady-state operating conditions and a typical blow-down pressure for the valve of about 7% of the set pressure. However, the stability of the valve is also influenced by other factors such as the dynamic response of the valve disk to the unsteady pressures and forces exerted by the fluid on the disk. A model for the opening lift dynamic response of a pressure relief valve in gas/vapor service is presented here which accounts for all of these effects through a set of five coupled nonlinear algebraic/differential equations. These equations are solved by a numerical method that can be implemented on a spreadsheet to predict the position of the valve disk as a function of time for given valve characteristics, operating conditions, and installation parameters. The model incorporates the influence of the various parameters on the stable/unstable nature of the disk response. An example is presented for a typical valve that illustrates the various modes of stable and unstable dynamic response that can be predicted by the model under various conditions. Two additional papers will be forthcoming: Part II – Experimental Investigation and Part III – Analysis of Data and Comparison with Model Predictions.     

Postural Stability of Sitting Women

The study examined the utility of stabilometric dimensions and explored whether the changes in sitting postures were manifested in functional measures of postural control. Eleven women participated in the study, which used 11 chair sitting postures: arms on laps or arms right angled; armrest at a height of 17, 20 and 23 cm; with or without backrest; slouch or straight back; legs right angled at knees or crossed legs. The backrest and armrest shifted 16.3% of body weight from a seat pan. The characteristics of stabilometric dimensions evaluated the influence of seat components and sitting behaviour on postural balance. The study attempted to evaluate stability and its application in human-seat interface design.     

Influence of seat geometry and seating posture on NIC(max) long-term AIS 1 neck injury predictability

OBJECTIVE: Validated injury criteria are essential when developing restraints for AIS 1 neck injuries, which should protect occupants in a variety of crash situations. Such criteria have been proposed and attempts have been made to validate or disprove these. However, no criterion has yet been fully validated. The objective of this study is to evaluate the influence of seat geometry and seating posture on the NIC(max) long-term AIS 1 neck injury predictability by making parameter analyses on reconstructed real-life rear-end crashes with known injury outcomes. METHODS: Mathematical models of the BioRID II and three car seats were used to reconstruct 79 rear-end crashes involving 110 occupants with known injury outcomes. Correlations between the NIC(max) values and the duration of AIS 1 neck injuries were evaluated for variations in seat geometry and seating posture. Sensitivities, specificities, positive predictive values, and negative predictive values were also calculated to evaluate the NIC(max) predictability. RESULTS: Correlations between the NIC(max) values and the duration of AIS 1 neck injuries were found and these relations were used to establish injury risk curves for variations in seat geometry and seating posture. Sensitivities, specificities, positive predictive values, and negative predictive values showed that the NIC(max) predicts long-term AIS 1 neck injuries also for variations in seat geometry and seating postures. CONCLUSION: The NIC(max) can be used to predict long-term AIS 1 neck injuries.     

Dynamic model for a heat exchanger tube rupture discharging a high-pressure flashing liquid into a low-pressure liquid-filled shell

Shell-tube type heat exchangers are often used to exchange heat between a high-pressure fluid and a low-pressure fluid. The pressure difference between these two fluids could be significantly high. In the event of a partial or full rupture of a tube, a problem may arise in that a transient pressure rise phenomenon could occur due to the flashing of the high-pressure sub-cooled fluid in the tube into the low-pressure shell, which may cause the shell to rupture with subsequent damage to equipment. This paper presents a dynamic model to describe the transient phenomenon occurring on the shell side following various scenarios of tube rupture. The spatial and temporal aspects of the flow transients along the pressure safety valve riser are accounted for by solving the one-dimensional continuity and momentum hyperbolic partial differential equations as applied to the liquid-filled riser. The dynamics of the attached piping system are also accounted for via two mechanistic models; the first is based on an inertial-resistive assumption of the fluids in this system, while the other is based on the assumption of anechoic perturbations passing through a long section of the attached piping. The latter is justified in cases where the attached piping is long enough such that reflections from the downstream end do not interfere with transients occurring in the shell during the initial phase of fluid flashing into the shell side following rupture. The various phases of this phenomenon are described, however the paper focuses on the initial phase of the phenomenon during which shell overpressure may be encountered. The model is applied to two ethylene heaters in tandem; the first uses propylene on the shell side to heat the ethylene on the tube side, while the second uses methanol, also on the shell side. The ratio between the shell design pressure to the tube design pressure in these two heaters are 0.169 and 0.154, respectively, hence the motivation to accurately model the transients involved in this phenomenon. The practical aspects and discussion around techniques to alleviate potential overpressure scenarios due to tube rupture are emphasized throughout the paper.     

