车用儿童约束装置综述

交通事故是14岁以下儿童死亡的主要原因之一,儿童约束装置(ChildRestraintSystem,CRS)能有效减少交通事故中儿童的伤亡。笔者对车用CRS进行较全面的概述,介绍CRS的定义、工作原理、分类、影响其安全性能的关键部件、国外相关强制性法规、固定装置、试验描述、国外CAE在CRS研发过程中的应用现状等主要内容,并简要指出未来几年欧洲的CRS研究重点。在此基础上,展望我国CRS的研究重点及发展方向,并对我国的儿童交通安全、CRS技术及其应用,提出下列建议:加强宣传力度,强化人们对儿童乘员的保护意识;制定强制性法规,保证CRS的使用率;在技术方面,重点加强CRS的CAE分析和动态试验研究,开发出适合我国儿童使用的CRS。     

我国(讨论稿)和欧洲关于行人保护法规的异同点

通过对欧洲和我国讨论稿关于行人保护法规的分析比较研究,在定义方面有着相同和不同;在下腿型冲击器对保险杠的试验、上腿型冲击器对保险杠的试验、儿童头型冲击器对发动机罩的试验、成人头型冲击器对发动机罩的试验等实验中,使用的实验仪器设备、实验手段和方法、实验程序、评价指标存在着相同和不同之处。与欧洲法规相比,我国讨论稿的一些评价指标值有待进一步完善,试验手段和方法需要进一步改进,通过比较分析来不断修订我国行人保护法规讨论稿,以利于我国未来正式颁布行人保护法规。     

校车儿童乘员约束系统的参数优化研究

为预防校车正面碰撞对儿童乘员的伤害,有必要分析和优化校车儿童乘员约束系统(CRS)参数。首先利用多刚体动力学分析软件(MADYMO),建立包括地板、前后排座椅、安全带与6岁儿童假人在内的校车乘员正面碰撞仿真模型。根据某型客车实车试验结果,验证模型的有效性。通过分析CRS参数的灵敏度,确定主要影响参数。采用正交试验的设计方法进行主要影响参数的正交优化;应用极差分析方法,得到一组最佳水平组合数据;对改进后的模型进行仿真计算,并与原模型比较。结果表明,经过优化的CRS能使6岁乘员的头部和胸部伤害指标都下降20%左右,并使伤害曲线变得更加平缓。     

高要求模式SIS异型冗余结构PFH计算模型*

为了满足石油化工生产中对高要求操作模式下采用异型设备的安全联锁回路进行SIL定级的需求,避免因误用同型PFH公式导致SIL等级评估误差。考虑各通道差异性及其失效顺序的遍历性,以MonteCarlo仿真值为多元线性回归模型观察样本,以改进共因失效部分多样性修正因子确定方法,提出异型KooN冗余结构每小时危险失效平均频率(PFH)的计算公式;比较该模型独立失效部分与异型1oo2结构Markov模型PFH结果,并分别将该模型和传统同型PFH公式应用于海上采油平台高完整性压力保护系统(HIPPS)异型关断阀子系统的比较分析。研究结果表明:在不同检测周期内,所提出的PFH计算模型与Markov模型PFH计算结果相对误差均保持在10-3数量级;但当检测周期大于3 a时,使用同型PFH公式会出现对HIPPS子系统SIL等级的误判,造成井口压力联锁保护功能过保护或欠保护。研究结果有助于生产单位准确评估联锁保护风险和设备维护投入。     

加强并完善儿童安全教育和保险体系确保儿童安全健康成长

一、认清形势,增强做好防止儿童意外伤害的紧迫感和责任感从20世纪70年代末起,在发达国家儿童总死亡排序中,意外死亡就一直盘踞在第一的位置。1990年,世界卫生组织发布报告:在世界大多数国家中,意外伤害是儿童青少年致伤、致残的最主要原因。我国学者经过历时两年的研究结果显示:从建国初期到现在,随着中国百姓生活水平的提高,肺炎、传染病和营养不良正逐步得到控制,而意外伤害已取代传染病和营养不良,越来越明显地成为影响儿童生命安全、生活质量和身体健康的重要因素。通过对我国     

