The influence of personal protection equipment,occupant body size,and restraint system on the frontal impact responses of Hybrid III ATDs in tactical vehicles

Objective: Although advanced restraint systems, such as seat belt pretensioners and load limiters, can provide improved occupant protection in crashes, such technologies are currently not utilized in military vehicles. The design and use of military vehicles presents unique challenges to occupant safety—including differences in compartment geometry and occupant clothing and gear—that make direct application of optimal civilian restraint systems to military vehicles inappropriate. For military vehicle environments, finite element (FE) modeling can be used to assess various configurations of restraint systems and determine the optimal configuration that minimizes injury risk to the occupant. The models must, however, be validated against physical tests before implementation. The objective of this study was therefore to provide the data necessary for FE model validation by conducting sled tests using anthropomorphic test devices (ATDs). A secondary objective of this test series was to examine the influence of occupant body size (5th percentile female, 50th percentile male, and 95th percentile male), military gear (helmet/vest/tactical assault panels), seat belt type (3-point and 5-point), and advanced seat belt technologies (pretensioner and load limiter) on occupant kinematics and injury risk in frontal crashes.

Methods: In total, 20 frontal sled tests were conducted using a custom sled buck that was reconfigurable to represent both the driver and passenger compartments of a light tactical military vehicle. Tests were performed at a delta-V of 30 mph and a peak acceleration of 25 g. The sled tests used the Hybrid III 5th percentile female, 50th percentile male, and 95th percentile male ATDs outfitted with standard combat boots and advanced combat helmets. In some tests, the ATDs were outfitted with additional military gear, which included an improved outer tactical vest (IOTV), IOTV and squad automatic weapon (SAW) gunner with a tactical assault panel (TAP), or IOTV and rifleman with TAP. ATD kinematics and injury outcomes were determined for each test.

Results: Maximum excursions were generally greater in the 95th percentile male compared to the 50th percentile male ATD and in ATDs wearing TAP compared to ATDs without TAP. Pretensioners and load limiters were effective in decreasing excursions and injury measures, even when the ATD was outfitted in military gear.

Conclusions: ATD injury response and kinematics are influenced by the size of the ATD, military gear, and restraint system. This study has provided important data for validating FE models of military occupants, which can be used for design optimization of military vehicle restraint systems.     

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.     

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.     

Pelvic restraint cushion sled test evaluation of pelvic forward motion

Objective: This study was designed to evaluate the performance of a pelvic restraint cushion (PRC), a submarining countermeasure that deploys under the thighs when a crash is detected in order to block the forward motion of the pelvis.

Methods: Sled tests approximating low- and high-speed frontal impacts were conducted with 4 female postmortem human subjects (PMHS) restrained by a lap and shoulder belt in the right front passenger seat. The subjects were tested with and without a PRC.

Results: The PRC is effective in reducing forward motion of the PMHS pelvis and reduces the risk of injury due to lap belt loading in a high-speed frontal crash.

Conclusions: Although small sample size limits the utility of the study's findings, the results suggest that the PRC can limit pelvic forward motion and that pelvic injury due to PRC deployment is not likely.     

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.     

Underutilization of occupant restraint systems in motor vehicle injury crashes: A quantitative analysis from Qatar

Introduction: Restraint systems (seat belts and airbags) are important tools that improve vehicle occupant safety during motor vehicle crashes (MVCs). We aimed to identify the pattern and impact of the utilization of passenger restraint systems on the outcomes of MVC victims in Qatar.

Methods: A retrospective study was conducted for all admitted patients who sustained MVC-related injuries between March 2011 and March 2014 inclusive.

Results: Out of 2,730 road traffic injury cases, 1,830 (67%) sustained MVC-related injuries, of whom 88% were young males, 70% were expatriates, and 53% were drivers. The use of seat belts and airbags was documented in 26 and 2.5% of cases, respectively. Unrestrained passengers had greater injury severity scores, longer hospital stays, and higher rates of pneumonia and mortality compared to restrained passengers (P = .001 for all). There were 311 (17%) ejected cases. Seat belt use was significantly lower and the mortality rate was 3-fold higher in the ejected group compared to the nonejected group (P = .001). The overall mortality was 8.3%. On multivariate regression analysis, predictors of not using a seat belt were being a front seat passenger, driver, or Qatari national and young age. Unrestrained males had a 3-fold increase in mortality in comparison to unrestrained females. The risk of severe injury (relative risk [RR] = 1.82, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.49–2.26, P = .001) and death (RR = 4.13, 95% CI, 2.31–7.38, P = .001) was significantly greater among unrestrained passengers.