Influence of Seat Properties on Occupant Dynamics in Severe Rear Crashes

Seat performance in retaining an occupant, transferring energy, and controlling neck responses is often questioned after severe rear crashes when fatal or disabling injury occur. It is argued that a stiffer seat would have improved occupant kinematics. However, there are many factors in occupant interactions with the seat. This study evaluates four different seat types in 26 and 32 mph (42 and 51 km/h), rear crash delta Vs. Two seats were yielding with k = 20 kN/m occupant load per displacement. One represented a 1970s yielding seat with j = 3.4°/kN frame rotation per occupant load, and 3 kN maximum load (660 Nm moment), and the other a high retention seat phased into production since 1997 with j = 1.4°/kN, and 10 kN maximum load (2200 Nm). Two seats were stiff with k = 40 kN/m. One represented a 1990s foreign benchmark with j = 1.8°/kN and a 7.7 kN maximum load (1700 Nm), and the other an all belts to seat (ABTS) with j = 1.0°/kN and 20 kN maximum load (4400 Nm). The crash was a constant acceleration of 11.8 g, or 14.5 g for 100 ms. Occupant interactions with the seat were modeled using a torso mass, flexible neck and head mass. By analysis of the equations of motion, the initial change in seatback angle (Δθ) is proportional to jk(y ? x), the product jk and the differential motion between the vehicle (seat cushion) and occupant. The transition from 1970s–80s yielding seats to stronger seats of the 1990s involved an increase in k stiffness; however, the jk property did not change as frame structures became stronger. The yielding seats of the 1970s had jk = 68°/m, while the stiff foreign benchmark seat had jk = 72°/m. The foreign benchmark rotated about the same as the 1970s seat up to 50 ms in the severe rear crashes. While it was substantially stronger, it produced higher loads on the occupant, and the higher loads increased seatback rotations and neck responses. The ABTS seat had the lowest rotations but also caused high neck responses because of the greater loads on the torso. Neck displacement (d) is initially proportional to (k/m_T) ∫∫ y, seat stiffness times the second integral of vehicle displacement divided by torso mass. As seat stiffness increases, head-torso acceleration, velocity, and neck displacement increase. This study shows that the jk seat property determines the initial seatback rotation in rear crashes. If a stronger seat has a higher stiffness, it rotates at higher loads on the occupant, reducing the overall benefit of the stronger frame, while increasing neck responses related to whiplash or neck extension prior to subsequent impacts. The aim of seat designs should be to reduce jk, provide pocketing of the pelvis, and give head-neck support for the best protection in severe rear crashes. For low-speed crashes, a low k is important to reduce early neck responses related to whiplash.     

大客车正面碰撞乘客约束系统仿真分析

为探究约束系统在全承载客车正面碰撞事故中对乘客损伤的影响,利用有限元分析软件LS_DYNA建立某大客车正面碰撞仿真模型,并开展整车50 km/h正面100％重叠碰撞固定刚性壁障试验;从车身变形、加速度曲线和乘员损伤等3方面验证仿真模型;基于已验证的仿真模型,开展不同座椅间距、车厢位置及安全带类型的乘员运动响应和损伤等综...     

