汽车整车结构侧面耐撞性有限元数值模拟

目的研究汽车结构侧面主要承载部件的耐撞性,参考我国碰撞法规和ECE R95,根据国内某SUV汽车的参数和相关标准建立整车有限元模型和移动可变形壁障模型(MDB),对其进行数值模拟,为结构的优化设计提供参考。方法利用Hyper Mesh前处理将CAD模型转化为CAE有限元模型,输出k文件,并通过LS-DYNA大变形有限元仿真软件对其耐撞性进行计算。结果仿真结果显示,在汽车侧面碰撞过程中,B柱和车门等主要承载部件发生了较大的变形,B柱变形量为116.6 mm,车门的变形量为190 mm,其值符合标准要求,在碰撞结束后保证了足够的乘员空间。结论该车有较好的侧面耐撞性,且得出的碰撞数值模拟结果可为该车的结构设计提供参考。     

高速公路边坡生态防护系统探讨

分析了高速公路边坡特点及其侵蚀机理,阐述了过去我国边坡防护方式的不足之处,提出了边坡防护类型选择原则及生物防护方式的优势所在,同时还指出当前边坡防护中存在的问题.     

半密闭罩在酸雾治理中的应用

阐述酸洗工艺线酸雾的产生原因及其危害，通过对2种集气罩：槽边吹—吸式集气罩和半密闭(加罩裙)罩的设计比较，说明采用合适的集气罩形式对酸雾治理的效果影响是巨大的，同时也可降低一定的初期投资和设备运行费用。     

Differences in Long-term Medical Consequences Depending on Impact Direction Involving Passenger Cars

Objective: There is limited knowledge of the long-term medical consequences for occupants injured in car crashes in various impact directions. Thus, the objective was to evaluate whether injuries leading to permanent medical impairment differ depending on impact direction.

Methods: In total, 36,743 injured occupants in car crashes that occurred between 1995 and 2011 were included. All initial injuries (n = 61,440) were classified according to the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) 2005. Injured car occupants were followed for at least 3 years to assess permanent medical impairment. The data were divided into different groups according to impact direction and levels of permanent impairment. The risk of permanent medical impairment was established for different body regions and injury severity levels, according to AIS.

Results: It was found that almost 12% of all car occupants sustained a permanent medical impairment. Given an injury, car occupants involved in rollover crashes had the highest overall risk to sustain a permanent medical impairment. Half of the head injuries leading to long-term consequences occurred in frontal impacts. Far-side occupants had almost the same risk as near-side occupants. Occupants who sustained a permanent medical impairment from cervical spine injuries had similar risk in all impact directions (13%) except from rollover (17%). However, these injuries occurred more often in rear crashes. Most of the injuries leading to long-term consequences were classified as minor injuries by AIS for all impact directions.

Conclusions: Studying crash data from a perspective of medical impairment is important to identify injuries that might not be prioritized only considering the AIS but might lead to lower quality of life for the occupant and also costs for society. These results can be used for road transport system strategies and for making priority decisions in vehicle design.     

The Influence of Enhanced Side Impact Protection on Kinematics and Injury Measures of Far- or Center-Seated Children in Forward-Facing Child Restraints

Objective: To evaluate the influence of forward-facing child restraint systems’ (FFCRSs) side impact structure, such as side wings, on the head kinematics and response of a restrained, far- or center-seated 3-year-old anthropomorphic test device (ATD) in oblique sled tests.

Methods: Sled tests were conducted utilizing an FFCRS with large side wings and with the side wings removed. The CRS were attached via LATCH on 2 different vehicle seat fixtures—a small SUV rear bench seat and minivan rear bucket seat—secured to the sled carriage at 20° from lateral. Four tests were conducted on each vehicle seat fixture, 2 for each FFCRS configuration. A Q3s dummy was positioned in FFCRS according to the CRS owner's manual and FMVSS 213 procedures. The tests were conducted using the proposed FMVSS 213 side impact pulse. Three-dimensional motion cameras collected head excursion data. Relevant data collected during testing included the ATD head excursions, head accelerations, LATCH belt loads, and neck loads.

Results: Results indicate that side wings have little influence on head excursions and ATD response. The median lateral head excursion was 435 mm with side wings and 443 mm without side wings. The primary differences in head response were observed between the 2 vehicle seat fixtures due to the vehicle seat head restraint design. The bench seat integrated head restraint forced a tether routing path over the head restraint. Due to the lateral crash forces, the tether moved laterally off the head restraint reducing tension and increasing head excursion (477 mm median). In contrast, when the tether was routed through the bucket seat's adjustable head restraint, it maintained a tight attachment and helped control head excursion (393 mm median).

Conclusion: This testing illustrated relevant side impact crash circumstances where side wings do not provide the desired head containment for a 3-year-old ATD seated far-side or center in FFCRS. The head appears to roll out of the FFCRS even in the presence of side wings, which may expose the occupant to potential head impact injuries. We postulate that in a center or far-side seating configuration, the absence of door structure immediately adjacent to the CRS facilitates the rotation and tipping of the FFCRS toward the impact side and the roll-out of the head around the side wing structure. Results suggest that other prevention measures, in the form of alternative side impact structure design, FFCRS vehicle attachment, or shared protection between the FFCRS and the vehicle, may be necessary to protect children in oblique side impact crashes.     