浅析儿童爬山车倾翻的常见原因和应对措施

儿童爬山车的平稳行驶是设备运行安全的关键,车辆一旦发生倾翻必定会对乘客造成伤害。本文结合检验过程中实际发生的案例,客观分析了儿童爬山车倾翻的常见原因,并提出了改进措施,为儿童爬山车的生产、安装、维保、使用、检验等相关单位技术人员提供一定的参考。     

儿童家具新国标8月1日起正式实施

2012年8月1日,GB28007-2011《儿童家具通用技术条件》强制性国家标准将正式实施,这是我国首次制定的儿童家具强制性国家标准。该新标准适用于3~14岁儿童使用的家具产品,一旦实施,凡在中华人民共和国境内生产或销售的儿童家具的产品质量,将必须执行并符合本标准的要求。过去,儿童家具与成人家具使用同一质量标准,导致儿     

校车儿童安全气囊安全性仿真分析

为提高校车乘员约束系统在正面碰撞中对儿童乘员的保护效果,提出一种新型主动式校车儿童安全气囊。运用多刚体动力学分析软件MADYMO建立包括地板、前后排座椅、安全带与第5百分位女性假人在内的校车乘员正面碰撞仿真模型,通过台车试验结果验证模型的准确性。在此基础上,建立主动式安全气囊模型,研究其对12岁和6岁乘员的保护效果。用正交试验方法,分析气囊设计参数,针对12岁乘员进行气囊优化。结果表明:头部气囊的厚度及排气孔大小对乘员伤害影响最大。与原始约束系统相比,经优化后的气囊使12岁乘员的头部、胸部和颈部伤害分别下降84.5%,19%和84.3%,同时加装气囊对6岁儿童也有一定的保护效果。     

基于风险矩阵的儿童游乐场的风险分级评估

为了评估儿童游乐场在建设与运营过程中的安全风险,介绍了风险矩阵法在儿童游乐场风险评估中的应用,并以此对某新建儿童游乐项目从场地布局、设备安全以及运营维护等方面进行了安全风险评估.通过研究,构建了儿童游乐场的安全检查表和风险矩阵模型,对该项目进行安全风险辨识和危险源评估分级,其中橙色风险占50％,红色风险占32％,黄色风...     

如何正确使用儿童安全座椅

<正>使用儿童安全座椅真有那么难么?还没有为孩子们准备安全座椅的父母们,以下这些会是阻碍你购买安全座椅的问题么?为什么需要安全座椅?这个问题最简单,一起事故足以证明。在美国,车祸是1岁到14岁儿童的头号杀手。据美国公路交通安全管理局统计,仅以2002年为例,美国14岁以下的儿童中有1543名死于车祸,大约227000名儿童在车祸中受伤。平均每天有4名儿童死亡、622名儿童受伤。在车祸中死亡的儿童,有50%没有使用约束系统,即儿童安全座椅。在车祸中受重伤的儿童,有40%没有使用约束系     

Observed LATCH use and misuse characteristics of child restraint systems in seven states

INTRODUCTION: Although the LATCH System (Lower Anchors and Tethers for Children) holds the promise of simplifying the installation of a child restraint system (CRS) to the vehicle's seat, many drivers transporting young children have difficulties using this technology. This paper reports on an observation study of LATCH use and misuse. METHOD: Observations of approximately 1,000 children less than 5 years of age in CRSs, in the back seats of vehicles that were equipped with tether and lower anchors, in seven states. RESULTS: Tethers were used for 51% of the children when the forward-facing CRS had tether straps and the vehicle had tether anchors. Lower anchors were used for 58% of the children when the CRS had lower attachments and the vehicle had lower anchors. The most common tether and lower attachment misuses were loose tether straps (18% of cases) and loose lower attachment installation (30% of the cases), respectively. Vehicle safety belts were used in combination with lower attachments in 20% of all lower anchor installations. CONCLUSION: As more caregivers of young children drive vehicles equipped with LATCH, it will be important to promote the proper installation of CRSs using this technology. LATCH education messages must also emphasize that the lower anchors may not always be the safest choice for CRS attachment -- the safest attachment is the one that results in a tight fit and will be used correctly consistently.     