Influence of seat properties on occupant dynamics in severe rear crashes

Seat performance in retaining an occupant, transferring energy, and controlling neck responses is often questioned after severe rear crashes when fatal or disabling injury occur. It is argued that a stiffer seat would have improved occupant kinematics. However, there are many factors in occupant interactions with the seat. This study evaluates four different seat types in 26 and 32 mph (42 and 51 km/h), rear crash delta Vs. Two seats were yielding with k = 20 kN/m occupant load per displacement. One represented a 1970s yielding seat with j = 3.4 degrees /kN frame rotation per occupant load, and 3 kN maximum load (660 Nm moment), and the other a high retention seat phased into production since 1997 with j = 1.4 degrees /kN, and 10 kN maximum load (2200 Nm). Two seats were stiff with k = 40 kN/m. One represented a 1990s foreign benchmark with j = 1.8 degrees /kN and a 7.7 kN maximum load (1700 Nm), and the other an all belts to seat (ABTS) with j = 1.0 degrees /kN and 20 kN maximum load (4400 Nm). The crash was a constant acceleration of 11.8 g, or 14.5 g for 100 ms. Occupant interactions with the seat were modeled using a torso mass, flexible neck and head mass. By analysis of the equations of motion, the initial change in seatback angle (Deltatheta) is proportional to jk(y - x), the product jk and the differential motion between the vehicle (seat cushion) and occupant. The transition from 1970s-80s yielding seats to stronger seats of the 1990s involved an increase in k stiffness; however, the jk property did not change as frame structures became stronger. The yielding seats of the 1970s had jk = 68 degrees /m, while the stiff foreign benchmark seat had jk = 72 degrees /m. The foreign benchmark rotated about the same as the 1970s seat up to 50 ms in the severe rear crashes. While it was substantially stronger, it produced higher loads on the occupant, and the higher loads increased seatback rotations and neck responses. The ABTS seat had the lowest rotations but also caused high neck responses because of the greater loads on the torso. Neck displacement (d) is initially proportional to (k/m(T)) integral integral y, seat stiffness times the second integral of vehicle displacement divided by torso mass. As seat stiffness increases, head-torso acceleration, velocity, and neck displacement increase. This study shows that the jk seat property determines the initial seatback rotation in rear crashes. If a stronger seat has a higher stiffness, it rotates at higher loads on the occupant, reducing the overall benefit of the stronger frame, while increasing neck responses related to whiplash or neck extension prior to subsequent impacts. The aim of seat designs should be to reduce jk, provide pocketing of the pelvis, and give head-neck support for the best protection in severe rear crashes. For low-speed crashes, a low k is important to reduce early neck responses related to whiplash.     

Disparity of a Seat Cushion and Its Influence on Postural Control

Properties of supporting surfaces of a seat have an influence on postural control. Centre of pressure (COP) displacement parameters reflect both the balance controlling process and movements of the centre of a mass of entire body. The subjects of the study were 9 healthy men. A seat cushion was examined with a 2-force platform setup. Force exertion at a seat pan and feet and COP displacement at a seat pan were measured to analyse postural control. Analysis of variance determined the differences in postural control depending on a cushion type among the subjects. Significant differences in COP displacement parameters were in COP trajectory length, medio-lateral COP displacement and COP velocity. The results of the study showed that foam cushion ensures better postural control.     