基于χ~2优化方法的铸钢侧架原始裂纹尺寸分布研究

将铸钢侧架清砂后未经修复的原始裂纹尺寸进行了统计 ,综合运用参数的点估计方法和区间估计方法 ,以置信区间作为优化的约束条件 ,提出了对检验值进行最优化处理的方法 ,并运用二参数约束非线性优化方法的直接解法 ,搜索出最佳点估计值。经过对裂纹尺寸分布参数的计算证明 ,其结果符合对数正态分布     

The Importance of Non-struck Side Occupants in Side Collisions

Current occupant protection assessment for side impact is focused on struck side occupants sitting alone. In a representative sample of tow-away side collisions from the UK, only one-third of front seat occupants in side collisions were alone, on the struck side of the car. The other two-thirds were either a non-struck side occupant alone or a situation where the adjacent seat was also occupied. In terms of restraint protection for non-struck side occupants, belts appeared to be less effective in perpendicular compared to oblique side crashes. Front seat occupancy had bearing on injury outcome. With both front seats occupied, there was a reduction in AIS 27+ injury to belted non-struck side occupants due to a reduction in chest and lower limb injuries. Struck side occupants sustained increased injury rates to the extremities when accompanied by a belted non-struck side occupant but no notable increases in moderate to serious injury to the head, chest, abdomen or pelvis.     

Occurrence of Serious Injury in Real-World Side Impacts of Vehicles with Good Side-Impact Protection Ratings

Objective: The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) introduced its side impact consumer information test program in 2003. Since that time, side airbags and structural improvements have been implemented across the fleet and the proportion of good ratings has increased to 93% of 2012–2014 model year vehicles. Research has shown that drivers of good-rated vehicles are 70% less likely to die in a left-side crash than drivers of poor-rated vehicles. Despite these improvements, side impact fatalities accounted for about one quarter of passenger vehicle occupant fatalities in 2012. This study is a detailed analysis of real-world cases with serious injury resulting from side crashes of vehicles with good ratings in the IIHS side impact test.

Methods: NASS-CDS and Crash Injury Research and Engineering Network (CIREN) were queried for occupants of good-rated vehicles who sustained an Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) ≥ 3 injury in a side-impact crash. The resulting 110 cases were categorized by impact configuration and other factors that contributed to injury. Patterns of impact configuration, restraint performance, and occupant injury were identified and discussed in the context of potential upgrades to the current IIHS side impact test.

Results: Three quarters of the injured occupants were involved in near-side impacts. For these occupants, the most common factors contributing to injury were crash severities greater than the IIHS test, inadequate side-airbag performance, and lack of side-airbag coverage for the injured body region. In the cases where an airbag was present but did not prevent the injury, occupants were often exposed to loading centered farther forward on the vehicle than in the IIHS test. Around 40% of the far-side occupants were injured from contact with the struck-side interior structure, and almost all of these cases were more severe than the IIHS test. The remaining far-side occupants were mostly elderly and sustained injury from the center console, instrument panel, or seat belt. In addition, many far-side occupants were likely out of position due to events preceding the side impact and/or being unbelted.

Conclusion: Individual changes to the IIHS side impact test have the potential to reduce the number of serious injuries in real-world crashes. These include impacting the vehicle farther forward (relevant to 28% of all cases studied), greater test severity (17%), the inclusion of far-side occupants (9%), and more restrictive injury criteria (9%). Combinations of these changes could be more effective.     

Census Study of Real-Life Near-Side Crashes with Modern Side Airbag-Equipped Vehicles in the United States

Objective: This study aimed to investigate the crash characteristics, injury distribution, and injury mechanisms for Maximum Abbreviated Injury Score (MAIS) 2+ injured belted, near-side occupants in airbag-equipped modern vehicles. Furthermore, differences in injury distribution for senior occupants compared to non-senior occupants was investigated, as well as whether the near-side occupant injury risk to the head and thorax increases or decreases with a neighboring occupant.

Method: National Automotive Sampling System's Crashworthiness Data System (NASS-CDS) data from 2000 to 2012 were searched for all side impacts (GAD L&R, all principal direction of force) for belted occupants in modern vehicles (model year > 1999). Rollovers were excluded, and only front seat occupants over the age of 10 were included. Twelve thousand three hundred fifty-four MAIS 2+ injured occupants seated adjacent to the intruding structure (near-side) and protected by at least one deployed side airbag were studied. To evaluate the injury risk influenced by the neighboring occupant, odds ratio with an induced exposure approach was used.

Result: The most typical crash occurred either at an intersection or in a left turn where the striking vehicle impacted the target vehicle at a 60 to 70° angle, resulting in a moderate change of velocity (delta-V) and intrusion at the B-pillar. The head, thorax, and pelvis were the most frequent body regions with rib fracture the most frequent specific injury. A majority of the head injuries included brain injuries without skull fracture, and non-senior rather than senior occupants had a higher frequency of head injuries on the whole. In approximately 50% of the cases there was a neighboring occupant influencing injury outcome.