Conclusion: The nonuse of seat belts is associated with worse outcomes during MVCs in Qatar. Our study highlights the lower rate of seat belt compliance in young car occupants that results in more severe injuries, longer hospital stays, and higher mortality rates. Therefore, we recommend more effective seat belt awareness and education campaigns, the enforcement of current seat belt laws, their extension to all vehicle occupants, and the adoption of proven interventions that will assure sustained behavioral changes toward improvements in seat belt use in Qatar.     

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.     

Predicting vehicle belt fit for children ages 6–12

Objective: To predict shoulder belt fit and lap belt fit as a function of child age, vehicle seat characteristics, and belt geometry.

Methods: In a previous study, the lap belt and shoulder belt fit of 44 children aged 5–12 were measured in a simulated vehicle seat while varying cushion length, cushion angle, seatback angle, and belt anchorage geometry. A regression model was developed to predict lap belt fit and shoulder belt fit as a function of vehicle parameters and child stature. These regression models were applied to the stature distribution of 6- to 12-year-olds using a range of vehicle geometry data to predict the proportion of children expected to achieve good belt fit in the second-row, outboard seating positions of 46 vehicles when not using belt-positioning boosters.

Results: Across the ranges observed in vehicles, lap belt angle had the strongest effect on lap belt fit, although vehicle cushion length also contributed. Shoulder belt fit was most strongly affected by D-ring location. Vehicles with the geometric conditions most suitable for children are estimated to provide good lap belt fit for 25% of children aged 6 to 12. In 20% of vehicles, the shoulder belt is too far inboard for the target child population; 20% of vehicles are estimated to have shoulder belt fit too far outboard for children ages 6 to 12.

Conclusions: Based on this geometric analysis, the rear seats of most vehicles are unlikely to provide good lap belt fit for up to 75% of children ages 6–12. Shoulder belt fit is outside the target range for 40% of children. Consequently, children under 12 years of age are likely to experience markedly poorer belt fit when transitioning out of a booster seat.     

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.     

Evaluation of geometrically personalized THUMS pedestrian model response against sedan–pedestrian PMHS impact test data

Objective: Evaluating the biofidelity of pedestrian finite element models (PFEM) using postmortem human subjects (PMHS) is a challenge because differences in anthropometry between PMHS and PFEM could limit a model's capability to accurately capture cadaveric responses. Geometrical personalization via morphing can modify the PFEM geometry to match the specific PMHS anthropometry, which could alleviate this issue. In this study, the Total Human Model for Safety (THUMS) PFEM (Ver 4.01) was compared to the cadaveric response in vehicle–pedestrian impacts using geometrically personalized models.

Methods: The AM50 THUMS PFEM was used as the baseline model, and 2 morphed PFEM were created to the anthropometric specifications of 2 obese PMHS used in a previous pedestrian impact study with a mid-size sedan. The same measurements as those obtained during the PMHS tests were calculated from the simulations (kinematics, accelerations, strains), and biofidelity metrics based on signals correlation (correlation and analysis, CORA) were established to compare the response of the models to the experiments. Injury outcomes were predicted deterministically (through strain-based threshold) and probabilistically (with injury risk functions) and compared with the injuries reported in the necropsy.

Results: The baseline model could not accurately capture all aspects of the PMHS kinematics, strain, and injury risks, whereas the morphed models reproduced biofidelic response in terms of trajectory (CORA score = 0.927 ± 0.092), velocities (0.975 ± 0.027), accelerations (0.862 ± 0.072), and strains (0.707 ± 0.143). The personalized THUMS models also generally predicted injuries consistent with those identified during posttest autopsy.

Conclusions: The study highlights the need to control for pedestrian anthropometry when validating pedestrian human body models against PMHS data. The information provided in the current study could be useful for improving model biofidelity for vehicle–pedestrian impact scenarios.     

Driver injury in near- and far-side impacts: Update on the effect of front passenger belt use

Purpose: This is a study that updates earlier research on the influence of a front passenger on the risk for severe driver injury in near-side and far-side impacts. It includes the effects of belt use by the driver and passenger, identifies body regions involved in driver injury, and identifies the sources for severe driver head injury.