Predictors of rear seat belt use among U.S. adults, 2012

IntroductionSeat belt use reduces the risk of injuries and fatalities among motor vehicle occupants in a crash, but belt use in rear seating positions is consistently lower than front seating positions. Knowledge is limited concerning factors associated with seat belt use among adult rear seat passengers.MethodsData from the 2012 ConsumerStyles survey were used to calculate weighted percentages of self-reported rear seat belt use by demographic characteristics and type of rear seat belt use enforcement. Multivariable regression was used to calculate prevalence ratios for rear seat belt use, adjusting for person-, household- and geographic-level demographic variables as well as for type of seat belt law in place in the state.ResultsRear seat belt use varied by age, race, geographic region, metropolitan status, and type of enforcement. Multivariable regression showed that respondents living in states with primary (Adjusted Prevalence Ratio (APR): 1.23) and secondary (APR: 1.11) rear seat belt use enforcement laws were significantly more likely to report always wearing a seat belt in the rear seat compared with those living in a state with no rear seat belt use enforcement law.Conclusions and practical applicationsSeveral factors were associated with self-reported seat belt use in rear seating positions. Evidence suggests that primary enforcement covering all seating positions is an effective intervention that can be employed to increase seat belt use and in turn prevent motor vehicle injuries to rear-seated occupants.     

Passenger use of and attitudes toward rear seat belts

Objectives: This study sought to identify attitudes toward belt use in the rear seat and to gain insight into the experiences of rear-seat passengers. Method: A telephone survey conducted between June and August 2016 targeted adult passengers who had recently ridden in the rear and who did not always wear their seat belt when doing so. Respondents were questioned regarding their reasons for not buckling up and possible conditions under which they would be more likely to buckle up during rear-seat travel. Results: Of 1163 recent rear-seat passengers, 72% reported always using their seat belt in the rear. Full-time belt use was lower among passengers who primarily travel in the rear of hired vehicles compared with personal vehicles. The most common explanation for not buckling up was that the back seat is safer than the front. Four out of five agreed they do not buckle up because of type of trip; two-thirds forget or do not see the need; and two-thirds agreed with reasons related to design, comfort, or usability issues. Nearly 40% agreed that they sometimes do not buckle up in the rear because there is no law requiring it. Conclusion: Many reasons for not using belts in the rear are similar to reasons in the front, such as forgetfulness, inconvenience, or discomfort. One difference is that many rear-seat passengers perceive using the belt is unnecessary because the back seat is safer than the front. More than half of part-time belt users and nonusers reported interventions such as rear seat belt reminders, stronger belt-use laws, and more comfortable belts would make them more likely to use their seat belt in the rear seat. Practical applications: This study identifies barriers to rear seat belt use that point to the need for a multi-faceted approach to increase belt use.     

多角度辨识压裂套管变形的失效影响因素

页岩气开发具有施工压力大、排量大、改造规模大的特点,使得压裂套管处于复杂力学环境中。挤压、剪切和弯曲等载荷共同作用,易引发套管挤毁变形,进而导致后续作业时井下工具下入遇阻。但目前研究多针对压裂套管的单一失效原因,难以保障其完整可靠性。鉴于此,针对页岩气大规模压裂作业特点,从不同薄弱位置（如垂直段、造斜段、水平段）、不同自身规格（如钢级、外径、壁厚）和不同约束条件（如内压、孔径、螺距）等多角度,系统辨识套管变形的失效影响因素。通过建立压裂套管三维模拟的有限元模型,分析套管内压变化引起套管应力、位移的变化规律及形态,明确套管变形的大小以及与载荷变化的关系,并揭示套管变形的位置及影响因素的临界值。结果表明:压裂套管的造斜段最大变形、水平段应力集中现象较为严重,属于危险脆弱点;且套管最大应力、最大位移随内压的增加而近似成线性降低关系。     

Association Between NCAP Ratings and Real-World Rear Seat Occupant Risk of Injury

Objective: Several studies have evaluated the correlation between U.S. or Euro New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) ratings and injury risk to front seat occupants, in particular driver injuries. Conversely, little is known about whether NCAP 5-star ratings predict real-world risk of injury to restrained rear seat occupants. The NHTSA has identified rear seat occupant protection as a specific area under consideration for improvements to its NCAP. In order to inform NHTSA's efforts, we examined how NCAP's current 5-star rating system predicts risk of moderate or greater injury among restrained rear seat occupants in real-world crashes.