Investigation of Child Restraint System (CRS) Compatibility in the Vehicle Seat Environment

Objective: Child restraint system (CRS) misuse is common and can have serious consequences to child safety. Physical incompatibilities between CRS and vehicles can complicate the installation process and may worsen CRS misuse rates. This study aims to identify the most common sources of incompatibility between representative groups of CRS and vehicles.

Methods: Detailed dimensional data were collected from 59 currently marketed CRS and 61 late model vehicles. Key dimensions were compared across all 3,599 theoretical CRS/vehicle combinations and the most common predicted incompatibilities were determined. A subset of 34 physical installations was analyzed to validate the results.

Results: Only 58.2% of rear-facing (RF) CRS/vehicle combinations were predicted to have proper agreement between the vehicle's seat pan angle and the CRS manufacturers’ required base angle. The width of the base of the CRS was predicted to fit snugly between the vehicle's seat pan bolsters in 63.3% of RF CRS/vehicle combinations and 62.2% of forward-facing (FF) CRS/vehicle combinations. FF CRS were predicted to be free of interaction with the vehicle's head restraint in 66.4% of combinations. Roughly 90.0% of RF CRS/vehicle combinations were predicted to have enough horizontal clearance space to set the front seat in the middle its fore/aft slider track. Compatibility rates were above 98% regarding the length of the CRS base compared to the length of the vehicle seat pan and the ability of the top tether to reach the tether anchor. Validation studies revealed that the predictions of RF CRS base angle range vs. seat pan angle compatibility were accurate within 6%, and head restraint interference and front row clearance incompatibilities may be more common than the dimensional analysis approach has predicted.

Conclusions: The results of this study indicate that RF CRS base angles and front row clearance space, as well as FF CRS head restraint interference, are frequent compatibility concerns. These results enable manufacturers, researchers, and consumers to focus their attention on the most relevant CRS/vehicle incompatibility issues in today's market.     

Parental awareness and perception for correct use of child restraint systems and airbags in Brazil

Objective: The objective of this study was to obtain information about the current knowledge and habits of parents who transport children in cars in Brazil.

Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted using specifically designed self-report questionnaires to parents of children attending a private pediatric office in a town in southwest Brazil. Data were collected regarding children's age, gender, height, and weight and possession of an automobile child restraint system (CRS), its type, frequency and adequacy of use, and reasons for not possessing or not using the devices. Parents were asked whether their cars were equipped with airbags and about the use of the restraints in seats with airbags.

Results: We interviewed parents of 293 children transported in cars who met the criteria for use of a CRS. Children were younger than 1 year in 15.3% of the cases, between 1 and 4 years in 38.6%, and older than 4 in 46.1%. Cars were equipped with CRS in 78.5% of the cases, but in only 58% of the cases was the device proper for child's age and adequately installed in the seat. Among owners of the devices, 84.3% reported that they always used it. Reasons for infrequency were forgetting the device at home or in another car (6.4%), the child disliking the device (3.2%), or the false impression that the child was grown enough not to use it (3.2%)l 87.1% did not justify why they did not always use the CRS. Considering type of CRS, correct installation of the seat, and frequency of use, only 44.4% of children under 1 year, 69.9% of those 1 to 4 years, and 52.6% over age 4 were protected. Only 28.6% of the parents knew that children should never be positioned in a seat with active airbags.

Conclusion: Considering appropriateness for age, correctness of installation (in the back seat in the correct orientation), and frequency of use, only 50.85% (149/293) of the children were reported as always protected with a CRS. Children between 1 and 4 years were more likely to always use a CRS in this Brazilian survey. We were also able to identify an important gap in the knowledge about airbags among parents. Further efforts are needed to correct those distortions.     

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.     