Methods: 1997–2015 NASS-CDS data were used to investigate the risk for Maximum Abbreviated Injury Scale (MAIS) 4 + F driver injury in near-side and far-side impacts by front passenger belt use and as a sole occupant in the driver seat. Side impacts were identified with GAD1 = L or R without rollover (rollover ≤ 0). Front-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: Overall, belted drivers had greater risks for severe injury in near-side than far-side impacts. As a sole driver, the risk was 0.969 ± 0.212% for near-side and 0.313 ± 0.069% for far-side impacts (P < .005). The driver's risk was 0.933 ± 0.430% with an unbelted passenger and 0.596 ± 0.144% with a belted passenger in near-side impacts. The risk was 2.17 times greater with an unbelted passenger (NS). The driver's risk was 0.782 ± 0.431% with an unbelted passenger and 0.361% ± 0.114% with a belted passenger in far-side impacts. The risk was 1.57 times greater with an unbelted passenger (P < .10). Seat belt use was 66 to 95% effective in preventing MAIS 4 + F injury in the driver. For belted drivers, the head and thorax were the leading body regions for Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) 4+ injury. For near-side impacts, the leading sources for AIS 4+ head injury were the left B-pillar, roof, and other vehicle. For far-side impacts, the leading sources were the other occupant, right interior, and roof (8.5%).

Conclusions: Seat belt use by a passenger lowered the risk of severe driver injury in side impacts. The reduction was 54% in near-side impacts and 36% in far-side impacts. Belted drivers experienced mostly head and thoracic AIS 4+ injuries. Head injuries in the belted drivers were from contact with the side interior and the other occupant, even with a belted passenger.     

Driving performance comparing older versus younger drivers

Objectives: A cross-sectional study was conducted at the Touro University California campus to compare differences in reaction times and driving performance of younger adult drivers (18–40 years) and older adult drivers (60 years and older). Each test group consisted of 38 participants.

Methods: A Simple Visual Reaction Test (SVRT) tool was used to measure reaction times. The STISIM Drive M100 driving simulator was used to assess driving parameters. Driving performance parameters included mean lane position, standard deviation of mean lane position measured, mean speed, standard deviation of mean speed, car-following delay, car-following modulus, car-following coherence, off-road accidents, collisions, pedestrians hit, and traffic light tickets.

Results: Compared to younger participants, older drivers experienced significantly slower reaction times (510.0 ± 208.8 vs. 372.4 ± 96.1 ms, P =.0004), had more collisions (0.18 ± 0.39 vs. none, P =.0044), drove slower (44.6 ± 6.6 vs. 54.9 ± 11.7 mph, P <.0001), deviated less in speed (12.6 ± 4.3 vs. 16.8 ± 6.3, P =.0011), and were less able to maintain a constant distance behind a pace car (0.42 ± 0.23 vs. 0.59 ± 0.24; P =.0025).

Conclusions: Differences exist in driving patterns of older and younger drivers as measured by reaction times and driving simulator outcomes. These results are the first to compare these 2 specific adult age groups' driving performance as measured by a standardized driving simulator scenario. Identifying these differences is essential in addressing them and preventing future traffic injuries.     

Exploring the association between working memory and driving performance in Parkinson's disease

Objective: The aim of this study was to explore whether varying levels of operational and tactical driving task demand differentially affect drivers with Parkinson's disease (PD) and control drivers in their sign recall.

Methods: Study participants aged between 50 and 70 years included a group of drivers with PD (n = 10) and a group of age- and sex-matched control drivers (n = 10). Their performance in a sign recall task was measured using a driving simulator.

Results: Drivers in the control group performed better than drivers with PD in a sign recall task, but this trend was not statistically significant (P =.43). In addition, regardless of group membership, subjects' performance differed according to varying levels of task demand. Performance in the sign recall task was more likely to drop with increasing task demand (P =.03). This difference was significant when the variation in task demand was associated with a cognitive task; that is, when drivers were required to apply the instructions from working memory.

Conclusions: Although the conclusions drawn from this study are tentative, the evidence presented here is encouraging with regard to the use of a driving simulator to examine isolated cognitive functions underlying driving performance in PD. With an understanding of its limitations, such driving simulation in combination with functional assessment batteries measuring physical, visual, and cognitive abilities could comprise one component of a multitiered system to evaluate medical fitness to drive.     

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.     

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.     

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 helmets on motorcycle outcomes in a level I trauma center in Connecticut

Objective: The State of Connecticut has a partial motorcycle helmet law, which has been linked to one of the lowest helmet compliance rates in the Northeast. We examine the clinical and financial impact of low motorcycle helmet use in the State of Connecticut.

Methods: A retrospective cohort study comparing the outcomes between helmeted and nonhelmeted motorcycle crash victims over a 12.5-year period, from July 2, 2002, to December 31, 2013. All patients who were admitted to the hospital after a motorcycle crash were included in the study. Patients were stratified into helmeted and nonhelmeted cohorts. Group differences were compared using t-test or Wilcoxon rank test for continuous variables and chi-square test for dichotomous outcomes. Regression models were created to evaluate predictors of helmet use, alcohol and drugs as confounding variables, and factors that influenced hospital costs.