Conclusion: Compared to non-senior occupants, the senior occupants sustained a considerably higher rate of thoracic and pelvis injuries, which should be addressed by improved thorax side airbag protection. The influence on near-side occupant injury risk by the neighboring occupant should also be further evaluated. Furthermore, side airbag performance and injury assessments in intersection crashes, especially those involving senior occupants in lower severities, should be further investigated and side impact dummy biofidelity and injury criteria must be determined for these crash scenarios.     

Biofidelity assessment of the 6-year-old ATDs in lateral impact

Objectives: The objective of this study was to assess and compare the current lateral impact biofidelity of the shoulder, thorax, abdomen, and pelvis of the Q6, Q6s, and Hybrid III (HIII) 6-year-old anthropomorphic test devices (ATDs) through lateral impact testing.

Methods: A series of lateral impact pendulum tests, vertical drop tests, and Wayne State University (WSU) sled tests was performed, based on the procedures detailed in ISO/TR 9790 (1999) and scaling to the 6-year-old using Irwin et al. (2002 Irwin AL, Mertz HJ, Elhagediab AM, Moss S. Guidelines for assessing the biofidelity of side impact dummies of various sizes and ages. Stapp Car Crash J. 2002;46:297–319.[PubMed] , [Google Scholar]). The HIII used in this study was tested with the Ford-designed abdomen described in Rouhana (2006 Rouhana SW. Abdominal impact injury research—a review. J Biomech. 2006;39(Suppl 1):S157–S158. [Google Scholar]) and Elhagediab et al. (2006 Elhagediab AM, Hardy WN, Rouhana SW. Advancements in the rate-sensitive abdomen for the Hybrid III family of dummies. J Biomech. 2006;39(Suppl 1):S158.[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]). The data collected from the 3 different ATDs were filtered using SAE J211 (SAE International 2003 SAE International. Surface Vehicle Recommended Practice. Instrumentation for Impact Test—Part 1—Electronic Instrumentation. Warrendale, PA: SAE International; 2003. SAE Standard J211-1. [Google Scholar]), aligned using the methodology described by Donnelly and Moorhouse (2012 Donnelly BR, Moorhouse K. Optimized phasing of PMHS response curves for biofidelity targets. Paper presented at: IRCOBI Conference; 2012. [Google Scholar]), and compared for each body region tested (shoulder, thorax, abdomen, and pelvis). The biofidelity performance in lateral impact for the 3 ATDs was assessed against the scaled biofidelity targets published in Irwin et al. (2002 Irwin AL, Mertz HJ, Elhagediab AM, Moss S. Guidelines for assessing the biofidelity of side impact dummies of various sizes and ages. Stapp Car Crash J. 2002;46:297–319.[PubMed] , [Google Scholar]), the abdominal biofidelity target suggested in van Ratingen et al. (1997 van Ratingen M, Twisk D, Schrooten M, Beusenberg M. Biomechanically based design and performance targets for a 3-year-old child crash dummy for frontal and side impact. Paper presented at: 41st Stapp Car Crash Conference; 1997. [Google Scholar]), and the biofidelity targets published in Rhule et al. (2013 Rhule H, Donnelly B, Moorhouse K, Kang YS. A methodology for generating objective targets for quantitatively assessing the biofidelity of crash test dummies. Paper presented at: 23rd Enhanced Safety of Vehicles Conference; 2013. [Google Scholar]). Regional and overall biofidelity rankings for each of the 3 ATDs were performed using both the ISO 9790 biofidelity rating system (ISO/TR 9790 1999) and the NHTSA's external biofidelity ranking system (BRS; Rhule et al. 2013 Rhule H, Donnelly B, Moorhouse K, Kang YS. A methodology for generating objective targets for quantitatively assessing the biofidelity of crash test dummies. Paper presented at: 23rd Enhanced Safety of Vehicles Conference; 2013. [Google Scholar]).

Results: All 3 6-year-old ATD's pelvises were rated as least biofidelic of the 4 body regions tested, based on both the ISO and BRS biofidelity rating systems, followed by the shoulder and abdomen, respectively. The thorax of all 3 ATDs was rated as the most biofidelic body region using the aforementioned biofidelity rating systems. The HIII 6-year-old ATD was rated last in overall biofidelity of the 3 tested ATDs, based on both rating systems. The Q6s ATD was rated as having the best overall biofidelity using both rating systems.

Conclusions: All 3 ATDs are more biofidelic in the thorax and abdomen than the shoulder and pelvis, with the pelvis being the least biofidelic of all 4 tested body regions. None of the 3 tested 6-year-old ATDs had an overall ranking of 2.0 or less, based on the BRS ranking. Therefore, it is expected that none of the 3 ATDs would mechanically respond like a postmortem human subject (PMHS) in a lateral impact crash test based on this ranking system. With respect to the ISO biofidelity rating, the HIII dummy would be considered unsuitable and the Q-series dummies would be considered marginal for assessing side impact occupant protection.