Development of a three-year-old child FE model

OBJECTIVE: Child crash dummies are conventionally used for safety performance evaluations of the child restraint system (CRS) in vehicle crash tests. To investigate injuries to various body regions of a child in detail, mathematical models are useful, and provide information that cannot be analyzed by crash dummies. Therefore, in the present research, a finite element (FE) model of a 3-year-old child has been developed by model-based scaling from the AM50 human FE model, THUMS (Total HUman body for Safety). METHODS: The dimensions of each body region were based on the anthropometry data of United States children, and material properties of child bone were estimated from data reported in the literature. Neck flexion, thorax impact responses, and torso flexion were validated against the response corridor of the 3-year-old Hybrid III dummy in calibration tests. A test of lap belt loading to the abdomen was also conducted. FE models of two different types of CRS, a 5-point harness and a tray shield CRS, were also made, and ECE R44 sled impact test simulations were conducted using the child FE model. RESULTS: The characteristics of the child FE model proved to be close to the Hybrid III and child volunteer corridor. In the ECE R44 sled test simulations using the child FE model, the head movement down and head rotation were large in the 5-point harness CRS, and chest deflection was large in the tray shield CRS. In both CRS types, the whole spine flexed in the child FE model. This behavior is different from that of the Hybrid III, where the thorax spine is stiff and only the cervical spine and lumbar spine flex. CONCLUSIONS: Although this child FE model has several limitations in areas such as the anatomical shapes and material properties of a child, this model can be a useful tool to examine the behavior of a child in impacts, which may be difficult to predict by using the Hybrid III dummy with its stiff thorax spine box.     

Field investigation of child restraints in side impact crashes

OBJECTIVE: Various test procedures have been suggested for assessing the protection afforded by child restraints (CRS) in lateral collisions. Analyses of real world crashes can be used to identify relevant characteristics of the child, restraint, collision, and injury mechanisms that should be incorporated into the design of the test procedures as well as in the design of related ATDs and injury metrics. The objective of this work is to use in-depth crash investigations of children restrained in CRS in side impacts to elucidate specific sources and mechanisms of injuries and explore the role of crash severity variables such as magnitude and location of intrusion and specific impact angle. METHODS: Real world crashes involving children restrained in forward facing CRS in side impacts were analyzed from Partners for Child Passenger Safety, an on-going child specific crash surveillance system in which insurance claims are used to identify cases. In-depth crash investigations using standardized protocols were used to calculate the crash severity and determine the mechanisms and sources of the injuries sustained. RESULTS: Cases of 32 children restrained in CRS in 30 side impact crashes were examined. Twenty-five percent sustained AIS 2+ injuries. The most common injuries sustained by children restrained in CRS in side impact crashes were to the face, head, and lower extremity. Characteristics of the crashes that appeared related to injury were intrusion that entered the child's occupant space or caused an interior part of the vehicle to enter the child's occupant space, forward component of the crash, and the rotation of the CRS, restrained by a seat belt, towards the side of the impact. CONCLUSIONS: The ability to assess the injury potential in a laboratory setting for the body regions of common injury, the head, face, and lower extremity, must be explored. Characteristics of a regulatory-based test procedure to assess injury risk should include a frontal component to the crash and intrusion into the occupant's seating position. Design enhancements of the CRS should address rotation during lateral impacts. These results provide guidance to current efforts to design and regulate these restraints for the safety of child passengers in side impacts.     

Standardized error severity score (ESS) ratings to quantify risk associated with child restraint system (CRS) and booster seat misuse

Objective: Although numerous research studies have reported high levels of error and misuse of child restraint systems (CRS) and booster seats in experimental and real-world scenarios, conclusions are limited because they provide little information regarding which installation issues pose the highest risk and thus should be targeted for change. Beneficial to legislating bodies and researchers alike would be a standardized, globally relevant assessment of the potential injury risk associated with more common forms of CRS and booster seat misuse, which could be applied with observed error frequency—for example, in car seat clinics or during prototype user testing—to better identify and characterize the installation issues of greatest risk to safety.

Methods: A group of 8 leading world experts in CRS and injury biomechanics, who were members of an international child safety project, estimated the potential injury severity associated with common forms of CRS and booster seat misuse. These injury risk error severity score (ESS) ratings were compiled and compared to scores from previous research that had used a similar procedure but with fewer respondents. To illustrate their application, and as part of a larger study examining CRS and booster seat labeling requirements, the new standardized ESS ratings were applied to objective installation performance data from 26 adult participants who installed a convertible (rear- vs. forward-facing) CRS and booster seat in a vehicle, and a child test dummy in the CRS and booster seat, using labels that only just met minimal regulatory requirements. The outcome measure, the risk priority number (RPN), represented the composite scores of injury risk and observed installation error frequency.