Methods: We identified crash-involved vehicles, model year 2004–2013, in NASS-CDS (2003–2012) with known make and model and nonmissing occupant information. We manually matched these vehicles to their NCAP star ratings using data on make, model, model year, body type, and other identifying information. The resultant linked NASS-CDS and NCAP database was analyzed to examine associations between vehicle ratings and rear seat occupant injury risk; risk to front seat occupants was also estimated for comparison. Data were limited to restrained occupants and occupant injuries were defined as any injury with a maximum Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) score of 2 or greater.

Results: We linked 95% of vehicles in NASS-CDS to a specific vehicle in NCAP. The 18,218 vehicles represented an estimated 6 million vehicles with over 9 million occupants. Rear seat passengers accounted for 12.4% of restrained occupants. The risk of injury in all crashes for restrained rear seat occupants was lower in vehicles with a 5-star driver rating in frontal impact tests (1.4%) than with 4 or fewer stars (2.6%, P =.015); results were similar for the frontal impact passenger rating (1.3% vs. 2.4%, P =.024). Conversely, side impact driver and passenger crash tests were not associated with rear seat occupant injury risk (driver test: 1.7% for 5-star vs. 1.8% for 1–4 stars; passenger test: 1.6% for 5 stars vs 1.8% for 1–4 stars).

Conclusions: Current frontal impact test procedures provide some degree of discrimination in real-world rear seat injury risk among vehicles with 5 compared to fewer than 5 stars. However, there is no evidence that vehicles with a 5-star side impact passenger rating, which is the only crash test procedure to include an anthropomorphic test dummy (ATD) in the rear, demonstrate lower risks of injury in the rear than vehicles with fewer than 5 stars. These results support prioritizing modifications to the NCAP program that specifically evaluate rear seat injury risk to restrained occupants of all ages.     

Influence of Seat Foam and Geometrical Properties on BioRID P3 Kinematic Response to Rear Impacts

As the primary interface with the human body during rear impact, the automotive seat holds great promise for mitigation of Whiplash Associated Disorders (WAD). Recent research has chronicled the potential influence of both seat geometrical and constitutive properties on occupant dynamics and injury potential. Geometrical elements such as reduced head to head restraint, rearward offset, and increased head restraint height have shown strong correlation with reductions in occupant kinematics. The stiffness and energy absorption of both the seating foam and the seat infrastructure are also influential on occupant motion; however, the trends in injury mitigation are not as clear as for the geometrical properties. It is of interest to determine whether, for a given seat frame and infrastructure, the properties of the seating foam alone can be tailored to mitigate WAD potential. Rear impact testing was conducted using three model year 2000 automotive seats (Chevrolet Camaro, Chevrolet S-10 pickup, and Pontiac Grand Prix), using the BioRID P3 anthropometric rear impact dummy. Each seat was distinct in construction and geometry. Each seat back was tested with various foams (i.e., standard, viscoelastic, low or high density). Seat geometries and infrastructures were constant so that the influence of the seating foams on occupant dynamics could be isolated. Three tests were conducted on each foam combination for a given seat (total of 102 tests), with a nominal impact severity of Delta V = 11 km/h (nominal duration of 100 msec). The seats were compared across a host of occupant kinematic variables most likely to be associated with WAD causation. No significant differences (p < 0.05) were found between seat back foams for tests within any given seat. However, seat comparisons yielded several significant differences (p < 0.05). The Camaro seat was found to result in several significantly different occupant kinematic variables when compared to the other seats. No significant differences were found between the Grand Prix and S-10 seats. Seat geometrical characteristics obtained from the Head Restraint Measuring Device (HRMD) showed good correlation with several occupant variables. It appears that for these seats and foams the head-to-head restraint horizontal and vertical distances are overwhelmingly more influential on occupant kinematics and WAD potential than the local foam properties within a given seat.     

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.