Results: The registry included 986 eligible patients. Of this group, 335 (34%) were helmeted and 651 (66%) were nonhelmeted. Overall, nonhelmeted patients had a worse clinical presentation, with lower Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS; P <.01), higher Injury Severity Score (ISS; P <.01), higher incidence of loss of consciousness (LOC; P <.01), longer intensive care unit (ICU; P <.01) admissions, and higher incidence of head (P <.01) or face injuries (P <.01). Nonhelmeted patients were also twice as more likely to die from their injuries (P =.04, odds ratio [OR] = 1.89, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02–3.45). Financially, nonhelmeted patients incurred mean hospital costs of $18,458, whereas helmeted patients incurred $14,970 (P =.18). ISS, GCS, and ICU length of stay were significantly correlated with increased hospital costs (P <.01). Not using a helmet was a significant predictor of mortality (P =.04) after adjusting for alcohol/drug use and age.

Conclusions: Helmet use is associated with lower injury severity and increased survival after a motorcycle crash. These outcomes remained consistent even after controlling for age and alcohol and drug use. The medical and financial impact of Connecticut's partial helmet law should be carefully evaluated to petition for increased education and enforcement of helmet use.     

Airbag deployment–related eye injuries

Objective: We studied the correlation between airbag deployment and eye injuries using 2 different data sets.

Methods: The registry of the Finnish Road Accident (FRA) Investigation Teams was analyzed to study severe head- and eyewear-related injuries. All fatal passenger car or van accidents that occurred during the years 2009–2012 (4 years) were included (n = 734). Cases in which the driver's front airbag was deployed were subjected to analysis (n = 409). To determine the proportion of minor, potentially airbag-related eye injuries, the results were compared to the data for all new eye injury patients (n = 1,151) recorded at the Emergency Clinic of the Helsinki University Eye Hospital (HUEH) during one year, from May 1, 2011, to April 30, 2012.

Results: In the FRA data set, the unbelted drivers showed a significantly higher risk of death (odds ratio [OR] = 5.89, 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.33–10.9, P = 2.6E-12) or of sustaining head injuries (OR = 2.50, 95% CI, 1.59–3.97, P = 3.8E-5). Only 4 of the 1,151 HUEH patients were involved in a passenger car accident. In one of the crashes, the airbag operated, and the belted driver received 2 sutured eye lid wounds and showed conjunctival sugillation. No permanent eye injuries were recorded during the follow-up. The calculated annual airbag-related eye injury incidence was less than 1/1,000,000 people, 4/100,000 accidents, and 4/10,000 injured occupants.

Conclusions: Airbag-related eye injuries occurred very rarely in car accidents in cases where the occupant survived and the restraint system was appropriately used. Spectacle use did not appear to increase the risk of eye injury in restrained occupants.     

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.     

Ticketing aggressive cars and trucks (TACT): How does it work on city streets?

Objective: The purpose of this study was to determine the feasibility of modifying the Ticking Aggressive Cars and Trucks (TACT) program, originally designed to work on state highways, within a metropolitan area to reduce unsafe interactions and their related crashes between drivers of large trucks and passenger vehicles.

Methods: Using crash data, the driving behaviors most commonly associated with large truck and passenger vehicle crashes were identified. A public awareness campaign using media messaging and increased law enforcement was created targeting these associated behaviors. The frequency of these behaviors both before and after the public awareness campaign was determined through observation of traffic at 3 specific locations within the city. Each location had a sufficient volume of large truck and passenger traffic to observe frequent interactions. Pre- and postintervention data were compared using negative binomial regression with generalized estimating equations to evaluate whether the campaign was associated with a reduction in the identified driving behaviors.

Results: A comparison between crash data from before, during, and after the campaign and crashes during the same time periods in previous years did not show a significant difference (P =.081). The number of large trucks observed in traffic remained the same during pre- and postintervention periods (P =.625). The rates of negative interactions per 100 large trucks decreased for both large trucks and passenger vehicles after the intervention, with calculated rate ratios of 0.58 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.48, 0.70) and 0.31 (95% CI, 0.20, 0.47). The greatest reduction was seen in passenger vehicles following too close, with a rate ratio of 0.21 (95% CI, 0.15, 0.30).

Conclusions: Although designed for reducing crashes on highways, the TACT program can be an effective approach for improving driver behaviors on city streets.