Results: Variability within the sample of ESS ratings in the present study was smaller than that generated in previous studies, indicating better agreement among experts on what constituted injury risk. Application of the new standardized ESS ratings to installation performance data revealed several areas of misuse of the CRS/booster seat associated with high potential injury risk.

Conclusions: Collectively, findings indicate that standardized ESS ratings are useful for estimating injury risk potential associated with real-world CRS and booster seat installation errors.     

Evaluation of interventions to make top tether hardware more visible during child restraint system (CRS) installations

Objectives: The objective of the study is to determine whether specific child restraint system (CRS) or vehicle conditions improve top tether attachment rates during volunteer installations.

Methods: A factorial randomized controlled trial was designed to evaluate 4 different experimental categories: (1) Color of tether adjuster casing (black or red), (2) labeling on tether adjuster casing (labeled with “Tether: Use for forward-facing” or unlabeled), (3) storage location of tether (bundled in a rubber band on the back of CRS or Velcroed over the forward-facing belt path), and (4) labeling in vehicle (labeled under head restraint and below anchor or unlabeled). Ninety-six volunteers were randomly assigned to one combination of conditions. One installation per volunteer was completed. The primary outcome measure was acceptable attachment of the top tether to the tether anchor. The secondary outcome measure was overall secureness of the installation. Pearson’s chi-square tests were used to identify significant predictors of acceptable outcomes and logistic regression was used to investigate interaction effects.

Results: A total of 66/96 subjects (68.8%) attached the top tether in an acceptable manner, with either zero errors (n?=?50) or minor errors (n?=?16). A total of 30/96 subjects (31.2%) had unacceptable tether outcomes, with either major errors (n?=?10) or nonuse the tether at all (n?=?20). None of the 4 experimental categories significantly affected tether outcomes. Subjects who opted to install the CRS with the lower anchors (LAs) had higher rates of acceptable tether attachment compared to subjects who installed using the seat belt or those who used both LA and seat belt together (χ² = 6.792, P = .034). Tether outcomes were not correlated with previous CRS experience, use of instruction manual(s), age, or sex. Only 15.6% of subjects produced overall correct and tight installations. Of those who used the seat belt in some manner, 70.2% neglected to switch the retractor into locking mode.

Conclusions: Conditions in this study including tether color, tether labeling, storage location, and vehicle labeling did not significantly affect tether attachment rates. High rates of tether misuse and nonuse warrant further exploration to find effective solutions to this usability problem.     

Child passenger fatality: Child restraint system usage and contributing factors among the youngest passengers from 2011 to 2015

Objective: Motor-vehicle crashes (MVC) remain a leading cause of preventable injury and death for children aged 0–3 in the United States. Despite advancement in legislation and public awareness there is continued evidence of inappropriate child restraint system (CRS) use among the youngest passengers. The current study focuses on appropriate CRS use from 2011 to 2015 using data from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) for children aged 0–3. Methods: Child-, driver-, vehicle-, and trip-related characteristics were investigated within a sample of 648 children from 625 crashes over 5-years in which a child aged 0–3 was fatally injured while unrestrained or wearing an identified CRS type. Multivariable log-binomial regression was used to obtain relative risk. Results: Only 48% of the fatally injured children were appropriately restrained in a CRS. Premature transition to a booster seat and seat belt was evident. The largest proportion of rear-facing restraint use was reported in < 1 year olds (40%), with less reported in 1 (11%) and 2 year olds (2%) and no usage in 3 year olds. Younger children were more likely to be in an appropriate CRS, while Black children, driver not restrained in a lap-shoulder belt configuration, and riding in a pickup truck were less likely to be restrained appropriately. Conclusions: Evidence of inappropriate CRS use supports the use of more stringent legislation and parental interventions to communicate best practice recommendations and educate caregivers regarding appropriate child restraint methods. Practical applications: Public health campaigns focused on increasing appropriate restraint use in children are of great importance as optimally restrained children are less likely to sustain injuries, or require crash-related hospitalization compared to unrestrained children. Researchers and practitioners may find these surveillance findings essential when developing education and interventions targeting child–parent dyads at the greatest risk for a MVC-related fatality.